If a god or gods were real...

[Ancient Aliens]

If a god or gods were real, isn't it presumptuous to assume any knowledge about such an entity? The creation of existence is so far beyond human comprehension that it is almost insulting to base ones beliefs regarding it on an ancient book, or on the word of ones religious leader. How exactly would an ancient Semite from pre-Babylonian times, or a Roman Jew (Jesus) know anything about the nature of creation, thousands of years prior to modern times?

There is a possibility that there was a "creator entity", even as an atheist I acknowledge the (remote) possibility. That being said, why would such an entity be confined to Bronze Age notions and superstitions?

[SigniferOne]

If a god or gods were real, isn't it presumptuous to assume any knowledge about such an entity?

Why?

The creation of existence is so far beyond human comprehension that it is almost insulting to base ones beliefs regarding it on an ancient book

But no one does. No one believes in God "because it says so in the Bible" while everything that he sees outside of him screams that it isn't so and the opposite case is true.

How exactly would an ancient Semite from pre-Babylonian times know anything about the nature of creation, thousands of years prior to modern times?

Innocent absence of cynicism.

a Roman Jew (Jesus)

You clearly have not read the Bible in any way other than thick cynical glasses, if even there. Jesus was the most moral man who has ever lived. And after having lived a perfect life of man, before going to the executioners to die, with perfect lucidity, he said, I am God, and through me, you will be saved.

why would such an entity be confined to Bronze Age notions and superstitions?

How are they?

[Ancient Aliens]

First off, I apologize to everyone for creating a thread and then failing to respond to it. I have been extremely busy recently with work

If there was a Creator, don't you think he would try to communicate or make him self known to us in some way? Why create something capable of conscious interaction, and then not interact with it.

That is exactly my point. Is it not egotistical, and does it not require a high degree of unwarranted self importance to believe that a god would deign to facilitate communications with a single planet, out of trillions of planets? Is it not egotistical to assume anything about a creator or creators?

So it's fairly obvious it's either

1. God(s) exist and we no nothing about them or there nature.
2. They don't exist.

My thoughts exactly.

Well... does a sheep know anything about humans?

Good comparison. Our knowledge of existence is so limited that we may as well be sheep in a pasture, and attempting to understand our pastor(s) (if any) at this point is incredibly foolish.

Through ignorance and fear religion (Including all the lore: gods, religious traditions and such.) had been created. Assuming that "gods" could be real is assuming an impossibility is true; any any notion arising from the aforementioned impossibility would be false. (Although theists still cling to their religion just as their religious ancestors had, due to the same fears & ignorance.)

You already know I believe this, just play along

Why?

Do you really mean to tell me that you are capable of comprehending the creation of existence, and existence itself?

But no one does. No one believes in God "because it says so in the Bible" while everything that he sees outside of him screams that it isn't so and the opposite case is true.

Why then do you worship your particular god, if you do not base your religious beliefs on the Bible? And if you do not base your understanding of your god on the Bible, from where does your understanding originate?

Innocent absence of cynicism.

Got it. Bronze Age thought is superior to modern day thought because it is devoid of cynicism and skepticism. These, by the way, are the very essence of scientific reasoning (and therefore, scientific development), the process by which you are even able to communicate your thoughts to me over the internet, the very process by which everything we know and have is founded upon. It's easy to dismiss modern civilization and advancements, but it isn't easy to live without them.

You clearly have not read the Bible in any way other than thick cynical glasses, if even there. Jesus was the most moral man who has ever lived. And after having lived a perfect life of man, before going to the executioners to die, with perfect lucidity, he said, I am God, and through me, you will be saved.

Because of his moral perfection, he was completely aware of the process by which existence was created? If Jesus is Yahweh, and Yahweh created existence, then who created Yahweh, and if he "always was" then what the does that entail and why didn't Yahweh expound on it when he supposedly communicated to Bronze Age peoples (which he conveniently refuses to do today).

How are they?

How is your religion not confined to Bronze Age superstitions and notions? Your morals, ethics, an, indeed, your entire lives are based on both the author of a 2000 year old book and the author of a ~3000 year old book.

[Cooraan]

If a god or gods were real, isn't it presumptuous to assume any knowledge about such an entity? The creation of existence is so far beyond human comprehension that it is almost insulting to base ones beliefs regarding it on an ancient book, or on the word of ones religious leader. How exactly would an ancient Semite from pre-Babylonian times, or a Roman Jew (Jesus) know anything about the nature of creation, thousands of years prior to modern times?

There is a possibility that there was a "creator entity", even as an atheist I acknowledge the (remote) possibility. That being said, why would such an entity be confined to Bronze Age notions and superstitions?

If there was a Creator, don't you think he would try to communicate or make him self known to us in some way? Why create something capable of conscious interaction, and then not interact with it.

