Do you believe in God?

[Steele_obsidion]

I am God.

If you give me a Lamborhini tax free no questions asked......

i will then believe you are god. and i promise i wont say anything. ill tell no one

 

[Sureboss]

Can you give him a book on grammar too, RPM?

 

[Roo]

I am God.

Is it blasphemy if you don't believe in yourself?

 

[GTP_rpm]

Mortals encourage those to believe in themselves, when few people have faith in them. Yet, discourage those to believe in themselves when their following is in abundance.

The immortal amongst us, do not require belief or disbelief, encouragement of discouragement...about ourselves.

We just, are

On the other note, I help those who have helped themselves. If I offer up the choice of ''grammar'' for free would it allow them to create such thing as a lamborhini? If I create a lamborhini and gift it for free, would it encourage them to learn the meaning of ''grammar''?

As a great man once said, Jesus is your friend. He brings you beer.

 

[McLaren]

I once had a friend named Jesus buy me tequila. Does that count?

 

[GTP_rpm]

Tequila.

Did it make you happy?

 

[McLaren]

Tequila.

Did it make you happy?

Along with all warm & fuzzy inside, yes.

 

[Sureboss]

I once had a friend named Jesus buy me tequila. Does that count?

It is a really common Hispanic name, isn't it?

 

[Stevisiov]

I once had a friend named Jesus buy me tequila. Does that count?

It is a really common Hispanic name, isn't it?

What Tequila!? don't be ridiculous Nigel.

 

[mindwise]

Well, that is an encouraging outcome

I'm just wondering how so many people answer "Maybe" to the question "do you believe in god". What do they mean 'maybe'
I can see how someone like me (who does not believe in god) can say 'maybe' to the question 'Does god exist'. Since that is basically what i say, (though perhaps maybe is a lot softer then the 'highly unlikely' i'd actually respond with.)

But 'maybe' to the 'do you believe' question, what do they mean 'maybe', either you believe or you do not, what is that 'maybe', is that 'i do not know if i believe in god'? and then so many.

O wait, 💡 i guess it is so many because the presented 'atheist' position is too strong.
I think that if the answers were plain 'yes/no' rather then 'no way' ..

Ah well, thank goodness (for goodness sake of course) my stance is that anyone who does not answer 'yes', is an atheist

 

[Skynyrd1977]

Christians often like to talk about God as a "Father". As a parent myself, I can tell you I would be the worst father in the world if I condemned one of my children to (John 3:18): ETERNITY IN HELL for not following the "rules".

I know how hard it is to punish your child, but if the child repeatedly and consistently disobeys your explicit directions, you enact some form of punishment, usually a predefined penalty. God loves us, and does not wish to eternally condemn any of us, so he gives us our entire life to make the right decisions.

I think you’re shortchanging yourself by not giving yourself credit for that kind of transformation – it was your want to be good (whether or not good is defined by the Bible) that allowed you to change like that.

Sage has said this but you have identified who started to turn your life around, it was you. Did he turn to you? No, you instigated the whole process. Firstly by realising that what you were doing was wrong, be it morally or for your life in the long term. You changed yourself, not Jesus, but you attribute your turnaround to Jesus because you underestimate your own strength of determination.

Actually, I did not care about or want to be good, and I really didn't instigate or seek him out. The circumstances were this: I enlisted in the Air Force to see the world, and during basic training you are extremely limited to what you can do on the base. I opted to go to a non-denominational Christian Sunday morning service just to get out of the barracks! What I heard changed my life when I decided to accept it. I can testify that it has continued to prove to be truth to this day.

Sounds like Pascal's wager to me... what I don't like about it is that it assumes that a mere belief in God is the only way to a pleasant future.
... I prefer to think of Pascal's wager along similar lines to Richard Dawkins, who has challenged the notion that mere belief is the key to anything - is it not better to have lived a moral, fulfilling and useful life regardless of your own personal thoughts about what comes after than to commit appalling acts of abuse and cruelty, justified only by your own belief in your own righteousness?

If heaven does exist, and it is solely occupied by true believers regardless of their behaviour here on Earth, then you're damn right I don't want to be there.

TM, I don't blame you, but that's not how it is. A persons actions and practices verify what they truely believe in their heart. God knows what is in every man's heart. Jesus condemned some of the religious leaders of the time as hypocrites. Mere belief is not the prerequesit. Satan believes in God and has seen Him. But he has chosen to rebel and reject Him, which is the same choice we all have.

A lot of it may be in your head, if you think you are being healed or at least bettering your condition then your body seems to respond. I think many forms of illness have a metal factor to them. If prayer helps you achieve this then by all means use it.

