The Proof Discussion Page

Alright everyone, this is the page for questions, discussions, debates, etc. Remember the rules; a)Phrase your questions tactfully and respectfully b)Do not demeen anyone at anytime for their beliefs c)NO SWEARING! d)Be mature about your topics e)No personal wars here. If you have a problem with someone, take it outside this page. If you'd like a mediator, message either myself or someone you would like to help you. e)Have proof of some sort to back up your argument (See What is Proof? for a definition), and finally f}Keep an open mind.

Be sure to keep converstations and such together ok. If you want to start a new one, make a line seperating the old and the new discussion. If you have any problems message [Child of God]

---

[Sedition] Well now,i must say that is a very lengthy response.Yes,i do agree a common factor,and probably a solid factor in the rise of a civilization is infact religion,but just becuase it happens doesent mean its a necessity.how can you know that writing first came about to write religuos text?math came around as a usefull means of managing trade,but thats not all it was used for,who is to say what it's original purpose is?

You stated that one of the 'necessities' for a civilization is a sophisticated religion system.can you tell me exactly why?can you tell me what it is about religion that supposedly provides the means for which humans leaped in technology?I see what your saying,but i dont think i grasp how your connecting the dots here.

The accuracy of the bible is to be debated,more or less becuase it was supposedly written quite awhile after these events happened.It's predictions are vague,and could be met in all sorts of ways.the accuracy of the bible is a much larger debate all in its self.

And as far as humans making mistakes for not following god,i could be real finnicky and ask why he doesent do it himself,but thats redundant.Alot of his 'commands' are ones of violence,and i dont blame any sane and ethical person for not following them.If you believe in free will,then you have to acknowledge the fact that despite the logical fallacy of it free will exist as a way for humans to keep god in check in a change.If god told you to kill the person you held most dear,would you do it?it isent a matter of weither or not he would really ask you (he has before,im sure you know which story im talking about if your really as into the bible as i believe),but if you would listen.Humans have the capacity to make up their own mind.All in all,i could say Athiesm is my moral choice as i would not want to worship a god that condoned violence and hatred.Who is to judge god's orders as just?god?seems a bit biased.why should we listen to it anyway?just becuase it created us supposedly?there are people born from donated sperm from sperm banks,should they become obedient to the donor or the scientist that implanted the seed?were do you draw the line of worship?the bible?if the bible is the word of god,then are you not inclined to follow it to the letter?do you condone the many instances of violence and hatred portrayed in those text?

If god is the awnser behind human civilization,then you must ask why there were cavemen,why it took so long for civilization to start,and why there were millions of religions before your particular brand called christianity showed up.how do you know your god is the right god?if your wrong your going to zues's or allah's hell.why cant human progress be chalked up to human ingenuity?i fail to see the connection of religion as a necessity to human technological progression.an example would be:what did god do to invent a tank or a car?

[Child of God] According to academia, math is not considering a form of writing. I don't know the reasoning behind that because I can't take the History of Linguistics till my third year. (Apoligies on that one but I'll see if I can't dig up some information on that) As for religion being one of the requirements for civilization, again at this point I'm not sure what criteria was filtered through for these requirements all I know is these are the requirements according to academia for a culture to be considered as having reached civilization. If that sounds like a copout answer I apologize, but again I am not in a position to challenge academia until I am fully qualified to do so.

If you really want to get into a different debate about the historical accuracy of the Bible we can. I have lots of material on that.

Again, going back to the difference between generational commands and what I call 'one-time' commands. God's generational commands are not ones of violence. I'll be the first to admit I'm not the best person to be defending the Old Testement. A Jew would be better at that than myself, since their Torah is our Old Testament. If you could, I ask you show me where in the New Testement violence and hatred is promoted. Yes, there is violence in the Old Testement, though I don't ever recall reading anything about God condoning either it or hatred. If people take the Bible and twist it's meaning, or take something out of context with the rest of the chapter, then yes it could be taken that way. If you are referring to the instances where God orders the massacre of groups of people, I would point out that it is only within the time that Israel is still becomming a nation. Once they have become a nation I don't recall any after that where God again orders it. 

