Page 1 of 15

Why doesn't god prove himself?

PostPosted: March 5th, 2007, 11:07 am
by cynicallyinsane
If there is a god, why doesn't he prove that he exists? Why does he leave us without any compelling evidence of his existence?

PostPosted: March 5th, 2007, 11:43 pm
by calenture9
It could be possible that God exists, but doesn't necessarily care about people that much to prove himself (or herself, itself, etc.).

I, personally, am agnostic leaning toward the atheistic side. But, if God does exist, then I think that God must just not care about us - it just created the basic building blocks of the universe and let it do the work.

PostPosted: March 6th, 2007, 1:14 am
by Bk2Kant
If God proved he existed he would take away the meaning of faith. If people did not have faith thier love for and/or obedience of God would be similar to our obedience of government a way to kep us in ine because we fear inevitable punishment should we do wrong. If we believe in God based on faith it is a diferent relationship and we could agree with the Christian idea that you have to take the lead of faith and trust in God fully to be forgiven for the flaws he has given you. I think you're devotion to God gets discredited if the existance of Gos were common knowledge.

PostPosted: March 6th, 2007, 1:23 pm
by captain_crunk
I don't know why God should (if there is one, and personally I think there is) feel he has to prove anything to us. If there is a God and he made us, I can't imagine what would make him feel like he had anything to prove. Unless there's a God who, in essence, hasn't done anything at all. Damn I'm running in circles here. Sorry all, I know what I mean to say but I don't know how to say it. Just ignore this whole post if you'd like...

And please note that when I refer to God as a "he" I'm not being a misogynistic, sexist pig or anything. The Bible just refers to God as "father" and fathers usually aren't called "she." Sorry if this offends anyone.

PostPosted: March 9th, 2007, 3:17 pm
by MyshiningOne
Bk2Kant wrote:If God proved he existed he would take away the meaning of faith. If people did not have faith thier love for and/or obedience of God would be similar to our obedience of government a way to kep us in ine because we fear inevitable punishment should we do wrong. If we believe in God based on faith it is a diferent relationship and we could agree with the Christian idea that you have to take the lead of faith and trust in God fully to be forgiven for the flaws he has given you. I think you're devotion to God gets discredited if the existance of Gos were common knowledge.


I agree with you there. If there was a rational basis
for the existence of God, then the act of faith would
have no meaning. Faith is belief in the unknown.
A relationship with God, contrary to popular belief, is not the same kind of relationship we have with
our friends. God doesn't answer back in a literal sense like a friend does. This can be both
encouraging and discouraging for people. Some
people do not believe in a higher power simply because their minds can't fathom having faith in a
being who does not communicate with them. Others feel
that they can have stronger faith in a being who
does not communicate with them.

PostPosted: March 9th, 2007, 3:20 pm
by MyshiningOne
calenture9 wrote:It could be possible that God exists, but doesn't necessarily care about people that much to prove himself (or herself, itself, etc.).

I, personally, am agnostic leaning toward the atheistic side. But, if God does exist, then I think that God must just not care about us - it just created the basic building blocks of the universe and let it do the work.


Well, actually, you may be classified as a post-modern Deist rather than an atheist.

The Deists also believed in an impersonal God who set up the universe and left it alone.

PostPosted: March 9th, 2007, 3:22 pm
by MyshiningOne
captain_crunk wrote:I don't know why God should (if there is one, and personally I think there is) feel he has to prove anything to us. If there is a God and he made us, I can't imagine what would make him feel like he had anything to prove. Unless there's a God who, in essence, hasn't done anything at all. Damn I'm running in circles here. Sorry all, I know what I mean to say but I don't know how to say it. Just ignore this whole post if you'd like...

And please note that when I refer to God as a "he" I'm not being a misogynistic, sexist pig or anything. The Bible just refers to God as "father" and fathers usually aren't called "she." Sorry if this offends anyone.


I am a woman and I'm not offended. Gender correctness
is still hard to achieve.

PostPosted: March 11th, 2007, 12:06 am
by captain_crunk
MyshiningOne wrote:I am a woman and I'm not offended. Gender correctness
is still hard to achieve.


Alright good. Thanks for not being hypersensitive about things =)

PostPosted: March 11th, 2007, 1:48 am
by MyshiningOne
captain_crunk wrote:
MyshiningOne wrote:I am a woman and I'm not offended. Gender correctness
is still hard to achieve.


Alright good. Thanks for not being hypersensitive about things =)


No prob.

