Why do you believe in God, or why not?

[basics]

So you only pray for your own improvement? Couldn't you pray a little so that the rest of the world would be a little happier or something?

mishkin,

Of course I pray for others, you included. Why even as I sit out in the car whilst my wife does her shopping I pray for all those people I see that some might have their hearts opened to know Jesus Christ. I have wondered what people passing the car think on seeing this old man talking with no-one else there in the car. By the way when my wife shops I mean she shops and so then these are not fleeting ins and outs that I have told her that one day she'll come out and find a cobwebbed skeleton waiting for her. Being a Christian does not mean one loses their sense of humour. It's all part of the peace and joy one gets from knowing Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour. That's what heaven is going to be all about.

[mishkin]

Yeah I'm starting to feel something, don't stop.

[basics]

mishkin,

Look around this world and see the state it's in and it's all down to man, fallen man, so how can I stop? The Lord Jesus Christ is the only hope for man as no other has proved himself the way He has or will do and so it is my privilege to tell of Him wherever and whenever I can.

[chriscase]

chriscase,

Well, that my mother and father were actually the ones who conceived me is true. That I was born in Bellshill Maternity Hospital on January 9th 1943 is true and there was nothing religious about that as there was no religious ceremony after to say I had a religion. Indeed my father didn't believe whilst my mother did although he did start attending church a few months before he died.

OK, but suppose there were some doubts about these facts. Perhaps there was an inconsistency that bothered you. You could investigate, right? Wouldn't you ask questions like, "Why would anyone bother to falsify my birth records? Who would want to do that? What would they have to gain from it?"

[basics]

OK, but suppose there were some doubts about these facts. Perhaps there was an inconsistency that bothered you. You could investigate, right? Wouldn't you ask questions like, "Why would anyone bother to falsify my birth records? Who would want to do that? What would they have to gain from it?"

chriscase,

As for me and my records I've never thought of the possiblity of anyone changing my birth date or why they would want to do that. I'm here and that's it. Now since I suspect you are questioning the birth of Jesus Christ do you really think it has been falsified? Unless the innkeepr and any of his guests took note of the time and day of the events in that stable we will never know exactly what that was. Recollection of the events had to have passed from Mary and Joseph to the writers of them and so what would have been false about parents telling of what transpired that night? They had nothing to gain other than becoming targets for those that wanted to harm them.

[chriscase]

Not exactly. When it comes to religious assertions like the existence of a creator, my observation - really the gist of this topic IMO - is that skeptics like me tend to think about these topics more or less the same way as we think about other factual assertions like, say, the facts of my birth. Those who embrace a religious mindset seem to me to have put the assertions of their religion into a different category, and generally don't apply the same kinds of critical thinking to them. It's not that religious people lack the ability, it's more that the entire class of religious ideas has carved out a space that has become more or less exempt from the ordinary facilities of criticism. For me this appears to be an unwarranted exemption but either way that's how things look.

[basics]

chriscase,

From the beginning of time man has looked to the heavens for answers as to their existence, their hopes, their strength, their futures and so many religions sprung up as man spread across the world. Was there a God Who created them? They believed so and we find that by delving into their histories and the evidence they left behind them. I may be wrong but I believe the stronger a tribe or nation became the number of their gods increased, so why was that? Indeed it would be fair to say that where a people have been Godless that system has failed and they are once more turning back to religion of some sort.

Today the great cry is for Darwin's Theory of Evolution which is a religion in itself, why? Because it takes greater faith than anything to believe in something so shrouded in time, mystery and darkness to make it credible. We surely must have had a beginning and what more profound is the statement, " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." In six wonderful days He made all things up and running as against billions of years wherein by chance we came to be. I am not and never have been a prime example of being the fittest yet for some reason Darwin can't explain why my unbelieving heart was changed to know and accept that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour. Chance didn't do that but my Creator did.

[Muizer]

Because it takes greater faith than anything to believe in something so shrouded in time, mystery and darkness to make it credible.

