me being an atheist
- Thread starter zavok
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
The flood was necessary because humanity had fallen into depravity. Just picture murder, orgies, drug use constantly from everybody. That's what I picture. And the term murder doesn't really apply to God. If I make a paper airplane, there's no problem with me crumpling it up and throwing it in the trash. I can understand how you think it's terrible, I used to think so too. When a person becomes a Christian though, they realize that their life is not their own and never was. They don't really have a right to it. When I was younger I struggled with this because I was anti-establishment. I believed in God though, and I eventually realized that whether I liked it or not, He was in charge. Once I gave in He was revealed to me (through the Word and the Holy Spirit) and it all made a lot more sense. Not sure if that will change your mind, but that's my point of view.
To your last post (at the time of typing this), we started in contact with God. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve walked with God in the cool of the night. I believe this is a physical as well as spiritual description. When they were cast out of the Garden, this contact stopped. The only way to get it back is through Jesus Christ, who is the mediator (1 Timothy 2:5). That's why everybody doesn't feel God's presence.
To your last post (at the time of typing this), we started in contact with God. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve walked with God in the cool of the night. I believe this is a physical as well as spiritual description. When they were cast out of the Garden, this contact stopped. The only way to get it back is through Jesus Christ, who is the mediator (1 Timothy 2:5). That's why everybody doesn't feel God's presence.
L
There may not be "proof" in the scientific sense, but we can use reason to see that there has to be a God. St. Thomas Aquinas formulated five ways that we know the existence and necessity of God.
First, the argument from motion. Some things in the universe are in motion. All things that are in motion require a mover. An infinite regress of motion is impossible (in other words, if we say A moved B moved C moved D moved E moved F et cetera, it doesn't make sense to say that that goes on forever. This is simply because if for each individual motion there is a mover, why would the same not be true of all motion looked at together?). So there must be an unmoved mover which moved all things, and this we call God.
Second is the argument from Causality. Some things in the universe are caused. All things that are caused require a cause. An infinite regress of causation is impossible (for the same reason as above). So there must be an uncaused cause which caused all things, and this we call God.
Third is the argument from Contingency. Some things in the universe depend upon others for their existence. We call these contingent beings. It is impossible for all beings to be contingent, since something can't come from nothing. Therefore, there must be an independent being from which all things derive their existence, and this we call God.
Fourth is the argument from Degree. There are varying degrees of perfection in nature (that is, some things are greater beings than others. A rock is completely passive, a plant is somewhat passive, an animal is sensitive, a man is rational and can form judgments of goodness--thus he has the highest knowledge of these things). To speak of degrees requires that we admit of a standard of perfection from which lower degrees derive their perfection. And so there must be a pinnacle of perfection by which we measure the goodness of all things, and this we call God.
Fifth is the argument from End (or purpose). Some things in the universe act toward some purpose, and we call them natural bodies. These natural bodies are themselves to some degree unintelligent, but acting for a purpose is a sign of intelligence. Therefore, there must be a higher intelligence guiding them toward their purposes, and this we call God.
So we can see that the world simply doesn't make any sense without a God of some kind. We can also deduce from all of this that God must be loving: if he caused all things, it had to have been from love. To love is to will the good of another, and since it is better to exist than not to exist, God must love what he has created. Sure, there is pain and suffering in the world, but this is not caused by God. It is caused by man's disobedience against this natural order God has established. Further, God, being all-good, manages to bring good out of suffering. This is most exemplified by his Son's sacrifice on the Cross--the very worst thing that could ever happen, the death of God at the hands of men, became the very best thing that could ever happen: the salvation of all mankind.
First, the argument from motion. Some things in the universe are in motion. All things that are in motion require a mover. An infinite regress of motion is impossible (in other words, if we say A moved B moved C moved D moved E moved F et cetera, it doesn't make sense to say that that goes on forever. This is simply because if for each individual motion there is a mover, why would the same not be true of all motion looked at together?). So there must be an unmoved mover which moved all things, and this we call God.
Second is the argument from Causality. Some things in the universe are caused. All things that are caused require a cause. An infinite regress of causation is impossible (for the same reason as above). So there must be an uncaused cause which caused all things, and this we call God.
