Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Must a God be available to us?

Must a God, or some superior being, prove its existence?

Are we programmed by the Bible to think that God must be available to us as the Bible projects the events? Is it more likely that a superior life form from space would very likely be available to us than a true God of creation? Was the Biblical God a visitor from space intent on subjugating people of Earth?

Jim said - Was the Biblical God a visitor from space intent on subjugating people of Earth?

Jim, if so, he wasn't very successful, could we be any more war-like?

Regards,

Blacknad.

I'm with you there, Blacknad. It seems to be in our nature to do things we're told not to do.

I doubt this topic will find much favor, or interest with the members so I will elaborate a little before it fades away. Our western world concept of God comes to us primarily from the Biblical record. It speaks from a burning bush, privately on a mountain top, travels in a cloud by day any appears as a light by night. It chooses a group of humans to carry out murder and genocide against its neighbors and after various killings and poisonings offers the chosen the escape from Egypt ? only after telling the chosen to borrow (steal) jewels and animals from the Egyptian?s before they leave Egypt. It is unable to easily communicate directly with its followers very well so a special Ark must be made to convey the signals. Most of the miracles, other than killing ?enemy? soldiers, take the form of natural phenomena, like parting water, and such.

I can accept there is logic to a superior being that creates but not one that is bent on destruction simply for personal attention. We can recognize this as an all too human trait and not what one would expect of a superior life form. If this life form deceived humans into submission it would have been due to some superior science it possessed which appeared like magic to humans.

I do not intend to demean the beliefs of others but this my take on the subject.
jjw

Jim,

I'm interested and don't see this as demeaning my beliefs. In fact, these are issues I grapple with myself and it is important to question them and not brush them under the carpet. Christianity is full of embarrassments for the onlooker with contemporary sensibilities.

Just a small point - you say:
...not one that is bent on destruction simply for personal attention.

This statement doesn't accurately represent any biblical picture of God and I would have a real problem with a superior being who's destruction is in effect just saying 'Hey - look at me.' There are other reasons why God destroys and its those that need questioning, not straw men.

I think it is a useful exercise to define how you would expect a god to communicate - and what. Also how you would expect it to act towards it's creation. This is a good basis for discussion, but understandably may take more time than you have to give to something like this.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Jim,
I am of the opinion that there is a creative energy for sure which is the basic ingredient of everything in the universe. The question only is whether it is concious of its creation or not.

jjw said, re the Biblical God?s methods:
...not one that is bent on destruction simply for personal attention.

Blacknad questioned:

This statement doesn't accurately represent any biblical picture of God and I would have a real problem with a superior being who's destruction is in effect just saying 'Hey - look at me.' There are other reasons why God destroys and its those that need questioning, not straw men.

Jjw reply:

While the bible presents much that may require interpretation this issue is not one that I see in doubt. References to things like ?there shall be no other gods before you?; the killing of the followers that made ?craven images? or worshiped Bal or did any squeaky thing diverting their attention or worship of ?it? elsewhere, was enough to warrant extinction. Every where within the bible the followers are compelled to submit to this one and only this one supreme control. That, to me, is the ultimate in seeking complete attention and getting it by force.

Possibly I simply read it differently from you. I see no free will offered by the Bible?s God. Those that had other beliefs were destroyed, routinely. This is very much like the conduct of people, not gods. There is a curious fact in the bible story to the effect that the Hebrew god never had the Hebrews directly attack Egypt as it did all of the other surrounding land owners. True, some alleged miracles of torture were visited upon the Egyptians while Moses bargained for their release (and god hardened pharaoh?s heart against the release?) but that was about it. The Egyptians had a litany of gods of all types and designs but that did not seem to upset the Hebrew god all that much.

I am probably committed to the idea that the benefactors of the Hebrews were not gods as creators of heaven and earth but rather some travelers with advanced science that decided to have some fun at humanities expense. Where did they go? It is just as likely as not that they ran short of fuel and had to split. Did their god die? Do not confuse the biblical god with the entity known as Jesus Christ. They are two different stories and different attitudes. That is all my preaching for today. Is this origins?
jjw

"Must a God, or some superior being, prove its existence?"

Well if it wants us to give it all our money and spend our time worshiping it then YES it bloody-well does!

I'm not sure a god or superior being must prove its existence. But if there is no proof of its existence then it is irrelevant.

Except to those who use the threat of it to control other people's lives and money.

jjw: "Must a God, or some superior being, prove its existence?"

To what end? For it's own good, perhaps not. But for us to believe in it, I think we should expect some strong evidence. Not "proof", but strong evidence.

But "God" and "superior being" are not necessarily synonymous. A "superior being" isn't necessarily supernatural. God is. "Superior Beings" may or may not be.

da: "I'm not sure a god or superior being must prove its existence. But if there is no proof of its existence then it is irrelevant."

EXACTLY!

God doesnt have to prove its existence because its God. Think about it. If I were a God. and you said "prove it". I'd say "go to hell" I dont answer to you [content deleted], I'm God."

