Is there a god?

[LeedsRhinos]

Is there a god? I mean look at all the different relgions around the world who all believe that THEY are right & the others are wrong. They can't all be right can they. Which is why in my opion it all rubbish.

[I.R.]

Merlin, I DO know why JC ascended to heaven. His earthly mission was accomplished, and he was going back to be with The Father. For your other question, again i refer you to John 20:30. "A number of other signs Jesus did before his disciples which are not recorded in this book" Obviously, JC appeared to the disciples more than once, and over a period of time. What's the contradiction there? bobbyx, your question presumes that I believe every good person goes to heaven. I don't. The bible does speak of a paradise on earth under God's rule. That's what I believe. Note that I'm not representing "theists" here. I'm simply speaking of my beliefs in and about God.

[el duerino]

well yes I like to finish the kill Merlin, no point in hunting otherwise ;) no not really its just frustrating when you ask a question that gets avoided extravagantly. IR - so if we can be evil in heaven and we have free will, how is it any better than earth? as for free will, does the fact that god can see the future not imply that it is predetermined and thus xstians cannot believe in free will thus evil is not explainable this way?

[I.R.]

Predetermination versus free will! To begin with, I don't believe in destiny. I wake up in the morning with a fresh slate, which I write on as the day progresses. I don't act out a script written by some higher power. To be very frank and honest, the issue of God's ability to see into the future as against our freedom to chose how we live is somewhat dicey. I go for the "free-will" stance. If predetermination controlled our lives, it would be pointless to try, then one would assume that God wanted some people to be atheists so he could punish them (some ogre!). Still, God does see into the future. The extent to which that encroaches on our free-will is what I still ponder on. The case of Judas is one. Now it was prophesied that Jesus would be betrayed. And someone had to do it. So do we blame Judas for acting out God's will? Seems like he was doomed from the onset. Am I beginning to sound like an atheist now? I asked a friend that question and the answer I got was that Jesus was destined to be betrayed by one of his followers, but Judas did not have to be the one. He CHOSE to do it. gosh, I'm having a headache just thinking about it.

[I.R.]

Perhaps God REALLY should have made us zombies. All the trouble could have been avoided if Adam had to act out a script which stated boldly "DO NOT EAT APPLE". Perhaps.

[Merlin]

IR The question was more precise � why did JC ascend UPWARDS into heaven when we know that heaven is not in the sky, nor just beyond it. Was John a witness to the events or was he recording a story reported to him? How long after the event? Right after the resurrection: Luke 24.33-53 JC met the eleven in Jerusalem, led them to Bethany and then he ascended to heaven. OR Matthew 28. 16-20: JC met the eleven disciples in Galilee, at the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. But not both - Galilee is a long way from Jerusalem and when JC left Jerusalem, the only way was up. The paradise on earth theory is tricky because paradise is supposed to be eternal, but the planet earth is not. And I understand that your religion is personal. You are nonetheless a theist (I think), but I appreciate that you are representing your own views, however much they may coincide with others�. El D I think the argument goes something like this: God is eternal and can see all points of time, past and future simultaneously. God can see the future, whatever it is and can see the future as it changes according to your choices. So God can see whatever future is created by you when you exercise your free will. This preserves free will as the cause of evil on earth. This one also raises some juicy questions. Heaven is better than earth because in heaven you are in God�s presence. Being in God�s presence, I guess, you would be so overwhelmed by God�s love that it would be your will solely to love him right back forever.

[I.R.]

But, Merlin, do we really KNOW that heaven is not in the sky or beyond? We can't see it with human eyes, can we? And who says the earth isn't eternal? The bible? I think not.

[I.R.]

And where on earth is Clanad? Still digging up some more facts?

[Merlin]

If God is unlimited by space and time and if God is in heaven then yes, we do know that heaven is not in the sky. It is a rational and logical deduction from the premises to the conclusion. Undeniable, like saying if one number is 3 and the other number is 5, then the sum of those two numbers is 8. The earth is not eternal. The laws of physics dictate that this planet will end one day. The pull of the sun is irresistable. Either the earth will fall into the sun or the sun will go supernova (or whatever it is that suns do) and take the earth with it. Evidence that we can see with our own eyes confirms it. There are other possibilities, of course, such as a collision or other unforeseen event, but it ain't here forever.

[Merlin]

I think Clanad is away from home for a bit and probably needs some time for research and reflection. I guess(s)he (I think 'she') also has a life outside of this conversation!

[Merlin]

So, IR, which is to be - what say you: Luke 24.33-53: JC met the eleven in Jerusalem, led them to Bethany and then he ascended to heaven OR Matthew 28. 16-20: JC met the eleven disciples in Galilee, at the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. Let's not let this one slip away.

[el duerino]

dont get me started on the whole adam thing - knowledge is bad, we shouldnt know good from evil etc. also, god knew that adam would eat the apple from the moment he was made. so why the surprise? tbh, the whole free will thing does get slightly confusing.

[el duerino]

although thinking about it, a choice that has already been made and will absolutely be made is no choice at all. the whole point of choice is that we can choose another option. yet if we have already made one, we cannot. Again call me biased, I firmly believe the free will argument is another expose in the fallacy of an omnipotent and all loving being.

