Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9744765 Quoting: simultaneous_final
Let's get right to it.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is real.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is NOT real.
All arguments are moot without assuming a "given".
How can I say all this with certainty?
BECAUSE NO ONE CAN PROVE THAT THEY'RE NOT DREAMING RIGHT NOW, with fabricated memories and all.
No matter what, FAITH is required just to participate in whatever you think is reality.
Both atheists and God-believers base their beliefs on FAITH in experiential data.
A true atheist "lacks a belief" and that is a perfectly honest position to hold. However, the rabid atheists who argue endlessly that "there is no God" are taking the same leap of faith that the proselytizing Christians are.
SO--is there a GOD?
My experiential data (a near-death experience that was seemingly as "real" as anything else I've experienced) says YES.
That's why I believe in God.
But I'd be a liar if I said that my NDE provides "proof"--even to myself. After all, my dreams are as "real" as anything even when I'm walking on the ceiling and lightsaber fighting and flying a MIG--all with a head full of outlandish memories.
So...all of you know-it-alls arguing FOR or AGAINST the concept of "God" need to
because your arguments ARE DEMONSTRABLY FLAWED.
Before getting angry with those trapped in their 'opinions' of the mind, please consider that what you 'feel' to be 'real' could be simply your own MIND. Careful, as the MIND is a programmed 'trick'.
For you to then 'believe' in God based upon your own mind would be as trapped in a 'belief' system as the atheists and believers you hurl you last line of hate towards.
What is provable? The physical - since the mind is NOT real.
What up what up, first post, interesting conversation so thought I'd chime in.
Alright so as to the physical being provable, that's entirely incorrect. Even what's physical is subjective. You can have a million scientists examine the same data and come to the same conclusion, but it still isn't relative. That's why they call gravity a "theory". Billions of people will attest to their experience with gravity, but in science, there is no absolute. Now what you can do, is say, "Hey, I have a million scientists saying the same thing, so I'm 99.9999% sure that this is an accurate conclusion." But every one of those scientists could be working off a flawed paradigm, all that you can really do is be relatively assured
Now a few people in this thread mentioned "experiential data" as their motivation for their beliefs. This was what finally pushed me to Christ as well.
For a long time, based on bizarre occurrences in my life, I sensed the existence of a supreme being, but I never was entirely willing to put a name on it until I was hit by a break-through, a flash of realization, an epiphany, while on a bus to New York. My experience confirms not only the existence of God in my life, but that Jesus came as His Savior. Am I to think I am insane for experiencing the same epiphany that millions of others have felt before? I was lucky enough to have a personal divine experience. Why would I deny myself that, after a lifetime of noticing this presence? That would be foolish.
Now most people don't have that epiphany, which gives them that divine realization. I've been blessed with that. But as far as giving testimony, it's my job. If I see a solid object falling from the sky, I'm going to warn the people around me. Even if they don't believe me at first, I will repeat again and again that they need to move before being crushed, because I care about other people naturally, but also because it's set forth as our mission as Christians.
I believe in God, and there is very solid historical data to support the works of Jesus, but I suppose if it was so obvious, then it wouldn't be called "faith", now would it? However I can't imagine the experience that would lead someone to say with a sense of conviction that there is NO GOD. Patterns in nature suggest an intelligence to our evolution, but even if you want to suggest that there's no God there's just no data, subjective n'or objective, that supports that. All you can say is, "I personally don't have a relationship with God." And I, as a rational person, will without second thought tolerate that. Because we are who we are.
But it isn't my opinion that there is a God, it is my personal and undeniable experience. My experience forms my concept of reality, so to toss that away would be on the same level, as I mentioned earlier, as tossing away gravity, tossing away the basic laws of life which each have their own solid foundations in culture and in our personal experiences. Just like God.