The Existence of God

[Vandy 110]

Hello, all.

I've spent some time reading through this thread and it is quite interesting to read the various poster's points of view as well as the tone in which they have been posted.  For the most part the thread has stayed relatively civil and, for that, I applaud all who have and are still participating by posting in the thread.

For those of you who know me and my posting style, I tend to be more of a "lurker" rather than an active participant.  Nevertheless, a thread does catch my attention from time to time to the point that I consider and, as this post shows, actually post in order to express my own opinion or answer someone else's.

"The Existence of God".  A subject that has been debated amongst humankind's best minds and most humble of people.  I am a Christian -- Evangelical United Brethren (now United Methodist) by birth, Fundamental Pentecostalist by choice.  Now, before everyone starts to shake their head and groan over my declared religious bent, please let me assure you that I have no intention of getting onto my "soapbox" and delivering a sermon.  I have three Biblical quotes I wish to share with you and my post will be complete.

Before I post the three scripture references, I do wish to state that I am not expecting these scriptures to cause a "miracle amongst the masses".  Rather, I present them to you as an explanation of my own beliefs and tenets by which I live.  Even though I am a declared Fundamental Pentecostalist, I tend to be a moderate in my beliefs.  Rather like my politics -- I am a left of center Republican.  You'll see the relevance of the scriptures to this thread when I post them.

Scripture #1

Hebrews 11:1 states the following:

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

That one verse is enough, however; the entire chapter is filled with excellent examples and can serve as a guide by which to live.

Besides the fact that Christ died on the cross for my sins and has washed me clean in His blood and through His gift of salvation, this scripture is the foundation of my religious beliefs.  Without faith, we have nothing.  Without faith, how can we believe in God?  Without faith, we have no hope of a life everlasting.  Etc, etc.

If you're interested, here are some good topics to research and read:

The Church of God Daily Bible Study

Bible Tools: Forerunner Commentary

Participatory Bible Study Blog - Hebrews 11: Honor Roll of Faith

Now, just because I have professed faith, does that mean that I don't have questions?  Of course I do!  There are many, many earthly things that I don't understand.  There are life events that occur that I can't answer why they happen.  There are many scientific facts that beg a answer as to why.

Does this fact bother me to the point that I lose my faith?  No.  Why?  Because of this next scripture:

Deuteronomy 29:29 states the following:

"The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but these things which are revealed below unto us and to our children for ever, that we do all the words of this law."

I can guarantee you that the first thing I'm going to do once I get to Heaven and have worshiped at the feet of my Lord and Savior, is to ask all the questions that have puzzled me throughout my life.  I am very much looking forward to the answers.

Again, if you're interested, here are some topics to study:

Christian Classics Ethereal Library: Deuteronomy 29:29

Why Does God Allow Problems?

There is a very good follow up scriptural passage to this one:  1 Corinthians 2:9-11.  Since I said I was only going to present three scriptures, I'll let you look this one up yourself.

This bring us to our third scripture.  For me and my faith, there are certain tenets that are undeniable and "non-negotiable".  With that comment in mind, I present the third scripture to you:

Philipians 2:12 states the following:

"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."

For me, this scripture has a powerful meaning as well as allows me through the guiding of the Holy Spirit to (I can't say it any better than the scripture does) "work out my salvation with fear and trembling."

Am I a perfect man?  No.  Will I ever (on this earth) be a perfect man?  No.  However, I can, through the guidance and conviction of the Holy Spirit, work through my own salvation based on the unrefutable tenets of my faith and with the fear and reverence of God firmly on my back, trembling and praising him every step of the way.

One more time, here are some studies for you:

Working Out Your Salvation

Forerunner Commentary on "Working Out your Salvation"

Phillipians 2:12

In conclusion, let me just restate the following:

Faith

Unquestioning Acceptance

Working out my salvation through Christ my Savior

It works for me.

All the best to you.

Gary (Vandy)

[BlondeTwiggy 43]

Sorry if this has already been said, don't usually follow threads like these.

The Bible makes no effort to prove God's existence. 

"In the beginning God..." (Gen 1:1) 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God..." (John 1:1). 