I have a really bad right knee that was damaged several years ago. It flares up with extreme pain about once a month, although if I wear a knee brace during that time it seems much better. Countless doctors have told me though that the brace does nothing for me though. I believe it's purely a mental thing.

This is nothing more then me speculating though, and really that's all we can do as this would be very hard to prove since you could make a case for both sides.

While it is true Joey that mental belief does play a factor in ones health, it is also very true that doctors are often wrong. At least four prominent prosthetic surgeons told me to amputate my son's foot before he turned 1 year old, because lengthening a limb 12 inches is near about impossible. He has had 10.5 inches lengthened to his leg, and for the first time this year made the football team as back up quarterback even with a 2-inch lift added to his shoe. (90 tried out, 40 made the team)(sorry for rambling...parental pride stuff...)

No, what you need to do is believe in God, on the off-chance that heaven is real. And then you can spend forever doing whatever you like, even if it's stuff that'd get you sent to prison down here.

Because a supreme being would be real happy that you believed in it just in case it existed.

Famine, maybe my analysis is not a reason for a decision, and more of a hind-sight logical look at things from my perspective, but as I mentioned to TM above, I am not saying nor do I beleive that "belief only" is your passport to heaven, or that believers can do as they like because they're already forgiven. I would agree with you that that's just crap.

But, I would say that the "off-chance" is that heaven is not real.

Faith = Clouded Judgment
The definition of faith is belief without sufficient reason to believe.

Danoff, (I'm tempted to call you Dano because I have a brother that we call Dano ), do you not use faith in your everyday life? When you cross a bridge, aren't you using faith that it will not collapse, even though you do not have the structural test reports?

Our "faith" is based on repeated testimony.
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definition/faith




Has anyone read the book "90 Minutes in Heaven"?
Skyn.



.

 

[mindwise]

Danoff, do you not use faith in your everyday life? When you cross a bridge, aren't you using faith that it will not collapse, even though you do not have the structural test reports?

Of course not (i understand you did not direct this to me, but the question is generic enough for me to take the liberty of answering), when one crosses a bridge then one can make a reasoned assumption that the bridge will hold for a couple of reasons:

1) the bridge has been standing for quite some time, many many people have crossed it already.
2) many bridges exist, collapsing bridges are rare.
3) Bridges are constructed based on scientific theories, just like airplanes; airplanes fly because they are constructed according to the theory of aerodynamics

In that sense, it is not certain the sun won't 'rise' tomorrow, but it takes 'faith' to assume it won't.

I see no use for 'faith' (in the sense belief in something without evidence, or with evidence to the contrary).
But i'm open minded, so if you know of a single example where 'faith' yields good results in reality, then please present that example.

But, I would say that the "off-chance" is that heaven is not real.

Well, sure, you can say that, but what you say has no basis in our shared reality, it's based on 'faith'.

Our "faith" is based on repeated testimony.

Yes, well that renders heaven as real as alien abductions, the monster of Loch Ness, mediums, Shiva, tarot, esp, etc.

Not too impressive to a skeptic i'm afraid
Personal testimonies are -to put it mildly- not the best lines of evidence.

Regards,

 

[Famine]

I cannot argue with any of that.

 

[Joey D]

While it is true Joey that mental belief does play a factor in ones health, it is also very true that doctors are often wrong. At least four prominent prosthetic surgeons told me to amputate my son's foot before he turned 1 year old, because lengthening a limb 12 inches is near about impossible. He has had 10.5 inches lengthened to his leg, and for the first time this year made the football team as back up quarterback even with a 2-inch lift added to his shoe. (90 tried out, 40 made the team)(sorry for rambling...parental pride stuff...)

I agree, doctors are human and can be wrong just like the rest of us. They are only going on what they have learned and there are always going to unexplained cases. It's great your son was able to overcome his condition and actually make it. But do you really think it was God or do you think that maybe the drive to succeed was more important?

And you have to understand religion is just as often wrong as anything else. If it wasn't things would be changing all the time.

Has anyone read the book "90 Minutes in Heaven"?

Yes. Didn't care for it and I'm extremely sceptical that he actually went to heaven. For all I know he could have been knocked into a comatose state and just dreamt it. I don't know.

 

[Thiele]

I am Catholic, so yes i do believe in god. Though i don't go to church reguarly or any of that.

 

[Pako]

What I don't get about the whole "Do you believe in......." scenario is that Jesus Christ lived and died. His life, death, and resurrection was documented using the best practices of the day yet people still deny that He ever existed and if they mildly accept that He could have possibly lived, He surely didn't do all the things that were said of Him.