Humans do have the ability to make their own decisions; just look at all the bad ones we've made throughout the centuries. For those of us that believe in God, we know there is a reason behind everything even if we don't understand that reason. I'm sure Abraham didn't understand why God commanded him to take Issac to the alter but he did it anyway. When I was in the RCAC, you are first trained how to be a good follower. You take two to three years learning how to obey orders, who we take orders from, etc. You can't be a good leader until you are a good follower. Jews and Christians believe that God doesn't call us to understand, just to obey. How do we know what to obey? Just like in the military, you are taught the guidelines for how things are done. If you get an order that doesn't make sense but isn't in breech of those guidlines, you follow it witout asking why. You only start asking questions when you know it's in direct violation of those guidelines. Back then, people didn't have a holy book as a guidline for their faith; they had the voice of God alone. Sounds crazy I know, but how would we in a time that doesn't acknoweldge God know if He did speak to His people back then? If what God tells us, today, is against the guidelines He has now set down for us we know that it can't be from God. Why? Because He promised His word to the next generation that they may know what is good in His eyes and what is not. (I know it's said somewhere in the Old Testement but I don't know where. I'll try to find it) God knew generations to come wouldn't be willing to hear His voice directly, so He gave us guidelines.

If you would like my personal theories on the caveman question I'd be happy to give them, but they would be strictly personal theories. As to Christianity not being the oldest you are right. Judaism is older than most religions, not to mention the ancient religions that have long since died out. Judaism started with the formation of Israel, which didn't begin until after they were delivered from the Egyptions during the Middle Kingdom in Epyt's history. Mesopotamia, Egypt and possibly the Indus Valley all had structured religion before the Jews. However, it's the belief of who God is, His personality and such that distinguish Him from other Gods. How do we know He's the right God? That's where faith again comes in. Cop-out answer? Sorry, but that's really the only answer I can give. That is a faith-based answer, so I can only answer from my faith. For me, I used to be a Witch. Not Wiccan, a Traditional Solitary Witch. I've studied many other religions and for myself, 'this' God seems to be the most real to me. Out of all the God's I've studied, this God makes most sense to me, both in my spiritual experience as well as my historical interests. I personally can't believe there is no God/divinity/Source/Something period, due to the experiences I've had. And when I look at the other Gods and their personalities, I see impraticality. Gods that sound purely mythological, stories. Does that make sense? I have a feeling I'm not communicating clearly what I'm trying to say. To me, looking at history, if we had a God who only wanted to use us for sport, history would have been much different. There are so many possibilties for that, and seeing the continuity in history it didn't make sense to me. If we had a violent God who only wanted to watch us kill each other, why allow religions that promote peace and love? Why not kill off the movements as soon as they start? If we had an impartial God, why then is the human sense of justice so strong? (Even if it does vary)If we had a God that only wanted slaves, why create us with a mind capable of free will and intelligence? But do you see where I'm going with this? Fitting with human history and with human traits, this seemed to me to be the God that made the most sense, who was the most real.

As to religion and technological progression, um, I didn't say religion was a necessity. Those lists I provided were not in any particular order, they were just requirements from academia. My response to a question similar to that though would be that God doesn't zap a piece of ground and a car appears. God gave us minds and intelligence for a reason. He also created the world with all the potential in the world. Humans get the credit for comming up with the ideas, but I would say that it's only possible because God created the world with that potential and the human mind that has the capacity to make something like that. In saying that though, I don't think God would ever help in making something like a tank. (Personally speaking) If you would like to chalk that up to human inginuity, that's fine. The inventions of history are man's doing, but I would argue it's because what God has given us that we are able to use it to create such things, for better or for worse.