It states that there is one, obviously, but I find no long formal argumentation of His existence.  Simply a matter of faith. 

[spore415 5]

i'm not nor will i ever go quoting scriptures on/to someone. i beleive that religion is a personal thing, that should be kept on a personal level and to ones self, however i find it alright if people gather to worship if that is what they choose to do. it is their faith and i don't think that they should go forcing it upon other people that do not beleive. likewise, i beleive that those who do not beleive in a higher power or heaven and hell should go forcing there oppinions on those who do beleive in god's existence. relgion, faith or lack there of is a very personal thing that i see no point in arguing. everyone has a decision to make in what there beleifs are, and should not be suaded by others to change their veiws.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Vandy

Unquestioning Acceptancequote>

This is the single largest sticking point for me, personally.

Unquestioning acceptance, blind faith, etc. is not only unhealthy, it is in violation of simple common sense. What it means is essentially believing in something without having any rational reason for doing so. And, if there isn't a reason to believe in something, then why believe in it? Is that not absurd?

Yet, a lot of people operate that way. They believe what they're told without seeking evidence or proof. This is how urban myths thrive.

Or, more generally, they accept something by ad ignorantiam logic: true unless proven false. Well, it doesn't work that way.

Just because you can't prove something is false (or true) does not mean it isn't. It's a known shortcoming of the human mind that "we don't really know for sure" is hard to deal with, we would much rather accept an incorrect explanation than no explanation.

As an aside, considering what today is.... am I the only on that finds it ionic that the day on which the son of god is killed is known as "Good Friday"? Calling the day on which someone is brutally murdered "good" would make you think he was a tyrant, not a savior....

Or am I just reading too much into the name?

[spore415 5]

there is nothing unhealthy about beleiving something, and no it does not violate common sense. common sense does not pertain to a higher power, it applies to everyday matters. why beleive in something? in the case of god, it raises so many people up. that is the sole thing that keeps many people going in a world that is constantly baraging them trying to bring them down. a beleif is of your own personall decision, and what is absurd to you is not absurd to me, and vice versa. jesus and god is not an urban myth. calling religion an urban myth is highly offensive, and shows true ignorance and spite.

and as to your last point, it is ironic that it is good friday, but as i have come to understand, it is good because jesus was the lamb of the world, the final sacrafice that all the world can now be insured that there sins are forgiven.

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke87,

St. John 3:16,

For God loved the world in this way : He gave His one and only Son,So

that everyone who believes in Him will not perish,but have eternal life.

So see...Jesus was not a victim....He willingly layed down His life....It was a

Gift to the world....Therefore it is good....We are not calling His pain good...

We are thinking on a larger scale...We are acknowledging His will.

For everyone.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Duke of York

For God loved the world in this way : He gave His one and only Son,So

that everyone who believes in Him will not perish,but have eternal life.

So see...Jesus was not a victim....He willingly layed down His life....It was a

Gift to the world....Therefore it is good....We are not calling His pain good...

We are thinking on a larger scale...We are acknowledging His will.

For everyone.quote>

I've heard that quote a million times before. I know the deal.

Besides, you say he wasn't a victin... yet at the same time, many say that the Jews killed him.

And in that case, it is Ironic.

[Vandy 110]

Hi, Duke.

I do apologize to you if my comment concenring unquestioning acceptance was misinterpreted or taken out of the context in which I used it.  Let me see if I can better explain it.

If someone I didn't trust told me to "jump off the cliff, you won't get hurt.", I undoubtedly would NOT do it.  Why not do it?  Because, the person is using deception to make me believe I won't get hurt.

If someone I trusted told me to "walk out on the highway, the cars won't hit you", I undoubtedly would NOT do it.  Why not, since I trust this person?  Because, what the person is asking goes beyond trust and, again, is deception.

Now, if the Holy Spirit, by quicking my own spirit, directed me to do something, then I would MOST CERTAINLY weigh it against the Word to ensure that it was coming from Him and not from the deciever.  How can I be sure?  Here's the catch -- I can't!  It is through my faith, knowledge of the Word AND by knowing from Whom that still small voice belongs  which allows me to make a decision.

