Has anyone ever noticed that the proof that god was invented is within the very texts used to prove his existence?!?!
God = omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent
GENESIS 3:9 But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”
So much for omnipresent and omniscient… I am God but do not know where you are and cannot locate you despite that fact that I am everywhere and see everything.
GENESIS 3:22-24 And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life
So much for Omnipotent…. If God were omnipotent why would he fear that man would become “like one of us.†If we became immortal would we then be as great as God? Also, am I the only one who thinks that putting a cherubim and flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life is a little too Indiana Jones like?
I hope Indiana Jones finds that tree and gets past God’s cherub and sword… then we can all be immortals if we wanted…
Claude Tresmontant would reply that Bible is both the word of (imperfect) men and the word of God, as Jesus has both human and divine nature.
Inconsistencies are due to human errors, he would say.
Besides, your first statement is misleading, for God is not just a christian concept. Even if you get rid of the biblical God, you are still far from being justified in denying the existence of any supernatural being.
I think that we can look at a few of the historically influential and predominant religions to use as an example that supernatural beings do not exist…
Christianity, Judaism, Islam: All three have several flaws beginning with creation, prophets, extension, doctrine, dogma, stemming from the Torah onward.
If we look at Hinduism with its several gods… akin to Greek gods with fallacies and all… or recently a trend to move towards a single god with demon and angel like creatures…
Those religions alone cover about 1/2 of the world.
If we start dissecting others, such as, Buddist religions… we find more of a spirituality linked to creation itself and not to a deity (we are up to 3/4 of the world).
The proof that there is not Christian or biblical god is in the scriptures and it need not go any further than that… The proof that there isn’t a deity is in simple reason…
Okay, you got me… simple reason is not enough. But certainly reason is enough…
There is no empirical evidence that would support the existence of a deity. I guess the counter would be that there is no empirical evidence that proves that a deity does not, indeed, exist… however, that’s kind of like saying we have no proof that Gollum isn’t real… Or that we have no proof that Santa doesn’t really exist…
The universe is often used as proof that there MUST be something out there… There is something out there… it’s called the universe, it is out there and continues to create stars, galaxies, etc. with the physical matter that is available.
By the by… wouldn’t it be cool if Santa really existed? I know I would have behaved a lot better if I knew (had empirical evidence) that Santa existed and that my presents were on the line… same goes for a deity… I would certainly live a different life if the deity would ask me to…
I think that you’re ignoring faith. Faith requires no evidence. I think simply that some have it and some don’t. People with face don’t need evidence for god, there faith is enough to sustain them.
Faith is an invention of brilliant minds controlling the masses… how else could you subdue the people without their acceptance of a superior being: god, king, or otherwise?
Also, blindly believing something without proof is a call for ignorance… the ignorant are more easily controlled.
The creation of god (by man) was done, at first, to explain the universe. It was exploited by the leaders in early times to prevent anarchy and to give supreme authority to those who knew the most about the deities. That is why so many kings are likened to the gods… from Babylon to Greece…
Even the pontiff is given godlike status by the church so that we can continue to support the expanse of their empire (er holy goals).
Not gonna get deep on you here, I just to do a little part time God- defending…
Context man, context. God could have been asking a rhetorical question to emphasize [to Adam] the fact he was in the garden of Eden… Like - Hey Adam - Where the hell do you think you are…? The Grocer’s…? PUT THAT APPLE DOWN NOW…!
And moving right along…
How about God noticed that Adam and Eve had snacked on the fruit of knowledge - inducted the inevitable rise of Philosphers from the event, mentally said ‘oh bollocks they’re gona be a real pain in my Godly arse’…‘okay it could be worse - they could become immortal’…SHIT !!! [Runs to tree of life, pulls out flaming sword] “Don’t even think about it buster…”
No-one likes a smart-arse, but that doesn’t mean they are afraid of them…
Using the Bible to attack God is like using a badly-translated handbook to attack your toaster.
Every now and again somebody starts a topic in the Religion forum with what they apparently believe is some “novel” and clever statement that God cannot be proven by empirical means. As if the question of God’s existence, the question of something perhaps transcendent or immaterial, can possibly be a scientific question. In truth, it is a philosophical question that has been debated by great philosophical minds for thousands of years. Personally, I see all kinds of evidence. But if you want to argue scientifically, then go home. If you want to argue philosophically, as is appropriate, then learn what you’re up against.
We do have questions. And we would like confirmation. We just need to realize that some questions are scientific in nature and some are philosophical. I think we run into difficulties when we attempt to answer a philosophical question scientifically.
You have a point. I am not passing off my beliefs as a novel idea… not even a new idea… I am merely posting my side of it… kinda like I belive in string theory and black holes.
Foolish question: I believe Philosophy is an attempt to explain the world through the use of reason and available scientific data. So, isn’t the use of empirical data to reason part of the philosophical question?
Doesn’t philosophy analyse fundamental beliefs with the only weapon we have to make sense of the great expanse, namely the mind?
I digress… I wanted to learn more about biblical interpretations through the use of philosophy (using logic to investigate). If anyone, like Tabula, has different interpretations of the bible I enjoy learning about them.
Also, I would hesitantly admit I were wrong if I saw clear evidence in support of my error…
TABULA…
Context, schmontext!
No, seriously… don’t you think that god is a little fearful… (runs to take up his sword instead of just thinking about making it so that any human to approach withing ten yards automatically dies?
Also, later on in the bible, when humans are building the tower of babel don’t you think it was a shitty thing to do to give us all different languages so we wouldn’t understand each other? Especially so as to prevent us from doing anything we wanted (our great success is an affront to god).
See, that is partially what I mean by saying that the proof is in the scriptures… god is all knowing, all powerful, etc. but the scriptures clearly make him less than all powerful (in fact, sometimes he’s a bit of a wimp). We could take many comic characters that at times seem to be able to have at least one attribute that is cooler than what god has done in the bible… as our minds have advanced and scientifically understood more… our characters (like god) seem to take on greater roles and powers…
Well, science got it’s start as a branch of philosophy. I just prefer to think of science as a particular field of philosophy that uses inductive methods.
The big problem with demanding scientific evidence for the existence of God, is that it was never supposed that God was the kind of thing for which that kind of evidence could be found. An issue has to be investigated on it’s own terms, unless it can be shown (with philosophy) that those terms are inconsistant or self-defeating.
But certainly reason is enough… 