[Sedition] Alright then,i shall reply from the bottom of your post up,as its around the bottom part of the post that most intriged(sp?) me.If god gas us a learning capacity for cars and buildings,surely you agree that same capacity he knowingly gave us knowing that our nature would use it against each other,thus tanks,guns,etc.Why does god see it necessary to make us learn it ourselves instead of just telling us it all at once?there are so many repurcussions of free will and expanding intelligence for a diety's 'servants' that it makes you wonder if said diety cared to even have servants to begin with,in part becuase of a seemingly all to natural ability for humans to beat each other over the head with more and more advanced cudgels until either side dies off;And in part to humans eventually disbelieving religion becuase it logiclly doesent add up with reality.Especially when a god or gods make little or no effort to tangibly prove their existence and validate a reason for you to follow their particular brand of religion.Most argued instances of them 'proving' their existence are so incredibly vague half the time you can just chalk it up to nature or some man-made factor anyway.and omniscient god would know what he was getting his creations into;i wouldnt expect you to come up for a loose reasoning as to his judgement,that would be a tad unfair even for you.However I will question why a god needs servants in the first place.

On a quick side note as to why you believe in this particular brand of god and not one of the millions of others,what seems less mythical about this god as opposed to zues?I could argue that ANY religion had some historical bases,and that any text conveyed some archiving of its beginnings,much like the bible,koran,or torah.What is it about his personality that hasnt been seen the millions of other poseidons,allahs,and jesus's out there?anything you get from a christian god id be willing to bet money you could get from another monotheistic religion.I'm still not sure why christianity is considered valid while millions of other religions are rejected.My personal wager (although i dont know you in your personal life,so dont take offense as i dont try to make generalizing assumptions about people)is that society played a hand in it,christianity is the general religion of this country even if the country itself is (loosely) secular.Pressure is huge on minorities,and id guess you probably got as much crap for being a witch as i get for being an athiest.If you were in India you would be more likely to be a hindu instead.Id wager it had alot to do with growing up,unless your parents were also witches in that case that point is a bit moot.No matter which label of religion you slap on your back pack you end up with the same logical fallacies behind a religuos text,and a million logical arguements against an immortal being who knows all and can do all.

Well,ok,that side note was not very quick at all,but i guess in this debate thats a bit natural by now.as a much quicker side note,if you claim you simply CANT believe there is no god becuase of personal experiences that I am gonna guess you have no real evidence for that supports a super natural cuase rather then a coincidental and natural cuase;In which case im gonna have to accuse you of believing in irrational things out of emotional impulse.that is the same line of thought that leads children to believe in the boogy man becuase they are afraid of the dark and they hear things shift or move while trying to go to bed and the associate it with a monster under their mattresss,but have no evidence to support their claim when there parent is called into the room to investigate.

As for instances of god supported violence and hatred,both from himself and fed through humans,the flood of Noah is a big one.why kill everyone but Noah's family?wasnt the rest of humanity loved?if he wanted them to listen,im sure they would if some god came out of the clouds and told them to straighten up;people dont exactly ignore a guy that comes out of the clouds and shoots lightning bolts.Instead he opts to flood the world and kill innocent children,babies,woman,men,old,young,it didnt matter,he sluaghtered,yes,MURDERED those people.and for what?they didnt follow his particular orders?who would when all he does is create suffering in one form or another for humanity.natural disasters were around for much longer then humans had the capacity to destroy earth with construction and pollution,man-eating animals still exist today (just recently i read in the news about a christian saying god would protect him while he threw himself in a lion den at a zoo get eaten alive by the lions.big surprise eh?)and humans are still killed in all sorts of natural and rather cruel ways to disease,famine,weather,and about anything else you can think of.With stuff like this around i seriuosly would argue over your claim that god doesn't have us around as toys for sadistic amusement.After all,he is all powerfull so he doesent particulary need our help for anything he could easily do himself;He knows all so apon creation he knew we would be creatures of suffering;He creates millions of scenarios in which to torture us with our own natural urges and biology (such as lust,sloth,greed,all things both physical and mental);and (although i dont think free will could even exist with god,but ill throw you a bone)probably worst of all gives us the ability to deny him,and spend eternity in hell suffering.if you believe in free will then you have to acknowledge that her purposlly allows people to go to hell,and probably does this on purpose.What purpose is there for giving so many means for disobedience (at a cost of eternal suffering) and then telling your creations to be obedient?its like telling your kid not to sneak out of the house then leaving all the windows open and putting ladders under them,with the car left on outside and while you sleep with ear plugs and blindfolds on.It's simply setting humans up for more and more suffering.And before i forget again (i meant to type this much earlier) when you stated there are religions of peace on earth,i definantly have to disagree,there is no such thing.EVERY philosphofical belief has been used as an excuse for violence,yes,even athiesm (to an odd and finnicy extent,the best example would be communism,when they simply picked up athiesm,then dropped it for a shady political cult of stalin worshipping instead,mostly becuase the dictator forced them too,and partly becuase of damn effective propaganda and micro managed control over people's personal lives in soviet russia.).