Sometimes the decision is right; sometimes it's wrong.  BUT, the decision was mine based on the knowledge and guidance I had at the time.  Therefore, when I say unquestioning acceptance I should modify it thusly:

"Unquestioning acceptance as promted by the leading of God, the Son and the Holy Spirit."

Regards,

Gary

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke87,

Sorry....Let me make this more clear...

Indeed the Jews had a part in the crucifixion....

But why is that Ironic?The Jews was confused...

They thought the Messiah was going to be a

warrior that would set them free from the Romans.

They didn't know that God had something greater in mind...

And it was to set them free from there sins...And not just the Jews.

but also the Gentiles....Besides it doesn't matter who had a hand in the

Crucifixion....Christ allowed it to take place...So don't you agree if you allow

something you are not a victim?

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Vandy

when I say unquestioning acceptance I should modify it thusly:

"Unquestioning acceptance as promted by the leading of God, the Son and the Holy Spirit."quote>

I understand that, it's implied to begin with.

What I don't get is how that's really any different than "Unquestioning acceptance as promoted by _____", no matter what you put in the blank. Anything that you follow without questioning can lead you astray.

What I think makes the difference is that a Christian believes they are actually following a benevolent god who will not do wrong by them, whereas I see nothing more than following the Church (which is run by mere men) and the Bible (which was written by mere men). And so it seems no different than following Mel Gibson.

Originally posted by: Duke of York

Indeed the Jews had a part in the crucifixion....

But why is that Ironic?quote>

You're overthinking it. Consider this simple progression of logic:

- Person X is a great man

- Person X is brutaly murdered

- The day of Person X's death is made a holiday with "good" in the name

- The murder of a great man is being implied to be a good thing

- In reality it's a tragic, horrible thing

- Hence, Irony

Or, for an analogy: it's as if the day on which Martin Luther King was assasinated (April 4th) was considered a holiday, and it had "good" in the name. It's as if we're saying him getting murdered was a good thing, yet we considered him to be a great man and a hero, so why would it be?

I think you're just getting stuck on "but Jesus wasn't brutally murdered. He died for our sins" and that's preventing you from getting it.

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke87,

I acknoledge that Jesus was brutally murdered,But we celebrate it as good.....

For the simple fact that it promoted life for eternity...like I said It was a gift

from God....Jesus knew what His future was.....And that He would be

Brutally murdered,but on that day....Death by sin... was deafeted and He also

knew that....So see your logic doesn't apply to something as of this...There

was something done on that day that cannot realate to the one time death

on the Earth....As such Martin Luther King Jr...... Who was a wonderful activist

for a free society would agree with.....His death was tragic,but the good news is that He was a Christian

and didn't have the problem of eternal death....Hence why we call it good friday...

I think Martin Luther King Jr. situation is a example of what Christ accomplished that day...

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

I don't know why it's so hard to understand.

The wages of sin is death. God accepts the death of Christ as atonement for all of mankind's sin. Thus, for man, Christ's death was a good thing. Being God, Christ declares that all who believe may enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Those who reject Him in this life are rejected by Him in the next.

It is a pretty easily understood set of propositions.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

It is a pretty easily understood set of propositions.

quote>

And so is "If you keep making that face it might get stuck that way" or "breaking a mirror is seven years bad luck".

It's not that I don't understand it, it's that I think it to be preposterous and don't believe it.

And, in any case, I understand what's "good" about Good Friday. I never said that the name confused me and that I didn't get it. All I was saying was that it's ironic.

I dunno, maybe it just takes someone who's not a card-carrying Christian to see the irony in it.

[BlondeTwiggy 43]

I think I see your point, Duke.  But usually, when someone gives his life to save others' lives, it is considered good and heroic (though tragic, at the same time). 

But yeah, the Bible says if you don't have faith, you aren't going to understand these things, and of course they will seem foolish to you:

14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.  (I Corinthians 2:14, NIV)quote>

Anyway, I apologize for the off-topicness of this post. 

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: BlondeTwiggy

I think I see your point, Duke.  But usually, when someone gives his life to save others' lives, it is considered good and heroic (though tragic, at the same time). 