I disagree. Science is based on observations that can be made by anyone today, and that includes sciences that concern the deep past, like astronomy, geology and evolutionary biology. That we cannot truly imagine how big the universe is or long a million years is and what could happen over such scales of time and space doesn't mean we can't make calculations on those scales. No faith involved. We just might struggle to relate the outcomes to our human frame of reference, but who ever said the truth has to be easy?

[Sir Adrian]

Science is 100% not based on observations that can be made by anyone beyond its most rudimentary "high-school physics class" level. You cannot observe the principles of a quark-gluon plasma because you cannot produce it. You cannot prove the age of the universe because you personally lack the tools and skills to measure it. You cannot observe evolution. You cannot observe the current circulating through an integrated circuit.

Science is based on belief, namely the belief that the scientist who did make those observations is correct and knows what he is doing.

[basics]

Sir Adrian,

Isn't it rather odd that our lives are so short yet with all the nonsense about evolution we still cannot match the longevity of our forefathers as is written? In all the millions and billions of years not one person has survived death but in more millions and billions of years we might evolve to defeat death. One thing's for sure, not one person on these threads is ever going to see that. That said death can be defeated as witnessed by the Lord Jesus Christ's people who saw Him and communed with Him after His resurrection from the grave. There was no hiding behind time there, no just plenty of ordinary people who saw Him and some who wrote of it after seeing Him. Jesus Christ is our Creator as will be confirmed the day He comes back to fulfill all things. Charles Darwin already knows that.

[Muizer]

Science is 100% not based on observations that can be made by anyone beyond its most rudimentary "high-school physics class" level. You cannot observe the principles of a quark-gluon plasma because you cannot produce it. You cannot prove the age of the universe because you personally lack the tools and skills to measure it. You cannot observe evolution. You cannot observe the current circulating through an integrated circuit.

Science is based on belief, namely the belief that the scientist who did make those observations is correct and knows what he is doing.

With 'observations can be made by anyone' I evidently meant that the process is transparent and reproducible. No scientist can claim to have a valid theory if it comes with a clause that inherently only they can confirm its validity. Neither is it a requirement that the one following the evidence trail must already believe the theory is valid in order to do so.


@basics, "it is written" is not an argument. Lots of things "are written". The fact that something "is written" means very little in itself. The question is, can you verify something that "is written"**.

*for Adrian's sake: by 'can you verify' I do not mean specifically you, 'Basics', rather anyone with sufficient talent and dedication.

[Sir Adrian]

With 'observations can be made by anyone' I evidently meant that the process is transparent and reproducible. No scientist can claim to have a valid theory if it comes with a clause that inherently only they can confirm its validity. Neither is it a requirement that the one following the evidence trail must already believe the theory is valid in order to do so.

That does not mean you are taking 99.99% of science on pure faith.

No scientist can claim to have a valid theory if it comes with a clause that inherently only they can confirm its validity. Neither is it a requirement that the one following the evidence trail must already believe the theory is valid in order to do so.

That's not the case for Christianity either. Plenty of atheists/muslims/etc have found God on their own, and nobody can claim to be the only one to confirm anything.

[Muizer]

That does not mean you are taking 99.99% of science on pure faith.

In case you intended a double negation, i.e. that I do take 99.99% of science on pure faith, ultimately we have to take even our own observations and thinking process 'on pure faith'. The belief in science rests with the fact that incorrect claims can, and probably will, be proven wrong at some point. What we can at least observe is the predictive value of scientific theories. I do not have to be an expert to see that a prediction by other experts comes true. I can see that every time I flip the light switch, drive a car or heat a meal in the microwave oven.

That's not the case for Christianity either. Plenty of atheists/muslims/etc have found God on their own

"On their own" would be conversion to a specific religion by a person who had not been exposed to that religion in any shape or form. I don't think there's evidence of that ever happening.