As for your claim of humans having a strong sense of justice,you basiclly awnsered yourself with loosely saying there were differences in what different people considered "justice".Right now in Iran a woman is probablly getting sliced up in an honor killing.Here in America murder is murder.Over there murder is ok under certain circumstances,and their idea of justice is probably upheld stronger then ours,if anything becuase their idea of capitol punishment is on the extreme side of the spectrum.One man's justice is another man's chaos.I'm not sure what your point was on this one,i dont think a god is so much to blame for a human interest in laws,so much as a humans basic need to maintain a group's order and way of life.Soviet Russia was avowedly athiest yet had a system of justice,albiet a rather brutal and what we would consider wrong system of justice,but one none-the-less.If you look at Soviet Russia,then at Italy,nexus of the catholics,You wont find any difference in their needs for laws and "justice".I dont think this one can be chalked up to religion buddy,this one is chalked up to a need of maintaining a particular public order (and asserting the will of a leader onto the populace).

I think ill leave the retort off at that for the moment,your response?

[Child of God]: I again go back to the point that Christians believe that God did not create man as a servant but as a companion; there is a great difference between the two. As to your question about God's, or Yawhew's, personality being differnt from the personality of other Gods, I am working on that point in What We Are. Once I have that essay finished I will let you know and provide you a link for it. (I'm really starting to regret working nights. I find I actually have less time to work on stuff like this than when I was in school -_-).

As to my personal experiences that lead me to God and Christ, I would be happy to PM you my testomony, but I won't post it here. I don't think that would be appropriate or is relevant to the debate.

To your point about Noah and his family, I point out that in that time when that happened, the Bible says that the world was in a horrible condition wiht lawlessness, violence and hatred which is why God sent the flood. (Sounds kinda like today huh?). Again, I point to What We Are because I have just finished that section that talks about the flood. Just because every philosophical and religious belief has been twisted to be used for violence and war doesn't mean that is what the origional purpose was for. If you are given a knife to cut meat with, then use it to kill someone, whose fault is it? Diseases as I pointed out, largely came with technological advancement as I stated in a previous point. As stated in a previous point as well, we belive that when the Fall occurred, all of creation was affected, which includes the environment. As such, there are times of drought, pestilence, etc that cause famine. Why are we created in ways which we could feel pain and such? Because they are the same means through which we feel happiness, joy and love. The receptors are the same, I would argue they just weren't corrupted to feel the negative emotions until the Fall.

Why doesn't God shoot down lightning bolts to prove He's there? Because He shows us in other ways, such as the creation around us. Don't forget that we also believe He as already done what no other God has done; become human, lived amoung us and died as one of us. 

As to your question on predestination, I honestly don't touch that topic much, because that involves being able to comprehend the mind of God, something that is again so far above me I'm getting a nosebleed. Sorry, but I'm afraid because I'm a historian and not a theologan I can't offer you a good refute for that. I can direct you to Truth in the Word. It is run by someone who is recieved their pastorial and may have a better discussion for you there then I can give you. Just post it in the Q & A section and he will answer you once he is on. Sorry if it seems like I'm copping out of this question but in reality I am. I'm really not qualified to answer that question sorry. 

We push God out of our world and buisness every chance we get, then wonder why He doesn't do something to help us when things go wrong. We tell Him to get out of our buisness, to leave us alone and let us do things are selves. We tell God this is our world and we will do with it what we want, then curse Him when we screw it up. God said "Ask and you shall recieve" so we ask Him to leave us alone, and when He does as we ask, we curse Him for it. We can't have it both ways.

---

Please continue with the debates at:

The Proof Discussions Page 2

---

Read older discussions at Previous Proof Discussions

Back to The Proof

Go to The Proof Definitions