Then I'd say "Without me you wouldnt be you so Shut the hell up!"

Plus: If you're asking for proof then that is proof enough that you believe enought to ask. So don't ask, and you will be an athiest.

"God doesnt have to prove its existence because its God."

'have to' is ambiguous terminology.

"Without me you wouldnt be you so Shut the hell up!"

I've noticed that gods tend to be as petty or noble as the people who imagine them.

"Plus: If you're asking for proof then that is proof enough that you believe enought to ask. So don't ask, and you will be an athiest."

No it isn't. If a person is open-minded he is willing to change his opinions based on available evidence. Unfortunately, many believers expect others to accept their testimony without any evidence. "Believe this because I believe it."

Believers aren't irritated that atheists don't believe in God - they're irritated by the fact that we don't agree with them.

Very good. However the topic of the forum is not "Bash other peoples opinions because they're not as good as yours." Not to mention the logo says "whats on your mind" Not, "whats on your mind that its ok with the that ass the FalseFriend to express"
So Long. And thanks for all the attention.

"Very good. However the topic of the forum is not "Bash other peoples opinions because they're not as good as yours." Not to mention the logo says "whats on your mind" Not, "whats on your mind that its ok with the that ass the FalseFriend to express"

The topic of this thead is "Must a God be available to us?"

I addressed that issue. I didn't bash your view. I criticized it - and rightly so, because it was wrong.

This was my misbegotten post.

One of the things I had in mind was the difference between the Bibicle rendidtion where it is projected that their god was there with them talking to them and physically guiding them, and then its gone and no comment is offered as to why, where or when. This behavior to me suggests the possibilit that their so called god was a visitor from space and not "god" at all.

I know that space visitor will find antagonism with some members but if you accept the bible version the behavior of "god" is much more like that of a maniacle person at times.
jjw

There is no evidence that there was a visitor from space.

There is no evidence that there is a god.

There is no evidence that anything in the universe requires the presence of either except by those who make their living preying on weak minds. For them gods, Santa Claus, and aliens are essential.

"Must a God, or some superior being, prove its existence?"

How do you mean; "Must" in what sense? In order to satisfy our couriosity; in order to make us jump through hoops?

"Must" in order to satisfy our "belief/knowledge" of "God"?

Obviously, too many, God has proved his/her/its existence
(the bible says so)..OTOH to many others; there is NO GOD.

So your question relates to the ego of God or to the satisfaction of humanity.

Interesting question. Taking DA Morgan's stance; God would not have let atrocities such as mass deaths occur (given a). what we believe to be God's morality and b). any "just" God would not let human suffering occur (what does God care about anything less than human [was Jesus an echinoderm or chimpanzee?.. no, supposedly, a human.].


Sincerely,

Mung wrote:
""Must" in order to satisfy our "belief/knowledge" of "God"?"

I have no need that requires satisfying. But if you wish please amuse us by explaining the creation of smallpox.

God hasn't proven anything to anyone: Ever! What we have here is a bunch of mentally and morally weak people incapable of thinking for themselves and wishing to be told what to think, what to do, what is right, what is wrong, and hoping to be forgiven for being who they really are.

Your God, according to your bible, murdered every person on the planet except one family.

Your God, according to your bible, murdered every first-born male in an entire country.

Your God, according to your bible, invented anthrax, smallpox, diptheria, leukemia, and AIDS.

Oh and wants to be prayed to and worshipped. Not bad for six day's work.

And if you want to play your little game of not being a born-again fundamentalist nut-case by all means feel free to renounce the Bible. And please use a very clearly worded sentence. Thanks.

Hi Mung:

I must be getting vauge in my old age.

The Biblical characters appear to have believed strongly in THEIR god because he was there with them, talking, guiding and murdering them.
If THAT "god" was around would we believe?
Or whatever.
jjw

jjw004 wrote:
"I must be getting vauge in my old age. The Biblical characters appear to have believed strongly in THEIR god because he was there with them, talking, guiding and murdering them."

Not old ... just daft.

Your source of this information is the bible so lets see how that stands up.

1. Who wrote it? (provide proof)

2. When did they write it? (provide proof)

3. In what language did they write it (provide proof)

4. Did you read the original text?

5. If not which specific version did you read and how do you know it is 100% true in translation to the original? (provide proof)

6. If what you claim as proof in each of the above situations is, in fact, empirical proof, then it should be proof to a Jew and a Moslem and a Buddhist and a Hindu and followers of Janism, Shinto, Animism, etc. Certainly they don't quibble about the color of the sky or the temperature at which water boils or whether penicillin works. So there it is. Make your choice ... mindless hypocrite or step up to the challenge and explain to all what we've been missing all these millenia.

PS: If the invisible purple rhinoceros walked up to me, lifted his leg, and emptied his bladder I'd believe in him too. Neither is going to happen. And any person even remotely connected with reality knows you question is valueless.