The very same evidence that people choose to ignore is why I can't group the Christ story with alien abductions, the monster of Loch Ness, mediums, Shiva, tarot, esp, etc.

And with that,

Merry Christmas GTPlanet!!!​

 

[Omnis]

Yeah, you have to acknowledge that he was a profound man if nothing else. I mean, I revere Lao Tzu in a similar regard.

Also, Pako, it's not even Christmas yet. Lol.

 

[Joey D]

What I don't get about the whole "Do you believe in......." scenario is that Jesus Christ lived and died. His life, death, and resurrection was documented using the best practices of the day yet people still deny that He ever existed and if they mildly accept that He could have possibly lived, He surely didn't do all the things that were said of Him.

The very same evidence that people choose to ignore is why I can't group the Christ story with alien abductions, the monster of Loch Ness, mediums, Shiva, tarot, esp, etc.

What evidence do you have? The only real evidence I'm aware of is text written after his death and there is no way to actually prove it to be true. To be honest just about all Christian evidence on Jesus is hearsay. The Bible is also not a historical document as it's been changed so much over the years that it's ludicrous to believe it is still in it's original form. You've must have played a game of telephone when you were a kid, you know how that ends. Archaeologist and historians who use the Bible as their only source are constantly ran through the ringer on not performing good science.

Honestly this is what really irritates me about some Christians, you choose to dog other beliefs passing them off as myths, but your belief has to be correct when you have very little evidence to prove it. It's fine to believe the way you do, if you think Jesus existed, performed miracles, died, rose again, and ascended into heaven then I'm not going to criticise you for that. But when you try to pass off a believe as cold, hard, fact when all you have to base it on is faith is when I start having a problem with it. And before you say it, I believe some Atheist are the same way. They have no proof of God's non-existence so they shouldn't present it as fact either.

Let me ask you this (or any Christian for that matter), you believe in Jesus since there is written evidence that he existed, but do you believe that Hercules existed? Or Ra? Or Thor? Buddha? Shiva? Muhammad? Isn't there just as much evidence to prove these gods (OK Buddha isn't really a god and Muhammad is a prophet) existed as well? Many people believed in them and there are quite a few written accounts of them as well, even whole religions dedicated to them. What makes the story of Jesus any more or less credible then any other religious story?

I've said numerous times, I'm agnostic, there is a chance Jesus was a real person, performed miracles, and did all that mumbo jumbo. But without evidence it's hard for me to accept it as any more valid then anything else that has the same evidence for it. However, like I said, I'm not completely discounting the theory of Jesus.

 

[Omnis]

Coming at this personally, of course I believe Muhammad existed. For all we know, he did. I don't know whether he was a prophet, but we both share a faith in the same god. Same deal with Jesus. Prophets are chosen to be prophetic by people; it's all subjective.

Why should the determination of their existence be any different from some poor soul that died in, say, Mao's China, with no record of life or death except what has been written about him or her? Tangent incoming: What if the cake is a lie and 3 thousand years ago human civilization actually had spacecraft and internets, but they just chose to BS the future by writing down false history?

I don't like topics like this. Point is, we know of what can be proved with evidence, and there are things that we don't know, or possibly won't ever know. Doesn't really matter to argue or hypothesize something that will not be fruitful. That's why, for the latter, it is best to remain humble in your faith, or lack thereof.

 

[Sureboss]

What I don't get about the whole "Do you believe in......." scenario is that Jesus Christ lived and died. His life, death, and resurrection was documented using the best practices of the day yet people still deny that He ever existed and if they mildly accept that He could have possibly lived, He surely didn't do all the things that were said of Him.

The very same evidence that people choose to ignore is why I can't group the Christ story with alien abductions, the monster of Loch Ness, mediums, Shiva, tarot, esp, etc.

And with that,

Merry Christmas GTPlanet!!!​

Given the bible was based on personal experiences of what they saw, you could say the exact same about alien abductions and Nessie, etc. How many people in the US have claimed to have been abducted by aliens? It's running into the millions, isn't it?

 

[Pako]

Given the bible was based on personal experiences of what they saw, you could say the exact same about alien abductions and Nessie, etc. How many people in the US have claimed to have been abducted by aliens? It's running into the millions, isn't it?

Missed my point.

Best practices of the time were used to accurately document the events of Christ. These documents were written at the expense of imprisonment, crucifixion, dismemberment, torture, and death. Either the writers believed in what they wrote enough to die for it because it was true, that it really happened or they are bigger idiots than all the Christians in the world today.

