Describing the Christian God

[Confused]

From another thread the following quote was made:

So long as we insist that God is a scientific matter, then I cannot. In that sense, I agree with you, there will be no direct scientific evidence for God - thus, I do not believe in God as you describe him. I would propose, however, that this is not the whole of the story.

I have heard my daughter make similar claims and find them just as meaningless.

I would ask someone to please describe the Christian God to me and what evidence they have to support their description of Him.

Late edit: as usual, my OP isn't clear enough. I am looking for attributes that you would use to describe God. Not what He wants us to do, not what proves his existence.

[guy fawkes]

From another thread the following quote was made:

So long as we insist that God is a scientific matter, then I cannot. In that sense, I agree with you, there will be no direct scientific evidence for God - thus, I do not believe in God as you describe him. I would propose, however, that this is not the whole of the story.

I have heard my daughter make similar claims and find them just as meaningless.

I would ask someone to please describe the Christian God to me and what evidence they have to support their description of Him.

Oh yes, you ask Christians to provide evidence for something that does not exist, and they always claimed to exist without any evidence for thus. Good look Confused, this is going ot be a burnt out topic aint it?


Keywords for this topic: evidence for your God.


Happy Hunting.

[Confused]

From another thread the following quote was made:

So long as we insist that God is a scientific matter, then I cannot. In that sense, I agree with you, there will be no direct scientific evidence for God - thus, I do not believe in God as you describe him. I would propose, however, that this is not the whole of the story.

I have heard my daughter make similar claims and find them just as meaningless.

I would ask someone to please describe the Christian God to me and what evidence they have to support their description of Him.

Oh yes, you ask Christians to provide evidence for something that does not exist, and they always claimed to exist without any evidence for thus. Good look Confused, this is going ot be a burnt out topic aint it?


Keywords for this topic: evidence for your God.


Happy Hunting.

Now come on man, don't make me start out my own thread with an intervention. I am not looking for sarcasm. It is an honest question to attempt to understand.

[guy fawkes]

From another thread the following quote was made:

So long as we insist that God is a scientific matter, then I cannot. In that sense, I agree with you, there will be no direct scientific evidence for God - thus, I do not believe in God as you describe him. I would propose, however, that this is not the whole of the story.

I have heard my daughter make similar claims and find them just as meaningless.

I would ask someone to please describe the Christian God to me and what evidence they have to support their description of Him.

Oh yes, you ask Christians to provide evidence for something that does not exist, and they always claimed to exist without any evidence for thus. Good look Confused, this is going ot be a burnt out topic aint it?


Keywords for this topic: evidence for your God.


Happy Hunting.

Now come on man, don't make me start out my own thread with an intervention. I am not looking for sarcasm. It is an honest question to attempt to understand.

And in my sarccasm, I point to the real response you will get. As you know, there is not gods, the thing Theist then use for this is something they call "Faith", the ability to believe in things that do not exist.

You have now asked them to describe their God and supply evidence for it, something in contradiction with their Faith dogma. If they had evidence, "faith" would not exist. You ask for something they can not provide, 1, because it does not exist, 2. because if, there faith would vanish.

Basically, you ask something that we all always asked the theist, and never gotten an response for. It is a good question, and if an honest theist would try to answer it, he would become atheist or deist of some kind as he would know that his religion is ridicolous. You will not get a proper answer Confused, thats all I am saying.

[TheoCurious]

And in my sarccasm, I point to the real response you will get. As you know, there is not gods, the thing Theist then use for this is something they call "Faith", the ability to believe in things that do not exist.

You have now asked them to describe their God and supply evidence for it, something in contradiction with their Faith dogma. If they had evidence, "faith" would not exist. You ask for something they can not provide, 1, because it does not exist, 2. because if, there faith would vanish.

Basically, you ask something that we all always asked the theist, and never gotten an response for. It is a good question, and if an honest theist would try to answer it, he would become atheist or deist of some kind as he would know that his religion is ridicolous. You will not get a proper answer Confused, thats all I am saying.

Well, that satisfies me. I guess we can all log off this forum forever and go find other things to do. I've got some dishes in the sink I need to wash anyway. Yo, mods, you can go ahead and take down the Web site. There's no point in continuing with this nonsense. Guy hath spoken.

