Is Christianity In Trouble?

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by AnimeSpirit

Rationalists like to think God doesn't exist because we have no recorded evidence of His existance. We have no sample or measurement that supports that He is actually out there somewhere, therefore science cannot confirm His existance. That is the foundation of science afterall, what can be measured or observed.

We have plenty of recorded evidence of His existence. All of the samples and measurements that have ever been taken of anything, anywhere, supports His existence. I've said this before, said it till I was blue in the face, but for the benefit of those of you who didnt get it the first five hundred times, I'll say it again...CREATION ITSELF IS PROOF OF GOD'S EXISTENCE! We're walking on it, eating it, breathing it, living it. Cant make it any simpler than that for ya.

[AnimeSpirit]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

We have plenty of recorded evidence of His existence. All of the samples and measurements that have ever been taken of anything, anywhere, supports His existence. I've said this before, said it till I was blue in the face, but for the benefit of those of you who didnt get it the first five hundred times, I'll say it again...CREATION ITSELF IS PROOF OF GOD'S EXISTENCE! We're walking on it, eating it, breathing it, living it. Cant make it any simpler than that for ya.

I'm not a rationalist in that respect, Al, so you don't have to convince me. However, you surely know what a rationalist would say to that. I'd imagine the response would be, "Existance is proof of existance, but it does not prove HOW we got here or WHO is responsible."

I'd rather not discuss my personal views on creationism though. I just posted that analogy, because I thought it was intriguing.

[Al Swearengen]

My last post WAS the rationalist's point of view. Any rational person would arrive at that conclusion, that creation itself is proof of God's existence. It all had to start somewhere, didnt it? If you take it back far enough, SOMETHING had to have made all of this. That SOMETHING, for lack of a better word, is GOD. A boulder could understand this. Anyone who claims otherwise is being willfully obtuse.

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by Texasbelle

OH OH OH OH...let me translate for Neo..(he's a little slow)


Laughing My A** Off!

Hope this helps Neo. And since you were out Rhertz let me fill you in...Neo doesn't understand abbreviations too well. I've had to school him and I turned 40 so apparently according to Isaac I am a little cocky.

LOL, congratulations Texasbelle on turning 40! I am 46 and trust me, you have at least 5 more good years ahead of you!

Here lets help Neo out a little:
LOL: Laugh out Loud
LMAO: Laughing My @ss Off
ROFLMAO: Rolling On Floor Laughing Myt @ss Off
IMHO: In My Humble Opinion
JMO: Just My Opinion
GLTY: Good Luck To You
BTW: By The Way
CYA: See Ya!
L8R: Later!
FWIW: For What Its Worth
IWRBIADC: I Would Rather Be In A Dentists Chair

LMAO, just joking around a little on that last one...

[AnimeSpirit]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

My last post WAS the rationalist's point of view. Any rational person would arrive at that conclusion, that creation itself is proof of God's existence. It all had to start somewhere, didnt it? If you take it back far enough, SOMETHING had to have made all of this. That SOMETHING, for lack of a better word, is GOD. A boulder could understand this. Anyone who claims otherwise is being willfully obtuse.

I see. I understand your perspective. You are not claiming to understand what God is. You're saying that whatever put us here is God and everything else is a side point. Is that right? My definition of "rationalist" is somewhat different, but I think I see your rationale.

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by Neo

You are cocky Mrs.forty.... Be careful butterfly, your wings may catch fire if you get to close to the fire!

We just havin' a little phun skoolin' ya there Neo.. Neo might stand for neophyte. (ducking) Or you may be The One. who knows.. Not me. But I do know that Cypher (Joe Pantolaino) was Guido the Pimp in Risky Business, one of my favorite old timey flicks.

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by AnimeSpirit

I see. I understand your perspective. You are not claiming to understand what God is. You're saying that whatever put us here is God and everything else is a side point. Is that right? My definition of "rationalist" is somewhat different, but I think I see your rationale.

Precisely! WHO, or WHAT God is we cant say. We can say only two things with utter certainty...that He exists, and that He is a force beyond our comprehension. All else is speculation.

[AnimeSpirit]

Originally Posted by Al Swearengen

Precisely! WHO, or WHAT God is we cant say. We can say only two things with utter certainty...that He exists, and that He is a force beyond our comprehension. All else is speculation.

Well, in your rationale, the word "God" seems to be merely a label for something that is otherwise unidentified. This is a very constricting definition for the name because other than knowing He is the creator, you don't know anything more. This rationale states that He created us, but what happened to Him after that? Is He still out there? Is He still creating other worlds? I may not understand your rationale entirely, but these seem to be easy questions you'd run into when purposing this rationale.

The point I was making earlier depends on the rationale that is shared by most mainstream religious practice who do attempt to identify God's existance here in the modern world of science and not so much what He was back when the world was created because, as you say, that is merely speculation that we will never know.

