Would you like proof for God?

The only way primitive religion exists today is through the child abuse of forcing it into very, very young children but thanks to better education and growing intellects so many teens are able to discover the truth, throw off the indoctrination and step into the real world!

Academia states that in the absence of any sort of evidence of the existence of something it must be deemed not to exist until verifiable evidence is found - thus god is held not to exist pending some sort of verifiable evidence.

The bible is what is called "Faction” A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not!

There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded!

There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!

He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?

Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!

Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter!

At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!

Not one word of it is contemporary with the period and was not written until several hundred years after the period the story is set in!! How did the apostles write their books more than a hundred years after they would have been dead?

Please realize that those claims for the Old historians are worthless since they were not even born until long after everyone in the stories would have been so long dead!

Josephus AD 37 – AD 100

Tacitus AD 56 – AD 120

Suetonius - 69 – 130 AD

Pliny the Younger, 61 AD – 112 AD

Justin Martyr (Saint Justin) AD103–165 AD

Lucian - AD 120 -180 AD but he was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it.

Pamphilius AD 240-309 AD

Eusebius AD 263 – 339 AD

Photius AD 877 – 886 AD

Thallus - But there are no actual record of him except a fragment of writing which mentions the sack of Troy [109 BC] Showing that he was clearly not alive in biblical times.

Some even try to use Seneca. 4 BCE – 65 CE but as a Stoic Philosopher he opposed religion yet made not a single mention of a Jesus or Christianity!

Even funnier is trying to claim Celsus AD ? – 177 AD Who said that Jesus was a Jew who’se mother was a poor Jewish girl whose husband, who was a carpenter, drove her away because of her adultery with a Roman soldier named Panthera. She gave birth to an illegitimate child named Jesus. In Egypt, Jesus became learned in sorcery and upon his return presented himself as a god.

Equating fictional documents with historical records is a cheap evasion of the importance of the most influential set of documents in Western culture.

And the premise that because the evidence isn't deductive regarding God's existence that all supposition, hypotheses, belief and searching for God must be ended?

That's just arrogance in the extreme.

Of course Christians and nearly everyone would love evidence of God.

But it is a BELIEF system, not a scientific theory and only people ignorant of both religion and science ask for evidence in a belief system.

It's like asking people to belief a scientific theory. There is not belief in a scientific theory. It is always open to question.

Now if we're done trying to inject evidence into belief systems and belief into science, can we get on with REALITY and leave belief systems ALONE?

The Bible is evidence actualy, as it was written by 40 diferent writters (influenced by the Spirit of God) over several thousand years. Yet Gods plan of redemption for mankind through the work Christ Jesus did for us on the cross, can be seen throughout. Thus showing clearly Gods working through all that time. I think Luke and John were eye wittnesses to Christs life and miracles and they were good historians too. Obviously they wrote of the experiences a few years later as one would expect.

Plus there is loads more evidence for the life and death and even the resurrection of Jesus then of any of the Roman emperors of the day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fs_J34cqKc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotat...

I am always amazed that those like you don't believe in God or that He even exists, and yet you demand proof of something that you don't believe in. Logic says that if you demand proof of something and that proof is that it exists, then you, by default, accept the possibility that it does indeed exist. Faith has nothing to do with whether God exists or not. It has everything to do with what one accepts as truth. As for the Bible being the word of God, it says it is. The fact that you don't accept the Bible as a truthful reporting of God's word is immaterial. What you believe or don't believe is of no importance. It only matters if I believe in it. The other amazing thing is that those of your ilk somehow have the mistaken idea that some person is controlling us Christians as if we are mind-numbed robots when you know that's a lie. You live and work among us every day. If you want to learn about why we believe in what we believe and what we actually believe, it would be a good idea to..

How you can prove deities don't exist is by logic.

If a god did exist it could not just always have been god. The term god implies certain attributes. These attributes are meaningless without something for them to apply to. example - Superman has attributes but if there are no other men he is no longer superman. If there is nothing for him to bend with his bare hands how does the strength attribute apply? If there is nothing for him to see through x ray vision is meaningless. A God before the creation had nothing to be god too. A king without a kingdom is not a king. A god without the creation is the god of nothing.

So for any god to exist before the creation is senseless. It would know all of nothing (omniscience), it has power over nothing (omnipotence), has nothing to be good to (omnibenevolence) and nothing to love so how could it love? The 'god' is meaningless.

The only way a god could exist is with the creation but, theist extrapolate god and put it outside the creation. It's like trying to remove the forest from the trees. God could only exist with the creation if it existed at all.

I do not claim god exist. I do try to conceive if a god existed how could it? The problem with religion is it keeps people with in the box or book (scriptures). They then can't think outside of it.

If a god did exist wouldn't it make more sense to reveal itself always and from the beginning? The gestalt universe could be regarded as one body. We are like protons or neutrons within an atom something in something else in a expanding universe. If existence was the manifestation of god then god is everything that is. In that way it could be everywhere, is in everything and is infinite and it is one. I think of space, matter/energy and time as a universal recycling bin and perpetual motion machine. It's constantly morphing itself. Perhaps so that all parts may come to know that it is. Think of a new born that is learning it's body. The eyes follow the hands and it learns this is part of me. It learns to control it. It comes to self awareness. Because everything is of the universe and everything will surrender all the atoms it gained from it back to it, the cycle of matter to energy back to matter is completed. So time moves on. The arrangement of atoms is infinite. When we gaze into the vastness of space we can not help but, to be awed. If you have ever been to Niagara Falls you would know the feeling of the falls pulling you in. Is it gravity, is it hypnotic or is it your mind has found union. Much like the babe discovering a body part belongs to it. Do you belong to the tide your mind follows looking out to sea or to the stars in the night sky? Does the treed mountain or barren canyon grip you and pull you to it? Is this how a real god would speak? In silence to all life forms from the beginning of time. Not by proxy in one mans tongue left for others to translate. As the creation god would not be in hiding it would be exposed all the time. Like plants it speaks in silence. Like music it speaks in notes. Not in one tongue but universally. It would not matter that you honored it. Like the apple tree it gives unconditionally. If you stone the tree or worship it, it bares its fruit to all who would have it. Any god would need the creation as much as the creation would need the god. Without the creation it would be but a singularity.

To assume a god is to assume the need for it. In the theist religions they make god having needs. If god wants you to follow gods will then god must also have needs. Why would the god that can do anything have needs? You have to ask yourself this in the pursuit of saying everything had to come from somewhere. How could god exist without energy or matter and if god is energy/matter and it (energy/matter) always was then why the need for god?