The stakes are high, and it ultimately comes down to a choice to believe or not to believe.

 

[Danoff]

Either the writers believed in what they wrote enough to die for it because it was true, that it really happened or they are bigger idiots than all the Christians in the world today.

False dilemma.

Can you imagine other reasons to be willing to die for a fiction? I can.

 

[TheCracker]

I don't think many people actually deny there was a guy called Jesus, who was considered a prophet, around at that time).

It's whether what was written about him at the time has any truth in it or not is the main issue here i think. I believe there is some non-bible related evidence that proves their was a 'Jesus' 2000 odd years ago.

Quite interesting reading.

 

[Wolfe]

Why should the determination of their existence be any different from some poor soul that died in, say, Mao's China, with no record of life or death except what has been written about him or her?

Because the death of that person had no wide-reaching, long-term repercussions, such as the creation of a religion or the engagement in wars for the sake of that religion.

 

[Pako]

False dilemma.

Can you imagine other reasons to be willing to die for a fiction? I can.

Yes, but there was no personal gain for themselves or their family in dying for 'that' cause. There was no nobility or recognition, or social stature in dying for 'that' cause. There was no power to gain by making up this story. Christ's story was not a popular one during the time of Christ. Kings feared Him as did the priests as did the Jews and Gentiles alike. To what purpose did these writers of the Gospels have to gain by 'making up this story' at the price of their life? The price that they had to pay, the pain and suffering they had to endure because of their testimonies gives me reassurance to the truth of the Gospels.

 

[Danoff]

Yes, but there was no personal gain for themselves or their family in dying for 'that' cause. There was no nobility or recognition, or social stature in dying for 'that' cause. There was no power to gain by making up this story. Christ's story was not a popular one during the time of Christ. Kings feared Him as did the priests as did the Jews and Gentiles alike. To what purpose did these writers of the Gospels have to gain by 'making up this story' at the price of their life? The price that they had to pay, the pain and suffering they had to endure because of their testimonies gives me reassurance to the truth of the Gospels.

There are many possible reasons. Perhaps as a personal vendetta against those in power. Perhaps because they wanted their lives to have more meaning than they might have otherwise. Or... you know... perhaps they thought the religion would foster moral values and help humanity in general.

It's entirely possible that they thought this was the best way to convey a message of love, forgiveness, and morality and change the world for the better. Is that worth dying for? Even if the story isn't real?

 

[Pako]

There are many possible reasons. Perhaps as a personal vendetta against those in power. Perhaps because they wanted their lives to have more meaning than they might have otherwise. Or... you know... perhaps they thought the religion would foster moral values and help humanity in general.

It's entirely possible that they thought this was the best way to convey a message of love, forgiveness, and morality and change the world for the better. Is that worth dying for? Even if the story isn't real?

Good point other than it's a bit counter productive to try and bring morality to the world based on lies and deceit.

 

[Danoff]

Good point other than it's a bit counter productive to try and bring morality to the world based on lies and deceit.

Would the truth have worked? Morality was based on religion at the time - not reason. The only way for them to bring about a change in morality was to bring about a change in religion. To do so meant some sort of appeal to the divine... and is it really such a lie to say that Christ was the son of God when we are all supposedly sons of God?

There's no doubt that they believed in God. They may have even believed that Christ (as anyone could be) was sent from God to bring a message. So does it matter if his mother was really a virgin?

 

[homeforsummer]

Despite not believing in God, I'm happy to believe that Jesus existed, though I do not believe that he was "the son of God" (as I don't believe in God, ergo I can't believe in a hypothetical son). I'm more than prepared to believe, as Judaism does, that he was simply a prophet, one of many and not individually special in any way.

To me, the "miracles" described in the more popular gospels are simply over-enthusiastic accounts of events not necessarily written by eyewitnesses (especially given that three of the gospels were supposedly written up to 100 years AD and the other a good 80 years or so), which happened to be chosen over more down-to-earth accounts of events when the Bible "as we know it" was being compiled.

 

[Pako]

Would the truth have worked? Morality was based on religion at the time - not reason. The only way for them to bring about a change in morality was to bring about a change in religion.

Not sure I follow you here.

To do so meant some sort of appeal to the divine... and is it really such a lie to say that Christ was the son of God when we are all supposedly sons of God?

These guys weren't politicians. A lie would still be a lie. The title Messiah was only given to Jesus and not given to all children of God.

There's no doubt that they believed in God. They may have even believed that Christ (as anyone could be) was sent from God to bring a message.

So does it matter if his mother was really a virgin?

Other than it full fills the prophecy that Christ is the Messiah.