Proof of God? Is there any?

[Calmador]

First and foremost, it is rude to cite another page as your argument without any useful input during a conversation (I could cite scholarly articles and prime manuscripts, but instead, I have taken the time to understand them and incorporate them within my argument). Secondly, the page you cited is only in regards to evidence of the crucifixion of Jesus, and does not serve as evidence for God (and I do believe that Jesus existed). In addition, it was not peered edited nor published in a scholarly journal. He is wrong on several accounts - especially on the Old testament fulfillment of prophecies, as Jesus was NOT born in Bethlehem and NOT a direct descendant of King David because he was born of a virgin, and thus did not receive his genes from Joseph (who was a descendant of King David).

Finally, all of the "evidence" is explicitly and solely from the Bible. And if you had read ANYTHING that I had posted previously, you would know why the Bible, just like the Iliad, is not read as a history book by scholars. I encourage you to go back and read what I posted. I also encourage you to think on your own, without resorting to biased information and letting other people think for you.

I didnt see anything rude about citing another page as explaining the evidence of Jesus Christ resurrection... I don't see one bit of rudeness but it did save me some time and typing on my part. If it bothers you tho, sure I won't do it again.

That page explained why it's true that Jesus did resurrect and yeah tells about his cruxification... wow it really is all about faith. It served as evidence for many people, including atheists which seem to have the most hardened hearts ... and converted people left and right.. you just don't want to accept it. But God Bless you anyways

And yes he was born in Bethlehem and Joseph and Mary were descendents of David so he did by Mary Jesus is a descendent.

Matthew 2:1

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem

Matthew 1:1-17 (Joseph's line)

1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham: 2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4 Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6 and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14 Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Elihud,
15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.
17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.


Luke 3:23-38 (Mary's line)
23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,
the son (in law) of Heli, 24 the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath,
the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
the son of Josek, the son of Joda,
27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melki,
the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
29 the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon,
the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse,
the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
the son of Salmon,[a] the son of Nahshon,
33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,[b]
the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob,
the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan,
the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
the son of Kenan, 38 the son of Enosh,
the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
the son of God.


I did read what you have posted, I just don't believe it because of the overwhelming evidence... dead sea scrolls, the Jews being well and alive is evidence and gives credibility to the Bible. The existence of Egypt, is also evidence, there's archeological evidence, historical evidence, appearantly prophetic aswell and what I think is most powerful and that I'm capable of seeing best is philosophical evidence... God is real and it's only reasonable. Me having a vision, my brother having several accounts of sighting demons, once saying qoute "I was chased by a monster". Prayers being answered in my life... I closed my eyes and prayed for God to tell me to go left or right, when I was done praying, I opened my eyes and a stone flew to the left.... There is evidence.

Idk much about Iliad, it's a poem about a war... but the Bible was written as an account of history and what they believed was true and what they saw, that is clear and that's what historians should read as a platform for discovering the truth. And when you look at the historical documents... Jesus Christ did resurrect from the dead. You just don't want to believe it. The Bible is credible for consideration but you don't even want to use it, even when it's credible. It's just you man, you don't want to even try... you want look the other way and stay there, it's sad. Because philosophically your strong denial in this is proof of God. If we lived in a grey world... or moral-less world, everything would be acceptable but I imagine the most beneficial things would be best to go after. But on a moral level... you wouldn't care about this, you wouldn't be here, you'd be on about your own life doing what you think is most beneficial. But instead you do care. There are morals and your in-conflict of them and I think deep down inside... you know you need to be here because man will not live by bread alone but by the word of God.

I think I've said everything I could for the topic, for now anyways. Love you

 

[theBibleisawsome]

There were a few things that I was trying to object in the claim that I quoted, and creation was not one of them. I am a religious studies scholar and not a biologist, so getting into a debate over evolution or abiogenisis isn't something I am interested in.

I also did not provide a fluid argument for the affects of scriptural discrepancies and how they might have altered Christian doctrine over the course of history. I did, however, provide a sound and well supported argument as to why personal accounts should not be counted as empirical evidence. Furthermore, because the veracity of the bible predicated on such personal accounts, citing it as prove for the existence of a God is negligible.