Third is the argument from Contingency. Some things in the universe depend upon others for their existence. We call these contingent beings. It is impossible for all beings to be contingent, since something can't come from nothing. Therefore, there must be an independent being from which all things derive their existence, and this we call God.
Fourth is the argument from Degree. There are varying degrees of perfection in nature (that is, some things are greater beings than others. A rock is completely passive, a plant is somewhat passive, an animal is sensitive, a man is rational and can form judgments of goodness--thus he has the highest knowledge of these things). To speak of degrees requires that we admit of a standard of perfection from which lower degrees derive their perfection. And so there must be a pinnacle of perfection by which we measure the goodness of all things, and this we call God.
Fifth is the argument from End (or purpose). Some things in the universe act toward some purpose, and we call them natural bodies. These natural bodies are themselves to some degree unintelligent, but acting for a purpose is a sign of intelligence. Therefore, there must be a higher intelligence guiding them toward their purposes, and this we call God.
So we can see that the world simply doesn't make any sense without a God of some kind. We can also deduce from all of this that God must be loving: if he caused all things, it had to have been from love. To love is to will the good of another, and since it is better to exist than not to exist, God must love what he has created. Sure, there is pain and suffering in the world, but this is not caused by God. It is caused by man's disobedience against this natural order God has established. Further, God, being all-good, manages to bring good out of suffering. This is most exemplified by his Son's sacrifice on the Cross--the very worst thing that could ever happen, the death of God at the hands of men, became the very best thing that could ever happen: the salvation of all mankind.
...
W
science says we come from total randomness (the big bang, evolution) random! how could we be? With all these cells and neurons and thoughts... and everything around us! Tnature... the universe!
I think God is more likely than evolution, it makes more sense for there to be a creator than for everything to have happened by chance, and that is how I know there is a God. SOMEONE must have started it all...
I believe in God too, but I hate when people say this.
"I don't understand _______, so god must exist." I don't think i need to explain the ludicrousness of this argument. If you don't understand astrophysics, evolutionary biology, physics, etc, then go pick up a book and educate yourself.
I usually find, though, that it is not so much a case of not being able to understand, it's a case of not even TRYING to. I'm sure less than 5% of people who scream "we didn't evolve from apes!" have ever read a textbook on evolutionary biology.
Also, you may be interested in abiogenesis.
I don't belive the poster is saying they don't understand how something exists, but rather the chance of evolution and random happenings to exist is unlikely. As in seeing the improbability if something does not equal not understanding something.
I am certain without a doubt that this universe was NOT created at random Go look up some statistics of all this happening and they will surprise you. The chance of such a complex universe happening by randomness can't happen. Scientist talk about evolution like it's the bees knees and they've proved it without a shadow of a doubt and that' ludicrous. They've come up with many 'theories' but theres no ' law of evolution" like the law of gravity you can just pick up and prove. And many scholers would laugh if you say evolutions isn't real but i think its because many scientist are so bent on finding the universe without a creator that they have abandoned what a scientist is supposed to do. Look at the facts objectively and come to a conclusion and not presuppose your own agenda, but that's quite difficult to do, Christian or Atheist.
i can understand what you mean though, we shouldn't just say "we don't understand something so God must exist' but i think it'd be more accurate to say ' The universe is so complicated that God must exist."
I am certain without a doubt that this universe was NOT created at random Go look up some statistics of all this happening and they will surprise you. The chance of such a complex universe happening by randomness can't happen. Scientist talk about evolution like it's the bees knees and they've proved it without a shadow of a doubt and that' ludicrous. They've come up with many 'theories' but theres no ' law of evolution" like the law of gravity you can just pick up and prove. And many scholers would laugh if you say evolutions isn't real but i think its because many scientist are so bent on finding the universe without a creator that they have abandoned what a scientist is supposed to do. Look at the facts objectively and come to a conclusion and not presuppose your own agenda, but that's quite difficult to do, Christian or Atheist.
i can understand what you mean though, we shouldn't just say "we don't understand something so God must exist' but i think it'd be more accurate to say ' The universe is so complicated that God must exist."