[Lionspoint]

Well, that satisfies me. I guess we can all log off this forum forever and go find other things to do. I've got some dishes in the sink I need to wash anyway. Yo, mods, you can go ahead and take down the Web site. There's no point in continuing with this nonsense. Guy hath spoken.

I don't post often here anymore because the debating part is pretty much gone unless the thread is on something modern like prop 8 or church/state separation. But whenever a topic like this comes up, it usually ends up being a conversation between a few atheists with no theists defending their views. I'm not sure why, but the fact is that the only people out there truly looking for answers are skeptics. The theists already have all the answers, so they are not concerned with dialogue or debate.

The good news is the trends tend to favor an atheistic future where believers will be a minority.

Oh, and to address the OP, here is the Biblical God: All powerful, all knowing and present everywhere god that loves animal sacrifices en masse, the occasional stoning of sabbath-breakers, the occasional burning alive of witches, the killer of children (flood, medianites), a jealous and blood-thirsty monster, a schizophrenic (OT vs NT god), eternal destroyer, hater of women, lover of slaves (well, slavery) basically a scumbag, pure filth, the devil he claims to fight against. They seem to be working together...

God is the definition of pure evil.

[TheoCurious]

Oh, and to address the OP, here is the Biblical God: All powerful, all knowing and present everywhere god that loves animal sacrifices en masse, the occasional stoning of sabbath-breakers, the occasional burning alive of witches, the killer of children (flood, medianites), a jealous and blood-thirsty monster, a schizophrenic (OT vs NT god), eternal destroyer, hater of women, lover of slaves (well, slavery) basically a scumbag, pure filth, the devil he claims to fight against. They seem to be working together...

God is the definition of pure evil.

Oh yeah? Well that's nothing compared to what God told me about you.

[Wellington]

And in my sarccasm, I point to the real response you will get. As you know, there is not gods, the thing Theist then use for this is something they call "Faith", the ability to believe in things that do not exist.

That is not a fair definition of faith. according to Merriam-Webster faith is:

2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

Using this definition it is easy to see why a theist cannot provide adequate proof for their claims. Eventually, it all leads back to faith.

You have now asked them to describe their God and supply evidence for it, something in contradiction with their Faith dogma. If they had evidence, "faith" would not exist. You ask for something they can not provide, 1, because it does not exist, 2. because if, there faith would vanish.

I agree that there would no longer be faith if there was actual proof. Still a broader question remains: whether or not someone actually needs faith in order to be "saved." It seems to me that there are plenty of theists here that believe they do in fact have concrete evidence (a transcendental experience, historical documentation...etc.). Let's assume for a minute that they DO have concrete evidence...even if that concrete evidence is only something that they can know...bear with me. If they do have concrete evidence for their belief, they no longer have faith. Faith is lack of proof. A proof only to themselves is still a proof. I am sure no theist would argue that their personal proof of the existence of God is going to prevent them from going to heaven.

If no faith is needed to get into heaven, then why do theists make such a big fuss about faith? Why would anyone need it?

Basically, you ask something that we all always asked the theist, and never gotten an response for. It is a good question, and if an honest theist would try to answer it, he would become atheist or deist of some kind as he would know that his religion is ridicolous. You will not get a proper answer Confused, thats all I am saying.

I think it is a reasonable question to ask, but I am not sure it is a fair question. If everything eventually reverts back to faith then it would seem the only way to truly find "God" is through reason. If God is beyond even that...then we can't rationally postulate whether or not he even exists.

[bernee51]

From another thread the following quote was made:

So long as we insist that God is a scientific matter, then I cannot. In that sense, I agree with you, there will be no direct scientific evidence for God - thus, I do not believe in God as you describe him. I would propose, however, that this is not the whole of the story.

I have heard my daughter make similar claims and find them just as meaningless.

I would ask someone to please describe the Christian God to me and what evidence they have to support their description of Him.

Now about...heartless bastard

[Beto]

And in my sarccasm, I point to the real response you will get. As you know, there is not gods, the thing Theist then use for this is something they call "Faith", the ability to believe in things that do not exist.

That is not a fair definition of faith. according to Merriam-Webster faith is:

2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

Using this definition it is easy to see why a theist cannot provide adequate proof for their claims. Eventually, it all leads back to faith.

That's one thing. Another, is to have "faith" in a god that allegedly caused, for instance, a great global flood for which not only there is no proof, but which can be proved never to have happened. In these instances, is it still "faith"?