PostPosted: March 13th, 2007, 4:12 pm
by thestateimin
Bk2Kant wrote:If God proved he existed he would take away the meaning of faith. If people did not have faith thier love for and/or obedience of God would be similar to our obedience of government a way to kep us in ine because we fear inevitable punishment should we do wrong. If we believe in God based on faith it is a diferent relationship and we could agree with the Christian idea that you have to take the lead of faith and trust in God fully to be forgiven for the flaws he has given you. I think you're devotion to God gets discredited if the existance of Gos were common knowledge.


The only issue I have with this is that any ultimate and all knowing beings such as the Abrahamic God (or any other for that matter) would have to understand that their "word" is quite ambiguous. Each religion seems to have it's own sects and sub-sects simply because of human interpretation.

This interpretation of "holy" books has led millions to murder and be murdered (think Sunnis, Shi'ites, Catholics, Protestants, Therevada Buddhists, Hindus etc.). If a God were truly compassionate (like so many religions claim), one would imagine that he/she/it would care for it's creations. If God were compassionate, he/she/it would probably not allow these transgressions to occur in his/her/it's name. All murder done in the name of God could have been prevented if God came and cleared the air.

Given the following, we may make one of the following assumptions:
1)God is not compassionate
2)God simply created the universe, then abandoned it (Deist God)
3)God does not exist

PostPosted: March 16th, 2007, 12:07 pm
by captain_crunk
thestateimin wrote:The only issue I have with this is that any ultimate and all knowing beings such as the Abrahamic God (or any other for that matter) would have to understand that their "word" is quite ambiguous. Each religion seems to have it's own sects and sub-sects simply because of human interpretation.

This interpretation of "holy" books has led millions to murder and be murdered (think Sunnis, Shi'ites, Catholics, Protestants, Therevada Buddhists, Hindus etc.). If a God were truly compassionate (like so many religions claim), one would imagine that he/she/it would care for it's creations. If God were compassionate, he/she/it would probably not allow these transgressions to occur in his/her/it's name. All murder done in the name of God could have been prevented if God came and cleared the air.

Given the following, we may make one of the following assumptions:
1)God is not compassionate
2)God simply created the universe, then abandoned it (Deist God)
3)God does not exist


Interesting point. Although your argument makes sense I still don't believe any of the three assumptions.
1) Death is proof of God's compassion, in my opinion anyway
2) I don't think God "abandoned" the universe, but rather he is not exerting his power and control over it in the manner that he could. Instead- human free will.
3) I simply don't agree with this one.

PostPosted: March 20th, 2007, 7:24 pm
by bellybuttonmonkeypoo
If god did that there would be no free choice at all. Also it don't matter if others believe or not in the end it's your faith that proves the existance to you

PostPosted: March 24th, 2007, 10:38 am
by MyshiningOne
bellybuttonmonkeypoo wrote:If god did that there would be no free choice at all. Also it don't matter if others believe or not in the end it's your faith that proves the existance to you


It seems like if you believe in something hard
enough, you can almost make something exist. I
don't think it's about merely wondering if something
exists or not; I think strong belief coupled with the love and a willingness to serve proves that existence for you. It's much easier to believe in something (or someone) who can make this desire possible.

PostPosted: November 18th, 2007, 5:15 pm
by YungMunkee
I think it's ridiculous to say that there is no evidence of God, or any kind of spiritual power in the universe. Just think about it.

I think there is evidence of God all around, whenever I see a beautiful landscape, and the feeling I get from it being so beautiful, the fact that it is UNIVERSALLY beautiful to most everyone is evidence that there is God..I mean the[/u] Grand Canyon can't be coincidentally gorgeous to all eyes, it was crafted within nature by a supernatural essence or being.

My point being, God doesn't need to prove himself more than He/She/It already has and does everyday. The whole idea is faith, you don't believe in something that is easy, that is a fact or a law. Belief is how Faith stays around, in order to have Faith in something IE GOD, you must Believe in it. So I guess the real question you should be asking yourself is: "What do I really believe in?" That is the true meaning of religion, or rather the true question of religion. Believe that what you are doing is right and good, and that is your religion.

Basically, in order for there to be a God, you must have Faith in your Beliefs about God. that was a lengthy rant, forgive me. ^.^ and err..

"god bless?"

PostPosted: November 18th, 2007, 6:57 pm
by NSUSA
That's a good argument for evidence of god, YungMunkee. I never thought of beauty as being evidence of god.

Couldn't the perception of beauty be an evolutionarily gained trait though? Perhaps we find women beautiful because they are evolutionarily better to mate with. We find a green, sunlit landscape beautiful because it is an evolutionarily better place to be around and live in. (Wildlife is food, and green growth is evidence of sunlight and water, which is also healthy.) What do you think?