My analogy addresses the question, "How do we know God exists when we can't physically perceive Him?" The answer is that we know He exists the same way we know a single point in space exists even know we can't see it. We know there are dimenions of existance above and below us. This is part of quantum physics. However, we cannot see these dimensions because most of them fall outside of our perception and therefore cannot be measured. If God is in one of these other dimensions right now, then that would explain why we are having so much trouble "measuring Him," so to speak. Because we can't measure what does not have length, width, height, or duration (anything that is not within dimensions 2, 3, and 4).

If God is truly as omnipotent as most Christians believe, then I would not be a bit suprised if God himself were in the 10th dimension where He would have direct access to every point in time and space in every possible dimension there will ever be. However, mankind has not even mastered time travel yet and that doesn't happen until we master the 5th and 6th dimensions. This gives you an idea of just how much more God is than us.

[LateNight]

It's occurred to me, that this thread started off "Is Christianity in Trouble?" but it quickly turned into a "Prove God exists" thread. Which is a ridiculous point.

Just once wouldn't you love for someone to simply show you the evidence for God's existence? No arm-twisting. No statements of, "You just have to believe." Well, here is an attempt to candidly offer some of the reasons which suggest that God exists.

But first consider this. If a person opposes even the possibility of there being a God, then any evidence can be rationalized or explained away. It is like if someone refuses to believe that people have walked on the moon, then no amount of information is going to change their thinking. Photographs of astronauts walking on the moon, interviews with the astronauts, moon rocks...all the evidence would be worthless, because the person has already concluded that people cannot go to the moon.

When it comes to the possibility of God's existence, the Bible says that there are people who have seen sufficient evidence, but they have suppressed the truth about God.1 On the other hand, for those who want to know God if he is there, he says, "You will seek me and find me; when you seek me with all your heart, I will be found by you."

Now when someone says to me, "Is Christianity in trouble?" the first thing that comes to my mind is for example, these priests etc who have been caught, literally with their PANTS DOWN. Something else that I would want to consider, is attendance at churches UP or DOWN ?

[Al Swearengen]

We can never hope to quantify the Creator, regardless of how advanced our science becomes. To succeed in doing so would put man on an almost equal footing with Him. However, science is on the threshold of doing the next best thing with the "Theory of Intelligent Design". It is becoming apparent that the complexity of creation, of life, of reality, could NOT have occured randomly, that there MUST be a "designer" behind it all. A perceptible, cosmic prescience at work. In other words, our scientists are close to confirming empirically what the rest of us have already figured out.

[rhertz]

Originally Posted by AnimeSpirit

I'm not a rationalist in that respect, Al, so you don't have to convince me. However, you surely know what a rationalist would say to that. I'd imagine the response would be, "Existance is proof of existance, but it does not prove HOW we got here or WHO is responsible."

I'd rather not discuss my personal views on creationism though. I just posted that analogy, because I thought it was intriguing.

Call me a rationlist or not. But I define God as the sole entity who can create life. If you think I am wrong, then prove me wrong. Create some life..., or name someone who has. Just one single cell organism, that's all I ask. If you can't demonstrate that someone besides God can create an amoeba or a single cell of algae, then you cannot replicate the experiment of creation, and therefore you cannot say one way or another.

[Al Swearengen]

Its occurred to me, that this thread started off "Is Christianity In Trouble" but it quickly turned into a "Prove God Exists" thread. Which is a ridiculous point.

Well, one thing leads to another, doesnt it? The question "Is Christianity in Trouble" naturally attracts those who deny the existence of God, which in turn attracts the proponents of His existence. Its germane to the topic.

[AnimeSpirit]

Talking about the existance of God is closer to the topic than talking about Al getting a spanking from the ladies. Then again...

Hey Al, did the creation of your last offspring involve spankings?

[Al Swearengen]

Originally Posted by AnimeSpirit

Talking about the existance of God is closer to the topic than talking about Al getting a spanking from the ladies. Then again...

Hey Al, did the creation of your last offspring involve spankings?

Ha! Reminds me of that old S&M joke. You know, the masochist says "hurt me", and the sadist says "no" ! GET IT?

[Texasbelle]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Call me a rationlist or not. But I define God as the sole entity who can create life. If you think I am wrong, then prove me wrong. Create some life..., or name someone who has. Just one single cell organism, that's all I ask. If you can't demonstrate that someone besides God can create an amoeba or a single cell of algae, then you cannot replicate the experiment of creation, and therefore you cannot say one way or another.

I have a 16 y/o step son who adamently states he doesn't believe in God's existence. About a month ago, we were discussing it and finally I picked up some grass and asked him, "Can you make this?" He promptly said "No". I said, "Well neither can I. There is only one person who I believe can and unless you can name for me someone else who can create this grass in my hand I am going to believe that only God can." He promptly gave in and gave up the debate.