Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If there was an evidence of YOUR liking then, you wouldn’t have a choice.
Then, you would complain, “Ohhh God never gave me a choice”
There is no evidence for everyone’s likeness.
There are only signs - for those - who want to believe and have faith in God.
It’s a choice !
According to Christian theology, Lucifer and the rest of the fallen angels knew that God existed, yet they still rebelled. Doesn’t that mean that certain knowledge of god’s existence doesn’t preclude the freedom to reject god?
It was assumed that science would easily come up with answers to the biggest questions. What is everything ultimately made out of? How does the brain work? How does DNA generate an organism? How are diseases related to genes?
????? I don't know about "easily," but we know quite a bit about each of those questions. Certainly more than we knew 2000 yrs ago, or 100 yrs ago, or even just last year. There are entire textbooks devoted to each topic. At my university alone there are entire departments devoted to each of those topics, and they are busy teaching what we do know and researching what we don't. That knowledge base is replicated and multiplied the world over.
Are you suggesting that we don't know anything about these questions, or merely that we "don't know it all" (...which will never be the case)?
According to Christian theology, Lucifer and the rest of the fallen angels knew that God existed, yet they still rebelled. Doesn’t that mean that certain knowledge of god’s existence doesn’t preclude the freedom to reject god?
Excellent Question.
In my personal opinion,
The nature, amount of knowledge and amount of power of Lucifer is perhaps not comparable with Humans.
IMO, Lucifer rebelled because of arrogance due to power he has - and it's a sign for us humans that if you are arrogant, there will probably be consequences.
You want to be among the arrogant? Be my guest, I don't have a problem with it.
It was assumed that science would easily come up with answers to the biggest questions. What is everything ultimately made out of? How does the brain work? How does DNA generate an organism? How are diseases related to genes?
As science advances, it runs up against the fact that reductionist analysis cannot explain complex natural systems.
The key error in your thinking is that "it was assumed that science would easily come up with answers". Very little about science is "easy".
It is very common for people to see and communicate with non-physical beings. People talk about it less in modern times, for fear of being diagnosed with mental illness. But it is still extremely common, and always has been.
I don't think the bible's authors made up all the stuff about prophets having visions. People had visions. They still have visions.
Atheists confidently state that all supernatural visions and experiences are hallucinations. That's just their opinion.
I don't understand why or how the physical brain would generate all these elaborate hallucinations, and atheists don't know either.
We don't have an objective way to decide between that atheists and those who perceive the non-physical. But you can't say there is no evidence. There are tons of evidence -- it just is not observable by those who don't experience it.
Then there is parapsychology -- but atheists simply don't buy it no matter how strong the evidence, so I don't want to get into that. Forget I mentioned it.
IF many people came up with the same visions, that would be one thing. But that's not common. Heck, even tarot and astrology has a common "knowledge" base.
You tell me, what would constitute as an evidence of God?
Appearing on every TV station and every website around the world at the same time while patting his head with one hand and rubbing his stomach counter-clockwise with the other, while eating a chocolate eclair which hangs motionless in front of his face without getting any cream or chocolate on his face.
Appearing on every TV station and every website around the world at the same time while patting his head with one hand and rubbing his stomach counter-clockwise with the other, while eating a chocolate eclair which hangs motionless in front of his face without getting any cream or chocolate on his face.
what do you use as proof of your type o god trout?
IF many people came up with the same visions, that would be one thing. But that's not common. Heck, even tarot and astrology has a common "knowledge" base.
personal agendas will keep this from happening. using science data we can list some traits of the system we are in that most people can agree on. But not all.
heck, gld used the exact same observations to use as support of a pantheist god as trans and trans dismissed it as "samatics". The exact same observations and both dismissed the others claims.
rational people can settle on a reasonable middle ground.
Of course we can. How about a universe NOT capable of supporting life, but it did anyway. With the stars in the heavens spelling out 'God did it'.
Lets say God didn't do it.
You tell me, who did it?
Do you believe that the entire universe and everything in it came together by itself? Well, good for you!
Quote:
Then we have no reason to believe. And that would be the fault of your god.
There is a red line and there is a blue line. You are told that red line will land in fire and blue line will land in a garden, so you should follow the blue line.
You look for evidence of this claim but you don't find the one of your liking, and you follow the red line.
Whose fault is it?
Quote:
No, I have to believe in the evidence I have just seen. So you are contradicting yourself when you said it was a choice.
Evidence of an airplane was never presented to you. Instead the actual airplane was shown to you. So your statement of demanding evidence is an oxymoron.
Quote:
Yes. A man made statue is evidence for the belief in that god, not for the existence of it.
Again, that statue, THE GOD of hinduism is sitting right in front of you. There isn't any need of an evidence of anymore.
Quote:
Except miracles would be an example of a god. Evidence does not need to be scientific.
There is no example of God - or else, it's not a God anymore.
Quote:
It would be very good evidence for a god. Much better than the evidence we have now.
You should consider David Copper field as God. He flies over Grand Canyon.
Quote:
Faith based on evidence. Doctors usually curing illness is evidence this drug will also work. Once again the pretense that all faith claims are equal.
Not always, the same drug many times does NOT work and the patient dies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
