Christians: Why do you believe when there is no empirical proof for God?

Good question. I understand why the arguments given in your question would annoy you - the "because the Bible says so" always irritates me, because it's circular reasoning. Personal experience of course cannot convince you either and that is understandable, though that is actually one of the reasons I believe. I can't expect that to be proof for you, only for me.

Another of my reasons though is the actual teachings of Jesus. They are, if you look closely, pretty fantastic. His teachings, his ways of thinking and his attitudes are extremely unusual, especially in the context of the time. There's definitely something special there. Then there is the ressurection. If it really was a myth, how in fact did it arise? Mass delusion is in fact scientifically impossible. Fabrication? Extremely unlikely, considering the extent to which the early Christians kept to their faith, even facing death. Would they really do this for a faleshood? Consider also the circumstances - Jesus followers, after Jesus' death, would be frankly terrified. Scared that they will also be killed, they are probably lost and confused. They thought that this man was something special, but he wasn't. He died.

Then, suddenly, without any warning, a whole group of them start telling the world, very excitedly that he is back to life. Suddenly, they are not in any way frightened of persecution, even when it came, nothing can stop them from spreading this story. What was the event that caused this?

The whole argument I was trying to give is quite a big one, and there's a lot more to it. You probably have arguments against mine, so it's easier if I know where you stand about the whole thing - then I can go into more detail.

Of course, if you want to go into denying the actual existance of Jesus, that's a whole different argument, though I would be happy to go into it if you want.

On another note - "sure the religious lifestyle is nice and all".

Not if you are persecuted, threatened with death, humiliated etc for your faith. Not if mentioning that you are religious incites scorn, insults and alienation. Being a Christian is never easy. You have to change your entire life. Doing what the Bible says and living as we're told a Christian should is also hard. If it's not, then frankly you're not doing it right.

EDIT: Sorry for the delay - my computer thought it was clever to crash.

Ok. The idea that the stories of Jesus were scewed is a common one.

The first thing we have to ask is exactly what was scewed. Who in fact was Jesus? What do you understand him to have said, what parts of the gospels were fabricated? When you take away what was scewed, what is in fact left?

This may seem not to be going anywhere, but what you think about this particular is important.

There's a lot to the argument that depends on it.

A main question we need to look at is; what is the likelyhood of genuine memories of Jesus being preserved in the gospel accounts? There are a few good points on this in a book called "This Jesus" by David Day. He puts what I want to say much more eloquently, so here is an extract:

"What we have in the gospels is confessedly the writings of committed men. They believed that Jesus was the Son of God and that this supreme revelation of God had taken place in human history. It's incredibly hard to believe that the early Christians were completely uninterested in the details of Jesus' career. Any new convert would immediately begin to ask all the obvious questions about the Master he had just bejun to serve. The stories fill out the detail, they inspire devotion and teach the meaning of discipleship. But they are not likely to be at the mercy of every creative genius who happens to come into Christianity and fancies some imaginatvie novel-writing. For a start, at the time of the stories' formation eyewitnesses were still around to act as a check on wilder romanticizings. The material for Mark's Gospel was lying around in the Christian community long before he took up his pen to start writing. And this material had begun to harden soon after the resurrection, well withing the lifetime of both friends and enemies of the Christian cause.

I am also impressed by the explicit statements of two of the gospel writers that they were concerned to reproduce the events accurately. So the writer of the Fourth Gospel stresses the presence of an eyewitness at the crucifixion: "This is vouched for by an eyewitness, whose evidence is to be trusted. He knows that he speaks the truth so that you too may believe." Luke, for his part, begins the gospel with the words: "Many writers have undertaken to draw up an account of the events that have happened among us, following the traditions handed down to us by the orginal eyewitnesses and servants of the gospel. Ans so I in my turn, your Excellency, as one who has gone over the whole course of these events in detail, have decided to write a connected narrative for you, so as to give you authentic knowledge about the matters of which you have been informed."

