How Does One Reconcile The Existence of God on a Debate Site?

Author: Reece101

Posts

Total: 138
Topic's author
#121
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Mopac

In a pre-eternal sense, God spoke the word. The word existed before it left the mouth(this isn't to say that the pre-incarnate God has a literal mouth or tongue.), and after leaving the mouth, became flesh as it has been incarnate in the air as a word. Like all words, it is carried by the breath that proceeded from the "lungs of God" so to speak.

The Father is The One speaking.
The Son is The Word.
The Holy Spirit is the breath.

We use these illustrations as images, types, and shadows of the greater reality that we are witnessing to. It would be a mistake to see the hand of God as being literal hands like a man's hand rather than God's work in the world. That said, God did become man, and so we can speak of "God's hands". We can also say that the bishops and priests who administer the sacred mysteries as well as anyone who does the work of God is working with the hands of God. 
So the whole thing about creating man in God’s image? More interpretation?
#122
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Reece101
The Church has always understood being made in the image of God to refer to our noetic faculties rather than our physical appearance.
#123
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Mopac
You are 100% certain that God exists Moe Moe.
I can't except that. 
Can we say 98% ?   I'm happy to meet you there.
Hey Macca. Ask the atheists if they are 100% sure about the TOE..... 
I don't want to answer that. 

Other things Atheists may have trouble with. 
( Hypnotism ) idk.
And ummmm. That's what I was going to tell you Mar Poc. 
Atheists visiting grave sites, ask them about that.  Although it has nothing to do with Gods, I highly doubt that an atheist could visit a past loved one's grave and NOT talk to the headstone or plaque. 
( IT FEELS UNNATURAL NOT TALKING.)   
Maybe you ask the atheists where they think their past loved ones are at.
This will be answered with,  (They are six foot underground rotting away.) which is short for. ( They are in a place that I can only describe as heaven.  Looking over us whenever they want. ) 

Good day.










#124
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
The whole making in Gods image makes me wonder if God was circumcised.
#125
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Mopac
Also. Does God decide A+ blood for me and AB- for you?
Topic's author
#126
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Mopac
The Church has always understood being made in the image of God to refer to our noetic faculties rather than our physical appearance.
So not that bright huh?
#127
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Reece101
I don't know what you are saying. 
#128
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I am 100% certain that reality as it truly is exists.


Doesn't sound so outrageous when it is worded like that, huh?

The Ultimate Reality is God.

#129
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@Reece101
For one, your quote is an incorrect reference. It has to identify which letter, first or second. 

So, without God, your faith or belief rests on the subjective, limited, relative opinions and views of like-minded limited, subjective, relative men. The question is which one(s)?
You’ve changed your answer. 
I've expanded on the subject matter. So what?

It works one way or the other. Either you place your trust in God or humanity as the highest authority, granting the Bible is what it states. Either your highest point of authority is the God revealed in the Bible or it is some subjective human being, granting that the Bible is the Word of God. I believe it is true and I can justify my belief with reasonable and logical evidence. I do not believe you can do the same with your belief system of thought. 


What if they’re christians? We’re all born having a lack of knowledge of “God”, right?
Their belief is confirmed by God. But, He gives us (both Christians and unbelievers) evidence not only with the created order of things but in His self-disclosure of Himself and our relationship with Him. 

I believe we are born with an innate knowledge of God that is seen in the created order but we are not all His children since we have alienated ourselves from God by our sin and rebellion. Unbelievers suppress the knowledge of God. My belief is based not only on the biblical teaching below but on thinking over the issues for well over forty years. My belief is made sure, granting God. Surety regarding life's ultimate questions requires an objective standard/reference point and a knowledge of what actually is the case. Humanity apart from God is lacking that knowledge. Thus, they have no means of making sense of origin without first presupposing God. 

Romans 1:18-23
Unbelief and Its Consequences
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and [crawling creatures.

 
I believe only one position is correct and that position is a God-oriented perspective. Granting this universe is created the Creator would be the source and ultimate knowledge in how He created it and every detail of it. 

The question is which is the more reasonable belief and does the evidence really point to a solely naturalistic view? To decide you have to unpack the two beliefs, get to their core presuppositions and find how they are able to make sense of ultimate beliefs. 

Naturalism can't make sense of ultimate beliefs. Thus, if you want to hold it you are welcome to it, but you will consistently be inconsistent in what you say and what you do. You will be living a contradiction. 

I have no objection to both positions being taught. What I object to is when science is hijacked so that only one paradigm is investigated and looked at, when the orientation only looks at the data from a solely naturalistic viewpoint, when the evidence for the other side is totally ignored and when anyone holding such a position is ridiculed out of the scientific endeavour.
Okay, so what about when it comes to young Earth creationism; how should radiometric dating be handled? 