The topic of this thread is proof that God exists is there any thats why I put yes there is one proof I can give is creation thats why I talked about creation. God bless u

 

[Dogma]

The topic of this thread is proof that God exists is there any thats why I put yes there is one proof I can give is creation thats why I talked about creation. God bless u

I don't quite understand what you are saying... You might want to try to articulate you ideas in separate sentences.

 

[Saul_Durian]

I don't quite understand what you are saying... You might want to try to articulate you ideas in separate sentences.

I thought the same thing.

 

[theBibleisawsome]

I don't quite understand what you are saying... You might want to try to articulate you ideas in separate sentences.

In my last post u said I didn't read the topic right. Why am I talking about creation for.I said the reason I talked about creation is because the name of this thread is there any proof that God exists.and I said yes there is proof and one of the things to prove it is creation. Thats why I was talking about creation in my very first post in this thread n u said I misread the question. God bless u.

 

[Saul_Durian]

In my last post u said I didn't read the topic right. Why am I talking about creation for.I said the reason I talked about creation is because the name of this thread is there any proof that God exists.and I said yes there is proof and one of the things to prove it is creation. Thats why I was talking about creation in my very first post in this thread n u said I misread the question. God bless u.

Ok, I got what you were saying. But you really need to use some punctuation, doesn't need to be perfect, but some.

Not trying to bash on you at all, but it was honestly difficult to read what you said. This post is kind of hard to formulate into a coherent sentence.

 

[theBibleisawsome]

Amen Saul I understand u loud n clear God bless

 

[Saul_Durian]

Amen Saul I understand u loud n clear God bless

Amen Saul, I understand you loud and clear. God bless.

I could follow you around and correct all of your post for you if you want

 

[ms_ina]

My answer, sometimes, other times.......NO

your toes move
fingers
you walk and talk

rain, snow,

God apparently is convicting and driving many insane, and so we come to this website....

but is that God, because God is good, and God did create goodness, but then we all become bad, and then want to be good again, and then christians and non-christians, do not accept us

And, then we get take adavantage of, by bullying christians, aggressive, more knowledgeable, because we are all growing, and miss out on life, when God seems to give life, and happiness to drunks, crack addicts, who give birth to crack babies, and then force others to care for their mistakes! And, watch suffering!

So, where is God, good question! But do what you know to survive!

I believe God does not approve of killing, but I now understand why murderers in the flesh, have killed. A person, a wife, a husband, has abused, taken it beyond God's limits, the police do not intervene, shelters do not work.

We are partial. I hate that God seesm to love my ***edited*** mother, and yet, I work my entire life, to live godly, and yet, she gets all honor. The man in the house, a molester, my brothers are incestual, althought they have not taken it out, they only have the thoughts. God heard me many hears ago. Protected me.

Where is my hope in mankind now?
Where was my mother when I needed a pair of shoes, a school lunch, wanted to play sports, so now I suffer because I got bullied in school, and now when I tell the stories, get critized because of a woman who is an adulterer, and feels she wants and wanted to raise and influeunce a child to do the same!

What am I to do?

God honors here, for providing me a home!

I will curse her to the day I die.

The bible, God, no God is bigger than trying to out win and survive by showing honor, and loving the unloveable and your enemies, and trying to figure it all out!

God is not in every man, as they rape, abuse, misuse, then throw you away, as do women!

Self-interest is the name of the game, and I have been doing the same! But I cannot heal the world, save the world, fix you, the church.

You think if we want a good, world, we'd make it that way, and stay organized.

But, no, churches, the government have lost all comprehension, of what it means, to create a just world.

God Bless with knowledge.

And praying for those who DO NOT DESERVE injustice! That God wold wake up those who could have a better life, then being used by the devil or others, to make bad happen, because they truly believe the verse that says, we cause bad to happen so that good might result!

NO, NO, NO

Hyprocrites!

 

[prodigious1one]

We as believers in God are proof that He is real. The Jewish people are also proof that He is real.

 

[Saul_Durian]

We as believers in God are proof that He is real. The Jewish people are also proof that He is real.