I do not offer this as proof that they did give an accurate account but that it was their intention to do so. Often there are loose comments flying about today to the effect that the evangelists felt able to invent any old tale as long as it was edifying and helpful. If that were the case then at least two of the gospel writers were lying through their teeth."

Another point is that there appear to be many instances in the gospels of the passing on of information which a competent forger or creative genius would have suppressed. For example, the evangelists record material which would have been unintelligible to them. One example of this can be found in the mysterious title "Son of Man." There is no evidence to suggest that this phrase played any key part in the chuch's theological thinking. In the New Testament (except for one instance) it is found only in the gospels and then vertuallly always on the lips of Jesus. Its meaning is elusive - see the trouble modern scholars have had with it. It is difficult to see what the early Christians would have made of it. Though there is evidence that they had a go at fitting it into the scheme of beliefs about Jesus, it always remained something of a sore thumb. The natural reaction in these circumstances is to drop the offending phrase. Yet carefully and meticulously the gospels record the title on the lips of the Master.

Sometimes the writers go further and reproduce remarks which must have been unpalatable. The cry from the cross, "My God, my God, why ahve you deserted me?" didn't help in arguments with the opponents of Christianity. Jesus remark that he was ignorant of the time of the coming of the end might easily suggest that he was nobody special. The fact that Jesus was baptized by John could imply that he was sinful and was in fact taken that way in anti-Christian polemic. In each case life would have been made much easier for the Christians if this awkward information were suppressed. But there it is, for anyone to read."

There is a lot more to this, which I will give you if you want. However I have to leave this here for the moment, as I'm off to a dentist appointment. =p

Does

God

Really Exist?

Does God Exist?

Some Scientists Answer

PHYSICS professor Ulrich J. Becker, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, stated when commenting on the existence of God: "How can I exist without a creator? I am not aware of any compelling answer ever given."

Did this contradict his scientific views? The professor's thought-provoking answer was, "If you discovered how one wheel in the 'clock' turns—you may speculate how the rest move, but you are not entitled to call this scientific and better leave alone the question of who wound up the spring."

Contrary to the opinion of some, many respected men of science do not rule out the idea of there being a God—a Great Mastermind behind the creation of the universe and man.

Consider two more examples on this point. When mathematics professor John E. Fornaess, of Princeton University, was asked for his thoughts on the existence of God, he replied: "I believe that there is a God and that God brings structure to the universe on all levels from elementary particles to living beings to superclusters of galaxies."

Physics professor Henry Margenau, of Yale University, said that he was convinced that the laws of nature were created by God, adding: "God created the universe out of nothing in an act which also brought time into existence." He then noted that in the book The Mystery of Life's Origin, three scientists explain that a Creator is a plausible explanation for life's origin. Supporting this view, astronomer Fred Hoyle has stated that believing the first cell originated by chance is like believing that a tornado ripping through a junkyard full of Boeing 747 airplane parts dismembered and in disarray could produce a 747.

Yes, thinking and rationality have their place in the world, but there are feelings (gut reactions, whatever you call it) that simply can't be explained rationally yet are very real. So, while I'll give you a half-hart "because the Bible says so" is a lame excuse; you're selling short if you assume that someone can't say, "You know, I can't give you any rational explanation... but it's something I just know". Because there are things we can not yet explain with thought or word (call it sixth sense, gut reactions, feelings, or parental insight, etc)

Secondly, don't discredit observation as a form of proof. If 100 people say something happen, even if you may be skeptical about their specific details, you'd probably believe that something indeed happens, right? What if billions (separated by culture, language, even time itself) say something happened?

As to your actual question of why I believe there is no concrete proof -- well, I personally believe that's part of God's plan. If I believe in Free Will, than it would be counter productive to believe God would force people to know 100% and thus denying people the opportunity to simply have faith.

Why do you believe a creating God would have to obey our mortal laws of physics and logic? In fact, if such a deity did exist, surely it would have to disobey such laws in order to create them.

Whilst I acknowledge your point of the burden of proof, ultimately there is no proof about this issue, so the whole debate rests purely on feelings and faith.