But yeah, the Bible says if you don't have faith, you aren't going to understand these things, and of course they will seem foolish to you:

14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.  (I Corinthians 2:14, NIV)quote>

Anyway, I apologize for the off-topicness of this post. 

quote>

It's not off-topic at all, BT. In fact, I was about to quote from I Cor, 1:17-25, which expands your point.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Vandy 110]

BINGO!  Gve the man a CEE-GAR!!

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke,

The worlds fastest Indian....Some people watched the man on the motorcycle

hoping to see Him succeed....Some people watched hoping to see Him fail,

Either way those people had something invested...Someone who truly didn't care,

did not watch at all.....

What is eating on you Duke?

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Duke of York

The worlds fastest Indian....Some people watched the man on the motorcycle

hoping to see Him succeed....Some people watched hoping to see Him fail,

Either way those people had something invested...Someone who truly didn't care,

did not watch at all.....quote>

Huh?

What is eating on you Duke?quote>

...I presume you mean "What's eating you", to mean "what's bothering you"?

I don't feel particularly bothered by anything. Was I giving that impression?

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

All the recent conversation scream of religious Apologetics.

Barbarossa

quote>

Why, yes, Barbarossa... there are those of us who defend our faith. You make it sound like a bad thing.

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke,

What I am trying to say is......Why does the subject mean so much to you?
Obviously you are invested. Either to believe or not believe....but either way
you certainly are not indifferent.....Indifference would be a natural reaction
for someone who truly didn't believe....A fly bothers you...Something eating on you
is a inner emotion or struggle....Are you trying to convince others? Or yourself?

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Why, yes, Barbarossa... there are those of us who defend our faith. You make it sound like a bad thing.quote>

Defending it is one thing. Trying to argue that it is rational is another entirely.

The former is a matter of opinion. The latter is a matter of fact.

You're perfectly entitled to believe what you wish. But don't try and argue that Christianity (or any relgion, for that matter) is rational, since, well, it's not. Blind faith is irrational. Plain and simple.

Originally posted by: Duke of York

What I am trying to say is......Why does the subject mean so much to you?quote>

It's not so much that the subject in particular means all that much to me. It's that I have little tolerance for people being wrong, and I feel the need to correct someone whenever they are, regardless of the subject matter.

It does get on people's nerves sometimes. I had the following exchange with someone in my dorm a couple moths ago -

Him: "God, Anthony, stop {expletive}ing correcting people all the time!"

Me: "Stop being wrong and I'll stop correcting you."

Good answer, no?

[Vandy 110]

Hey, Duke.

Let's suppose...

... just for a moment that YOU'RE the one that's wrong?

Hmmm?

Mind, I'm not trying to start an argument or flame anyone.  Just trying to provoke a bit more thought on the subject.

Regards,

Gary

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Vandy

Hey, Duke.

Let's suppose...

... just for a moment that YOU'RE the one that's wrong?quote>

It's certainly a possibility.

Of course, on subjective matters like this, there isn't necessarily a right or wrong answer to things.

But, with that same approach, "right" versus "wrong" can by extension be taken to "you agree with me" versus "you disagree with me". There's an big difference, obviously, but from the perspective of a single individual the line between "I disagree with you" and "you're wrong" is easily blurred in terms of how one reacts to things.

[Duke of York 23]

Reply to Duke,

Well on one hand you feel the need to correct somone who you think is wrong....

And on the other hand you say that you could be wrong, or there may be no right

or wrong on this subject matter...Sounds to me like you are confused...If you are

only interested in the subject to correct those who you feel are wrong....But you

say you could be the one who is wrong, or there may not be a right or wrong...

Then how can you only be interested in the subject to correct those who are

wrong.....

                                       If you go much faster....You may catch your tail...

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Duke of York

Sounds to me like you are confusedquote>

Nah, I'm just compulsively argumentative. And thickheadded.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Vandy 110]

Okay.  I've decided to reply to this post by Barbarossa.  I'm also sure that I'm more than likely to ruffle some feathers on both "sides of the fence".  Nonetheless, my own personal beliefs, morals and less than conservative views cry out for this reply.  So...  Here goes -

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

I know this question was addressed to Dookie87 and he answered it, but I'll butt in and make a reply, as well.