I don't mean to be rude, but how is having believers proof?

 

[Dogma]

We as believers in God are proof that He is real. The Jewish people are also proof that He is real.

There are believers of Big Foot. Does that make Big Foot real?

 

[jimmydiggs]

There are believers of Big Foot. Does that make Big Foot real?

Goes both ways really.


You do not believe in God. Does that make him disappear?

 

[Sweetbird]

yes I understand.
but I do hope that we will evolve spiritually not physically since I know the sun will kiss this earth one day.....health nuts, gawd.[

quote=Dogma;636051]Humans are different than most animals because we have something called empathy - the ability to realize that other people have minds just like our own. We also have culture. We have the capacity for deep understanding and knowledge. We realize that we can achieve greater things as a whole than individually.

Evolution does not work that way. Evolution happens initially due to geographical/ environmental pressures that are put onto a species. We currently do not have any these. In fact, there are unnatural factors contributing to the thriving of our species (medicines, surgical technologies, etc.). If any physical changes were to be prevalent in the human species, it would be through unnatural causes (and thus not natural selection). We have already seen how the development of modern science has been able to increase the lifespan of a human by 20 years on average. As science progresses, there may come a day where it might become a profound disability for a person at age 200 not to be able to run a marathon.[/quote]

 

[Sweetbird]

bwahahahaha no I wrote that or would have lol

Hi Mirandie & hope you're well.
Proof of God? - It's writing this to you!
BW; J.

 

[TheAristocat]

In fact, scholars believe that the first gospels weren't written down until the late first century - about 100 years after the death of Jesus

Eh. "Scholars" believe a lot of things. To which scholars are you referring and why do they believe this? There is evidence for Christianity dating back 20-50 years after the crucifixion. Not to mention the Gospel accounts give a historically accurate depiction of the times that may have otherwise been lost had they been written 100 years after the crucifixion (we should also keep in mind that these Gospels are written in Greek but center around Jewish affairs, thus suggesting that the earliest copies are not the originals and thereby implying an even earlier date). To me that strengthens the case for an earlier eye-witness dating rather than a "cleverly devised fable" as the Bible puts it.

You can see evidence for an early dating of Christianity by reading some of the Roman letters and even the testimony of the martyrs they contained. Of course Christianity is going to be a faith-based choice. Every choice in life is. Some choices require more faith than others. For me I have personal evidence, and I feel for you that you have not received this yourself.

I've prayed for people who doctors said would die, and they've lived and recovered. I've had an experience similar to Mark 16:18 where a sort of "poison" entered my body (enough to kill me at least twice over) and it didn't affect me in the slightest. It's kind of a personal story, so if you'd like the details for curiosity sake I'll send them to you in private.

For those who say the Bible is full of contradictions it depends on the original text or at least the oldest copies. Those are the ones to which I refer when I want to study the Bible. The "Bible" could certainly be full of contradictions if you consult purposely-corrupted versions such as one lesbian version I had heard about before. I really don't know if the Bible contains contradictions, but I do know that people don't give its textual consistency nearly enough credit. There are ideas that exist within the culture that are assumed but omitted from the text, and these gaps cause these "contradictions." But when you cross-reference passages you'll see the evidence of these secrets behind the scenes and it will remedy these contradictions. This is my experience in conducting Bible-study and debate.

If someone wants to say Christianity is a big farse, God isn't real, etc. I can understand where they're coming from. But I cannot agree with them. If your testimony is true of this "miracle-worker" who has millions of followers, then I find it strange that people would be so willing to just blow him off rather than research these self-proclaimed miracles. The most logical decision should be the most readily accepted, and for me that is that God exists rather than that he does not.

Now, my belief in the God who gives power to my prayers is the same God who does not permit another god to reign over him. And thus gods like the ancient Caananite B*al, who is viewed as a supreme deity, must be false in my eyes. As for other gods, some we can both rule out with scientific observation.

And you should understand that in the Bible other gods are not necessarily "a lie," but many of their claims are. In fact the word for "god" in the Bible is "el" which I believe means "power," and even some humans are given this title. Thus prophecy by way of such minor powers as angelic beings is not ruled out in the Bible, but God is the proclaimed Supreme Power over all others. If they have power it is because he gives it to them.