Final thing, "The evidence in nature points to design, therefore there must be a creator" ? No...no, it really doesn't, it is explained so much more fully by evolution.

Nice question!

As Christians, we know God exists because we speak to Him every day. We do not audibly hear Him speaking to us, but we sense His presence, we feel His leading, we know His love, we desire His grace. Things have occurred in our lives that have no possible explanation other than God. God has so miraculously saved us and changed our lives that we cannot help but acknowledge and praise His existence. None of these arguments can persuade anyone who refuses to acknowledge what is already obvious. In the end, God’s existence must be accepted by faith (Hebrews 11:6). Faith in God is not a blind leap into the dark; it is safe step into a well-lit room where the vast majority of people are already standing.

I believe in God because there are many things that we cannot see with our eyes, but that we believe exist because there are sound reasons to do so. The air we breathe: we feel it when there is a breeze and we can tell that it fills our lungs even though we do not see it. And, we cannot see gravity, but when we drop something we see evidence that gravity is at work. Nor do we see odors, but our nose picks them up. We cannot see sound waves, but our ears detect them. Thus, because we feel or see the effects of these, there is good reason to believe in them, right?

So we, including you, believe in things we cannot see, because there is good reason to do so. So, I believe in Jehovah God, because I feel and see the effects of his invisible existence, much the same as I feel, see, and believe in the invisible existence of air, gravity, odors, sounds waves, gases, etc...

Also, consider this: When we see a camera, a radio, or a computer, we readily acknowledge that it must have been produced by an intelligent designer, and we give credit and praise to individuals and companies that produce these. Well, would it be reasonable to say that far more complex things—the eye, the ear, and the human brain—did not originate with an intelligent Designer? No.

Therefore, just as humans see a need to give credit and praise to men for creating less inferior things, I see the need to give praise and honor to the one who created all things...

A serious unbiased look at creation and taking time to study and meditate on plant life, nature, natural resources, planets, etc. helped me to see and feel the existence of God. And, this was done without the involvement of religion or the Bible. Perhaps doing the same, will help you to see and feel the same...

Whatever the case, I do believe that you are entitled to your own beliefs or disbeliefs.

First of all Empirical means something study through observation or experience, & you ask me if I have empirical knowledge, Yes I do, Because by observation & through experince I have had an experince with God & By observation I can see God in his creation & his laws of nature.----------Friend you have no proof to say there is no God, come on now show me the proof, & yet you like to try to run down my answer, what is the problem You claim that I can not prove there is a God Yes I can, But you can not disprove him legally therefore you just close your mind about anything else. BTW, I stick by what I said & yes I can prove it, but as the bible says for me not to cast my pearl before a swine.

When you meditate a lot you have clarity and insights. I suspect its very likely we have a memory within our cells or DNA of our ancestors and creators which is a part of our intelligent design to find our way to the golden age on earth for humanity. We all like to feel linked to ourselves, those around us, humanity, nature, planets, the whole universe into infinity and this is the original meaning of religiosity.

I also suspect we have this religiosity included amongst our other instincts as part of our intelligent design. Some people are more open to this awareness than others. When you meditate in higher consciousness it is a knowing of your creators and you feel their love rebounding to you as you love them in humility and gratitude. This is not in anyway mystical but scientifically happening. Our brains are magnificent and capable of telepathy and far more than we are aware of yet.

I hope you come to know Jesus for yourself. There is lots of evidence that God is real. There is no such thing as luck or coincidence. I can not speak for anybody else, but I know God is real in my life as "evidenced" by everything he does for me on a daily basis (i.e. waking me in the morning, providing me a job, home, money, food, good health, and joy)! I can go on and on and give you my testimony! There are some things that happen to and for me where it can not be anything else but GOD!

They will all say faith, but that isn't it.

They have belived what they were told when taought about god, and they learned so much to turn it away, even if they think there wrong.

They are being stubborn and that is the only "reasonable" argument that you can get.