[Sphere]

You clearly have not read the Bible in any way other than thick cynical glasses, if even there. Jesus was the most moral man who has ever lived. And after having lived a perfect life of man, before going to the executioners to die, with perfect lucidity, he said, I am God, and through me, you will be saved.

The message of Jesus was only moral if what he was saying was true. CS Lewis words help in this regard.

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

I would go further and say that the ~2,000 years without the coming of the "Kingdom of Heaven" on Earth makes much of the directions in the New Testement positively immoral. If the core idea of selling all possesions and instead only worshipping Jesus were followed, if people were to "give no thought for the morrow" as is repeatedly directed of them, if they were to not worry about gathering food and water and clothing, we would be living in a fairly terrible place right now. These idea would only be moral if Jesus was indeed heralding an apocolypse which was coming in a few years, as is strongly suggested by the New Testament.

[XIII]

The message of Jesus was only moral if what he was saying was true. CS Lewis words help in this regard.

Sphere, I think you misunderstood that quotation. C.S. Lewis' point was not that Jesus was not a moral man but that since Jesus claimed to be God, He can really only be either a lunatic or who He claimed to be: God. Lewis is responding to Muslim claims that Jesus was a mere moral teacher and was pointing out that Jesus' claims to divinity preclude such a possibility. Anyone claiming to be God can really only be a madman or a person who is saying the truth but that's not the same as saying that Jesus did not lead a moral life.

Lewis' position is, of course, that Jesus was telling the truth.

[Squiggle]

Good thing those directives arent in the bible eh sphere?

[Tacitursa]

For us to know anything at all about god or gods they would have to be part of the physical world to tell us or let us know about their presence.

Even something as trivial as religious people saying god speak's to them in prayer, If that were true science would be able to detect it.

And it doesn't matter how omnipotent god's are, Any form of communication or interaction between the supernatural and physical universe would leave a fingerprint of some kind that we could see or detect.

Especially if such communication or interaction breaks the laws of physics or nature so miracles and such can be performed.

So it's fairly obvious it's either

1. God(s) exist and we no nothing about them or there nature.
2. They don't exist.

[mw2xboxplayer]

If a god or gods were real, isn't it presumptuous to assume any knowledge about such an entity? The creation of existence is so far beyond human comprehension that it is almost insulting to base ones beliefs regarding it on an ancient book, or on the word of ones religious leader. How exactly would an ancient Semite from pre-Babylonian times, or a Roman Jew (Jesus) know anything about the nature of creation, thousands of years prior to modern times?

There is a possibility that there was a "creator entity", even as an atheist I acknowledge the (remote) possibility. That being said, why would such an entity be confined to Bronze Age notions and superstitions?

Through ignorance and fear religion (Including all the lore: gods, religious traditions and such.) had been created. Assuming that "gods" could be real is assuming an impossibility is true; any any notion arising from the aforementioned impossibility would be false. (Although theists still cling to their religion just as their religious ancestors had, due to the same fears & ignorance.)

But playing along with your scenario, Jesus was an all knowing and all powerful Son of God. He had in his possession all knowledge, and his word would be recorded as irrefutable truth by his followers.

[Copperknickers II]

Well... does a sheep know anything about humans?

[Dominicvs]

To this thread. God did make himself known to men, right up until the death of his son, Jesus. From there, the Bible basically states that we're on our own until he returns.

My opinion: A sort of test to man-kind, and look at us now, the rise of atheism, and morality going out the window. Some say it's just man enlighting himself, I say we have lost more than gained within society. Our strive to be better caused our downfall. The values, respects and goals we have really have lost their form.

Yet even I as a theist acknowledge the fact that there is a decent chance there is no god or realm beyond ours, since as the OP stated, there has been no contact with a God in a whiiiiile. Its just that I have faith that there is more to this universe than just the physically or scientifically visible.

That being said, why would such an entity be confined to Bronze Age notions and superstitions?

It wasn't, the appearance of God to men was in preparation to years before Christ's birth. When Jesus was born and why at that time, that is something I'm not qualified to answer.

[Cooraan]

That is exactly my point. Is it not egotistical, and does it not require a high degree of unwarranted self importance to believe that a god would deign to facilitate communications with a single planet, out of trillions of planets? Is it not egotistical to assume anything about a creator or creators?

Who's to say the Creator wouldn't communicate with others? IF their is life on other planets then they are still a creation. It would be egotistical to assume anything about a creator, unless that Creator wanted interaction with his Creation and imparted knowledge and showed His nature to them. Obviously, if you don't believe in a creator or one that would take interest in it's creation then it seems egotistical.

[Ancient Aliens]

Who's to say the Creator wouldn't communicate with others? IF their is life on other planets then they are still a creation. It would be egotistical to assume anything about a creator, unless that Creator wanted interaction with his Creation and imparted knowledge and showed His nature to them. Obviously, if you don't believe in a creator or one that would take interest in it's creation then it seems egotistical.

You are correct. Now show me some empirical evidence that suggests communication between the divine and humanity.