Carbon-14, radiometric dating is dated on the premise that the present is the key to the past (because the present is where we work from), that from the present we can figure out with some certainty how old things on earth are. The question is are they the same or can we approximate them enough to get a true measure? Since science has focused on a view of science that is strictly naturalistic the question becomes are we looking at the information from the right perspective? Are we conforming the data to what we want or expect to find? Those who favour a young earth creation would argue with a yes.  
#130
Patmos
Patmos's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 7
0
0
7
Patmos's avatar
Patmos
0
0
7
-->
@Reece101
I find the best way to do it is to approach the issue through science. Study probability theory, quantum mechanics, cosmology, thermodynamics, etc.
#131
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
So the whole thing about creating man in God’s image? More interpretation?
In some degree it's an interpretation, because it can't be taken soooo literal. The whole thing about creating man in God's image is pretty simple, it just means man cannot escape the mold he was created in and that "mold" reflects the same nature as the Creator, or the same image...…"image" not really reflecting literal appearance but more of an attribute thing... Something that would be very interesting to discuss in a real way. A general impression would be a good interpretation of that meaning not necessarily an exact image. 


1028 days later

#132
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
How Does One Reconcile The Existence of God on a Debate Site?

On a religion forum it is easy to separate Theists from Atheists because members  will tell you what their beliefs are.
The problem is not the existence of God. The problem is the perception of  God in the absence of a personal experience 

434 days later

#133
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Reece101
I suppose I'd suggest three possible answers.
Though I've not read or thought of the Bible much.

One,
'Could argue that specific quote was speaking of 'history, rather than Paul telling people 'how to convert others.
Though I am not sure what the "demonstration of the Spirit and of power" 'was.

"1And I, when I came to you, brothers,a did not come proclaiming to you the testimonyb of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, 4and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of menc but in the power of God."

I further argue One, by 

"11Therefore, since we know what it means to fear the Lord, we try to persuade men. What we are is clear to God, and I hope it is clear to your conscience as well. 12We are not commending ourselves to you again. Instead, we are giving you an occasion to be proud of us, so that you can answer those who take pride in appearances rather than in the heart."

Persuading is 'still spoken of.

Two, rather than the words of men, to focus on God,

Paul speaks of Christ as a foundation,

"Christ Our Foundation
10By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one must be careful how he builds. 11For no one can lay a foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13his workmanship will be evident, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will prove the quality of each man’s work. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive a reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss. He himself will be saved, but only as if through the flames."

Rather than his 'own words and persuasion (Of man) being the focus, it is more important that 'Gods words and truth be spoken?

He speaks 'against exalting the 'messenger, above God, I think?

"God’s Fellow Workers
1Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual, but as worldly—as infants in Christ. 2I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for solid food. In fact, you are still not ready, 3for you are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and dissension among you, are you not worldly? Are you not walking in the way of man? 4For when one of you says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men?
5What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are servants through whom you believed, as the Lord has assigned to each his role. 6I planted the seed and Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. 7So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. 8He who plants and he who waters are one in purpose,a and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. 9For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building."

Three

Spiritual truths,
What is meant by this?

Really I am unsure,
Is it meant as metaphysical?
Is it some 'stirring in the human condition?

Either way though, the third possibility I think of,
Is that Paul desires people's faith be of that experience, rather than reason.
. . .

Which 'can sound a bit bad,
But such a pull is human,
People can place or experience value in something, that contrary to evidence or reason,
They consider it worth the leap.
. . .
'Family, is such for myself.
#134
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Lemming
True.

After a while, physical existence might seem mundane and arduous.

Simulating an alternative can relieve the tedium and induce temporary euphoria.

Self induced euphoria is better than chemically induced euphoria.

Though continued reliance at any level can be far more detrimental than a mundane existence.

Perhaps it's better to remain mundane and content.




#135
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Hm, 'can humans be mundane though?

To 'Be,
It seems to me,
'Requires meaning.
Terry Pratchett on why Belief, Faith, and Other things science can not quanitify are important.

Not that I'm certain science 'can't quantify belief, faith, and some other things. . . Well, 'potentially,
Lot of things we don't know,
So how can we know they 'are knowable?
And I mean things we're aware of the edges, not things we havn't even heard of.

. . Hm, back on topic though,
To Be,
Well, yes rocks and animals 'exist,
But when I say To 'Be,
I'm speaking of 'people, humans, consciousness, qualia (As one person might say).
#136
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Lemming
Hmmmm.

What is a human.

Is it the whole, or just the machinations of the on board computer.
#137
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know.

7 days later

#138
SethBrown
SethBrown's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 102
0
1
7
SethBrown's avatar
SethBrown
0
1
7
Boutta start a war with this one, if anyone wishes we could have a full debate over this.

One of the ways I reconcile the existence of god is to show the rationality of the resurrection (Note the difference between rational & 100% truth, I dont live my life on 100% truths)

I simply cannot explain the events surrounding the resurrection without reference to the resurrection, the claims that were made & the enemies that converted to christianity, I can't explain those happening with the 3 main theories represented (laymen represent them at least, it's important to note that professional scholars present a mixture of theories, although I find all the theories ive seen unfulfilling) by atheists.