When you say I could be wrong, do you mean:

1) That there is a God, of the Christian flavor,quote>

Yes, there is.

2) That there is a God, of the Jewish flavor,quote>

Yes, there is.

3) That there is a God, of the Islamic flavor,quote>

Yes, there is.

4) That there is a God, of any other various monotheistic turn,quote>

Yes, there is.

5) That there are gods, of the polytheistic flavor,quote>

Yes, there is.

6) That there is a God, of the Deist flavor, orquote>

Yes, there is.

7) That there is a Supreme Being, of the naturalistic flavor (which could be interpreted as Deistic, but the can be a difference)?quote>

Yes, there is.

Do you see the problem here?quote>

No, I don't

 I am very comfortable in saying that 1-5 do not exist and sincerely doubt I am wrong.quote>

How do you know for sure?

I am actually unable to suppose that I am wrong.  It may sound arrogant, but it is a matter of fact.quote>

Ah.  Then you're being closed-minded about it.

You see, my belief system (mind, I'm speaking from my beliefs now as I have worked them out with fear and trembling) don't deny the existence of other G/gods.  History is full of god figures from prehistoric times right through to today.  I can only stand upon my own faith as guided by the Holy Spirit to divine the path on which I should follow and not stray.

As for 6-7, I tend to take the agnostic view, but I still lean very strongly towards an atheist explanation.quote>

Interesting.  You are aware, aren't you, that even agnostics and atheist have a supreme "thing" in which the believe even if that "thing" isn't something that can be touched or felt.quote>

[Kevin 101]

Good post Vandy, and I do appreciate you taking the time to detail your beliefs. Anyway, those who pay close attention may have noticed that I deleted an earlier post of mine, but that's only because I decided to ditch it in favor of the following, more detailed post...

I am not personally a religious person, and this has been the case my entire life. My dad was raised Catholic and my mom was Presbyterian... but they both fell out of their respective upbringings and by the time I came around religion simply wasn't a factor in my house.

The thing that bothers me is the fact that many people assume I am an atheist or agnostic. First of all, it's impossible to just be agnostic. Agnosticism is not a belief... its only part of one. Someone can be an Agnostic Atheist (Doesn't belief in god, but leaves room for the possibility) or an Agnostic Theist (Believes in a higher power, but is unsure about what that higher power is or how it effects them). I don't consider myself to fall under either of these categories... as they still sort of have the connotation of a religion, or at least can be spun to have one.

Additionally, identifying as an Atheist (or one of it's subcategories) seems to require one to specifically prevent any "god" or "religion" from entering their life, and I don't specifically aim to prevent or allow anything... I am just not really affected by anything godly or religious. If this is hard to understand (I've tried to explain it to some people to no avail), realize that I have never had religion in my life, so its just a non issue to me.

To better illustrate my apathetic approach to religion, I'll share the results produced by a "What Religion am I" test I was linked to a while ago...

"Nothing. Couldn't care less. Some people would describe you as apathetic. You should pat them on the back, as they are quite right. Religion isn't really a concern to you, so you prefer mostly to just go along with the flow. While the A-Team and God-Squad are viciously locking horns you just like to sit back quietly, or agree if there is a clear winner. You don't give a whole lot of thought to the meaning of life, as you may or may not have more important things to worry about. It doesn't really matter."

I was sure that the test was going to automatically place me in the atheist category, and was quite pleased when I got the above for a result.

With all that said, I need to take a step back and say that I do have a personal philosophy by which I live my life... and for anyone to say otherwise about themselves would be foolish. My philosophy is mostly derived from my own experiences and upbringing, though if I had to choose a category under which to place myself it would have to be Secular Humanism. For those of you who don't know...

"Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, and specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as the basis of moral reflection and decision-making. Like other types of humanism, secular humanism is a life stance that focuses on the way human beings can lead good, happy and functional lives. It does not refer to a relationship with the divine, or a belief in eternal life, reward, or punishment."

I've got a few problems with the wording of that definition, but I suppose it's impossible to have a definition that satisfies everyone.