[Cooraan]

You are correct. Now show me some empirical evidence that suggests communication between the divine and humanity.

Depends on what you count as evidence.
*Short Story*
One of my friend's friend(who I may or may not know, because my friend won't tell me who the person really is) who had terminal brain cancer and was given a few months to live. He/She being a Christian prayed to God, and said that God told her to trust Him and everything would be ok. So she believed God and trusted Him for healing, but as the months wore on nothing happened. This person and my friend(who was the only one to know about this) sank into depression, and started loosing faith. All the while my friend kept hearing God telling her to trust Him. She became very angry with God, and even told me she started cussing him out when she was alone, which is odd because she hates when people swear. Within those months this person would go in for frequent checkups, and the cancer remained with no signs of improvement. Finally in his final week of his estimated time, he went in for one final checkup and the cancer was gone. The doctors were of course shocked at this and had no explanation, and of course this person recounted his story to the doctors.


Now to them it's evidence of God interacting with humans. Of course anyone not involved can cast doubt and it may not seem convincing; but to those involved it's undeniable. Also, it's important to say that one of the doctors involved was an atheist, but is now a Christian because of this event.

Also I left out some details for the sake of time.

[The spartan]

Depends on what you count as evidence.
*Short Story*
One of my friend's friend(who I may or may not know, because my friend won't tell me who the person really is) who had terminal brain cancer and was given a few months to live. He/She being a Christian prayed to God, and said that God told her to trust Him and everything would be ok. So she believed God and trusted Him for healing, but as the months wore on nothing happened. This person and my friend(who was the only one to know about this) sank into depression, and started loosing faith. All the while my friend kept hearing God telling her to trust Him. She became very angry with God, and even told me she started cussing him out when she was alone, which is odd because she hates when people swear. Within those months this person would go in for frequent checkups, and the cancer remained with no signs of improvement. Finally in his final week of his estimated time, he went in for one final checkup and the cancer was gone. The doctors were of course shocked at this and had no explanation, and of course this person recounted his story to the doctors.


Now to them it's evidence of God interacting with humans. Of course anyone not involved can cast doubt and it may not seem convincing; but to those involved it's undeniable. Also, it's important to say that one of the doctors involved was an atheist, but is now a Christian because of this event.

Also I left out some details for the sake of time.

Very disturbing. This appears to me as a classic example of a Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Also, if any of your friends actually claim to be hearing physical voices, I would advise you to seek medical help from them. "Hearing voices" is a symptom of some mental disorders.

And speaking of logical fallacies...

If there is no God then everything is permitted. Again, you cannot condemn the OT as a non-theist. Your appeals to emotion move no one.

Example of Fallacy of Accident.

[XIII]

Example of Fallacy of Accident.

I struggle to see why. Could you explain?

[Jack04]

*Short Story*

Without wanting to come across as a complete , why only your friend's friend? If God can, and does, actively save lives, why does he only save a few? It would rather reignite the (otherwise fairly well dealt with) problem of evil. If God starts picking favourites, everything starts to become a bit dodgy.

[Squiggle]

Why empirical? If its not happening currently then it never has? If you want to look for genuine evidence [read: not positing absurd qualifications of what consists of evidence while predicating said statement with how open minded you are, but you wouldnt worship said God, would doubt your sanity even then ecetera] then the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, his life, ministry, quotations ecetera.

[Ancient Aliens]

Why empirical? If its not happening currently then it never has?

If I were to tell you that the sky was green, would you believe me? Absolutely not. This is because there is no evidence to suggest that this is the case. We human beings interpret our existence through empiricism.

[read: not positing absurd qualifications of what consists of evidence while predicating said statement with how open minded you are, but you wouldnt worship said God, would doubt your sanity even then ecetera]

...What?

If you want to look for genuine evidence then the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, his life, ministry, quotations ecetera.

This is not objective evidence. The same logic that leads you to disbelieve in deities like Marduk and Ra (a lack of evidence), is the same logic that leads me to disbelieve in Yahweh.

[justicar5]

Why empirical? If its not happening currently then it never has? If you want to look for genuine evidence [read: not positing absurd qualifications of what consists of evidence while predicating said statement with how open minded you are, but you wouldnt worship said God, would doubt your sanity even then ecetera] then the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, his life, ministry, quotations ecetera.

Evidence outside the bible for the resurrection please. (since the bible is a hate filled rant about the superiority of the followers of Yahweh and how all other must die I find it among the most offensive books ever written, and it is a useful on moral guidance as mein kampf is on race relations.) I seriously cannot comprehend how chrisitians can worship the same monster that gave the orders in the OT but claim 'he changed his mind it's ok' no it is NOT he issued those orders, he destroyed those cities, had those woman raped, those children put to the sword, nothing NOTHING can make up for that, well maybe a trillion years of being anally violated by a red hot fish hook encrusted bar, for every soul in hell, that may be a start.)