I also get the strong impression from reading the Bible that God is portrayed as a planner. He is very powerful, yes, but the fact that he knows the future shows us how he is able to create a universe in which events align to bring about actions of mercy and judgment at just the right time without what we would normally refer to as "direct intervention" or "miracles."

 

[TheKringledOne]

It's a long read, but here's some proof/evidence for God's existence.

THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST - Evidence for & about the Resurrection of Christ Jesus

It blessed me, but even with evidence, you gotta have Faith to accept evidence lol Someone can see an angel and not believe because of a lack of Faith.

This argument fails for a number of reasons. The main one being that it is considering many of the books in the bible as first hand accounts. Biblical historians have not been able to trace the books of the bible to any date before 60 years (and that is one of the more generous dates that is given) after his supposed death and revival. The longer it takes for the written accounts to appear after the event make them less convincing evidence.

The site mentions that Homer and Plato have less evidence than Jesus for existing. This is not a good comparison. Plato and Homer are known for their works. If the person that is claimed to be the author was actually different it wouldn't change the importance of why we think of these people. Plato may not have existed or have been the man who came up with the concepts he presented, but someone did. Jesus is a very different case. The claims made about him are not based on his own works but on events that either did or did not occur. This is especially true for the claims made to be extended as evidence for God.

Jesus was not supposed to be a fiction author like Homer. Jesus' claims in the written accounts about him are not based on works of art that Jesus did. The exception to this is in the parables that are attributed to Jesus. Someone came up with those parables and we could attribute them to a historical figure and call him Jesus. Obviously someone came up with them. This doesn't mean that this 'Jesus' did all the miraculous things that the questionable accounts of him say he did or even that this 'Jesus' was anything like he is described in those accounts.

Jesus' philosophies were not based on logical and reasoning most of the time like Plato attempted to do. Whether or not Plato existed as described doesn't matter. Someone existed who came up with the concept. If not someone named Plato then it was done by someone, or a group, that can be labeled as Plato as a historical model. This is not the same with Jesus, because his assertions are reliant on the idea that he existed in the way described and had the attributes given to him in these descriptions. If he did not do the miraculous things attributed to him, and had no supernatural abilities, then his claims about salvation are moot. The amount of evidence needed would be different for it to be accepted as likely, there would need to be a lot more. A lot of evidence would be needed for a historical Jesus with those attributes to be used as evidence for God. I do not believe that site makes the case that the historical Jesus existed as he was described in those accounts nor can I grant that concept based on other information I know about the written accounts about him.

The lack of evidence here isn't evidence against the idea of a god in anyway. However when there is a lack of evidence it does make the concept a lot harder to accept even if it actually was the case. Perhaps God does exist, perhaps Jesus existed in the way described and was resurrected, but if the reasons to believe in it are insufficient and have mutually exclusive concepts compared to other things that have more sufficient evidence then I do not think that belief in these things can be justified.

 

[Trax]

urf urf urf

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Just open the door and let Him in. It is that simple.

Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

A little child has sense enough to open the door when someone knocks. But, as it is, adults
want to write a 2000 page manual on opening a door, how to determine if someone is
at your door, and how you determine if they are at the right house. By the time you get all
that figured out, you die and He's knocking on someone else's door.

 

[AnandaHya]

Mark 8:12
But He sighed deeply in His spirit, and said, “Why does this generation seek a sign? Assuredly, I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation.”

1 Corinthians 1:21-26
New King James Version (NKJV)
21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks[a] foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.

 

[Red_Tory]

Eh. "Scholars" believe a lot of things. To which scholars are you referring and why do they believe this?

Oh... Don't forget that if the Gospels were written anywhere near 100 years after the death of Christ, they would not be written in the "late first century". Unless Christ was crucified before 0 AD, saying they were written in the late first century and claiming that they were written 100 years after the event are mutually exclusive.

I think we can dismiss this "scholarly" assertion out of hand, since it refutes itself... Unless some sources are provided?