[Randy1]

Hi Merlin, The point I attempted to make, but failed to do so, was that for me to deny the existence of God or some supreme being would be not harder than for me to deny the existence of myself or the universe in which I live. Something no one with a rational mind could possibly do. Since I can not deny that I exist nor can I deny the universe in which I exist I am compelled to accept the fact that some power or being had to initiate this existence. Can indeed something come from nothing? But is this not the very thing that must be accepted as being possible for one to believe in an eternal God? Understand it . . . ? I see no possible way of that ever coming to pass within the realm of human reasoning. So what is point of all this �discussion?� Probably nothing more than, for those who would, to share their feelings and concerns about why and how they and the world in which they dwell came into being. Granted, some care and other could care less. Still the fact remains, Here We Are. For some reason humans seem to seek for purposes, answers to questions, . . . some of which have no answers . . . and where reason finds its limit faith may be the only other road to take . . . that is if one cares to make the journey.

[el duerino]

so where did god come from then? oh let me guess, he has always been and needs no cause. so it would be illogical to say that we need one then?

[Merlin]

Randy1 Part 1: Simple logic and common sense dictates that it is easier to make a case for the non-existence of God and harder to make a case for the non�existence of yourself: if you prove the case for the non-existence of yourself, then you could not have made the case, because you don�t exist. But you think therefore you are. If you prove a case for the non-existence of God, a lot of people may be upset and go into denial, but your case will have been proven. By your proof, God will not exist and by your producing the proof, you will still exist. (I�m sure that makes sense somehow). Simply because something exists, it does not mean that it had to be created. Many things that exist did not have a �beginning� when they were created. Many (possibly most) things in the natural world �became�, that is they evolved from something else, or �became� as the result of changes or natural progression. For instance, when does a tree �begin�? So there is no strict or necessary compulsion to accept that a being initiated the universe. An undiscovered natural cause within undiscovered laws of physics may have resulted in the current universe. It may have been God, but there is no compulsion to accept that it was in fact God.

[Merlin]

Part 2: I do not believe that something can come from nothing. If one accepts an eternal omnipotent God, then it is rational to accept that God can make something from nothing and that would be an easy answer. But do we have to suppose that this universe was created from nothing? It is more rational, to my mind, to suppose that the universe was made from pre-existing matter or energy (or both) as the result of forces or actions that we have yet to discover. Each theory (big bang, expanding & contracting with a series of big bangs etc) should be more rational than the previous. We may never know, but we can make a pretty good suggestion without blaming God for it. If you explain the creation with God, then you have to go on and explain everything else with God, and that becomes very tricky indeed. The point of the discussion is whatever you want it to be. For me, I find the subject fascinating and learn something about people and how they see the universe, and why so many people in the world have what I consider to be an irrational belief. Others may want to discover more about their faith, or whether they should have one, others (including me again) just like a good argument � it stimulates the mind. But mostly, I think, there is an innate desire to �know� stuff.

[Merlin]

Part 3: But you are right in this � where knowledge ends, faith takes over. That�s when it gets REALLY interesting!! And I find it so surprising that so few people apparently take an interest in who they are, where they come from, why they are here and where they are going. I started in this (again) about 5-6 years ago when I casually said to a very clever theist and philosopher that something he thought or did was as a result of the beast within him, that it was a conditioned response. He said free-will, I said evolution, he said God, I said No God and we are still discussing it today. Join in.

[el duerino]

finding out why so many people hold an irrational belief is also one of the key searches I am fascinated by. although in another discussion I had recently, it was suggested and I am inclined to agree, that although the majority say they believe, their actions completely disagree and we are forced to conclude that they don't REALLY believe, they are simply towing the line. As in, if everlasting paradise were really at stake, they would not lie, cheat, steal, hurt etc.

[Merlin]

First I do acknowledge that very many people have a genuine faith and adhere to their religion to the best of their ability. HOWEVER!! I do attend RC mass from time to time as the rest of my family are RC. I observe discreetly. I agree with El D that many people 'go through the motions' out of habit. Going to confession, for instance, wipes the slate clean and you are free to sin again for a week - starting within 5 minutes of leaving church!. Others call themselves Christian but don't believe in the resurrection. My view is that there is a difference between christian and Christian (see what I did there?!). If you don't believe in the resurrection, ascension, plural nature of God, don't go to church etc, you cannot be Christian with a capital C. You can try to get away with calling yourself christian with a small c if you follow the teachings of JC as they relate to living life in this physical universe, e.g. christian but without the 'God' bits. But I also wonder how many adherents of religion truly believe what the claim to believe, or indeed what they think they believe. Again, I acknowledge that there are those who genuinely believe and bear out their faith in their everyday lives (just in case the first disclaimer was missed).

[el duerino]

hmmm you perform RC mass? some people will do anything for a free glug of wine ;) Personally I would not indulge any religious services. I don't ask them to sacrifice goats with me, so I will not sit and bow my head and waste my life whispering to a big imaginary fairy. Thankfully I was never christened or baptised. I have had cousins/relatives baptised by religious parents who do not adhere to what they swear in front of god at all. Its like marriage - call me hardline but if you promise god you gonna stay with someone then split and do the same again how on earth can you call yourself christian. A religion which compromises before social pressure is no longer a religion, its a social convention. same with women priests, homosexuals etc - I have nothing against them being in the church, but they are not supposed to be there. One of the reasons xstianity annoys me so much is because it blends in with whatever is needed. At what point is it no longer xstianity but some vague corruption of religion brought about through social reform. Seriously, so people think that an omnipotent god would allow his very word to be twisted so as not to offend the social norm, people are happy to say they believe and worship but selectively ignore the bits they dont like? thats not religion, thats fitting religion into your own little world view, and someone of true belief does it the other way around. Not that that is any better, but at least they have the faith in the original teachings and not some vague approximation that doesn't offend anyone. phew slipped into rant mode for a second.