[Søren]

I think we should be suspicious of any of our own beliefs where we can't set out potential countervailing evidence that would make us change our minds about them. That doesn't mean they're therefore inherently wrong, but if we can't easily do that our attachment there must be so essential to our identity that we might not be exercising good judgment around them.

I haven't seen a compelling reason to think God exists, but I could easily imagine how, e.g., the Judeo-Christian God could act in such a way that his existence was apparent, and then I'd update my view. Equally, I don't have a strong intrinsic attachment to evolutionary theory. If a more compelling case for human existence could be formulated, I would happily change my belief in it.

Everything we know about the world is to some extent faith-based in the sense that nothing we know is directly derived from the first principles of reality. The more relevant point is whether they are falsifiable, and we can see a path to falsifying them, however unlikely we think that would be to happen. Without this, I think anyone's confidence in any belief is misplaced. The first question we should ask about anything we think is — what would it take for me to change my mind?

[basics]

Soren,

With perhaps the exception of John the Baptist not one person in history has been born a Christian. In every case it took a Supernatural act by God in personal communion with them to be one. This is what is called being born again of the Spirit of God which obviously no person can do on their own. It has meant that many believe there is a God yet have never had that communion with Him just as there are those who believe in all sorts of gods that are no gods at all, and of course all them thinking it a load of rubbish look to other ways of how we got here. The thing is that no-one cares to explain how a person who is a devout atheist can suddenly claim to be a born again Christian and show the world his or her new walk in Jesus Christ? How all of a sudden the world and its ways become their enemy as do family and friends in many occasions.

[Derc]

The thing is that no-one cares to explain how a person who is a devout atheist can suddenly claim to be a born again Christian and show the world his or her new walk in Jesus Christ? How all of a sudden the world and its ways become their enemy as do family and friends in many occasions.

There are many people who care, and even more who do not care anymore. What you describe is a simple mental breakdown. Broken words from a broken man. History repeats itself. We think we learn, but we don't. Goodbye basics.

[basics]

Derc,

Yes, with a broken and contrite heart God led me to Jesus Christ for Him to be my Saviour just as is written. He replaced what was in my heart with something completely new and different yet left my memories intact that I might remember what I once was but not anymore. So, what did I learn? I learned that there is a God Who is Sovereign over all things, Who cares enough to change the lives of all them for whom His Son, Jesus Christ died for on a cross that their sin may be washed away in His blood. Oh you may look for simple answers to explain my experience yet you cannot and never will explain why it happens to people all over the world even as I am writing this. I pray that my words don't come back to haunt you, rather a hello instead of goodbye.

[mishkin]

There are many people who care, and even more who do not care anymore. What you describe is a simple mental breakdown.

reminds me of what a Guatemalan told me. After a life consuming drugs, getting women pregnant, going to prostitutes, accepting bribes, doing business with criminal gangs, with his face destroyed by a beating he had to flee the country and "found god" at the barajas airport, madrid.

[Muizer]

you cannot and never will explain why it happens to people all over the world even as I am writing this.

When European explorers set out for uncharted territories, I don't think they ever came upon any uncontacted native peoples who were Christians. So before that time at least, it wasn't happening "all over the world". No, nobody becomes a Christian, or member of any religion without having been told about it by other people first.

That is one thing. The other is that spiritual experiences have happened to all kinds of people all over the worlds, for a very, very long time. Yet, monotheistic religions tell us that many were followers of 'false gods'. That tells us, that people can indeed come have epiphanies, revelations etc without the 'true' God's involvement and yet lead to rock-solid belief, often strong enough to make them make great sacrifices, sometimes the ultimate one.

How can you tell your experience apart from theirs?

[basics]

reminds me of what a Guatemalan told me. After a life consuming drugs, getting women pregnant, going to prostitutes, accepting bribes, doing business with criminal gangs, with his face destroyed by a beating he had to flee the country and "found god" at the barajas airport, madrid.

mishkin,

May I say that he didn't find God, rather God found him.