its a self contradictory statement to say that you wouldn't believe in a tree, or sun, or love, or trust, or conception, or stimulation, or emphatic simulation, or in God. something thats obvious doesnt ask for doubt. its there and anyone with a few curves in their brains can make the connection to Gods existence. except the ones that are trying to debate religion on intellectual grounds. put them on a sinking ship in the carribean and they will pray "oh God" just the same.
God is 100% real, if he wasnt real where did the earth come from, and if the big bang was true(which it is not) where did that come from huh. The lord created everything!!! He is the Alpha and Omega! Jesus died for all of our sins and you ust believe it. If you are your own god why can't you mak a new living, real species? Eh. Science can not even create a blade of grass without using a little particle of real grass the lord has mad. If you do not believe in him, then go ahead, be my geust but you will have to face him on judgement day. Which by the looks of it is near. Believe in the lord!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is actually a good point you have. I have liked to say "I believe in God" but then again I never doubted his existence. Though now it is making think what you would say instead of "I believe" because it sounds a harsh to tell someone, who doesn't agree, that "God Exists". Then again it actually doesn't sound that weird. Plus saying "God Exists" would lead into a deeper conversation I imagine much more often than saying "I believe in God".
The Bible teaches very clear, we are all "spritiually dead" and can't believe in God, nor can dicern the "spiritual things of God." Believing is not something you have contributed or you did and part to believe in him. Believing, is 100% the work of God.
you dont even know what you're saying. these are two different statements;
I believe that god exists. I believe in god.
they are different. Belief in god is when you believe that he can answer prayers, like "i believe in the social democrats". Belief that god exists is when you think he exists like "i believe that this cake exists".
On the contrary the meaning is the exact same. When someone states they believe in god they are in fact admitting to his perceived existence. On the other hand you are correct for the statement "I believe in god" can be used in the context you describe but it still hinges on his perceived existence. Social democrats do exist however and do not rely on your belief in them to exist. Belief is not equivalent to voting. On a side note anyone who believes a politician is about as crazy as believing in a fictional creation from a story book.
He does exist! God says, there's none that are good, no not one. There's none, that are righteous, no not one. There's NONE that, Seeketh after God. No, not one. No man can come to Christ, unless God draws you first. Because, all man are "spiritually dead", and can't discern the truth.
Theist typically end up blaming existance on deities thereby using the fact that you can see, hear, and touch as a "proof" for theism, regardless of the fact that this is a self-contradicting circular argument.
After that, they claim that their raw belief in deities is what proves their existance (showing a clear lack of understanding in psychology and sociology).
Bluefire-the-DragonFeatured By OwnerFeb 25, 2013Hobbyist Traditional Artist
At the same time, you can also argue that God's existence is simply improbable, not impossible. Since a negative cannot be proven, we cannot really say for sure that He does not exist. Some simply choose to believe, which does not equate to fact. They believe, perhaps knowing that they may be wrong but they have faith that God is real.
God isn't physical, therefore, we cannot touch it, or feel it, or see it.
However, things like gravity, love, hate etc, do exist, yet we cannot feel it, touch it, see it.
But we CAN however, see how it AFFECTS us.
We know gravity exists because if I take this rock and throw it, it will always fall right back down to the ground.
We know love and hate exist, I don't have to explain this any further.
God exists because we can clearly see him affecting our lives, and if he hadn't of existed, then I guess those who are strong worshipers in God are just lucky people that happen to have many coincidental moments in their lives.
Some people actually accept that God is indeed a physical being, which we are not supposed to do.
HOWEVER, there ARE many people in the world, (such as myself), which we communicate with God as IF he was standing right next to us, like he is our friend.
I talk to talk so often that I talk to him as if he was my friend standing next to me listening to what I have to say, and his responses I always see in different forms, this depends on you, and is not the same for everyone.
No Atheist can ever convince me God does not exist since there is something worth greater in value than 'proof', and that is first hand experience.
For those Atheists, God doesn't exist, because they don't accept his existence, so for THEM, God simply doesn't exist, and God will ignore them and let them continue on with their lives.
For those who do believe in God, and worship him consistently, these people God favors and communicates with and responds to very so often.
A Logical analysis will show that you are in fact talking to yourself, which is absolutely fine. An inner dialectic is a very healthy activity. Giving a fictional character credit for your own thoughts however might not be. If you want to understand why I am an atheist I invite you to read my latest Journal entry.
How do you know that it's just out of human and current scientific capabilities to see or contact or prove a spiritual plane? After all, it used to be a conceived myth of the atomic plane and now it's common knowledge. We have a lot more discovery to go before we know the existence of a spiritual plane. It exists outside of matter, so of course we cannot test it with science. Yet.
No, I don't believe it's an argument from ignorance. I think it's possible that we're still ignorant, and atheism is more of an "argumentum ad ignorantiam." It's under the desire not to explore a different perspective on the universe.
Though I do agree that atheism is also an argument from ignorance. Thus, truly in this sense, I am agnostic for I'm open to the idea if the proof was presented to me in a logical and tangible manner. But I boarder on Atheism for the reason that I want to be responsible for my actions and leave nothing to fate.
I am the same. I'm for proof over blind faith, though I do believe in God. I have a sort of proof, something quite scientific and tangible (also recorded) but it's a long story and I don't want to seem like...pretentious.
I think we've all had experiences. I know I have but I don't think anyone can be totally conclusive as to what it all means. I understand the desire to believe in god because one doesn't have to be responsible for their short comings which is, as I've stated, why I hold my point of view. I think it is more powerful and more noble to use the tools at our disposal to not only come to our conclusions but also hone our skills so we can better contribute to society and its in this way that we will see real advances in society.
It's the atheism that can't disprove God, and believers don't use that as proof that God exists. I'm just saying that because believers can't prove God's existence, the atheists are using /that/ as evidence. That's ignorance.
What I find sort of funny is that when people say they believe in god, or even talks to god, that's okey. But talking to so called imaginary friends, or to yourself sends you to the psychiatric department. If someone can explain the difference, it would be much appreciated.
The bible teaches very clear, all man are "spiritually dead" and can't discern the truth nor can see the "spiritual things of God." It's impossible for anyone to believe in Him, unless God opens your spiritual eyes and ears. Otherwise, you're blind from the truth. God says, they have eyes, but can't see. They have ears, but they can't hear. For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart and should be converted. And, only God can converted them, not man.
I know exactly what you mean. when you say you believe something, it essentially means 'I think'. If you are certain that a god or gods exist, then why not say 'I know that god exists'?. 'I believe' and 'I know' are two different things entirely.
I believe in God, for me, is much like saying I believe in (insert friend's name here). It isn't a matter of believing He exist, His presence should be rather apparent in a Christian's life, but believing in the person that He is.
There's no evidence that the scientific method is valid, people just choose to believe in it because they think it makes sense. Does that necessarily mean all the scientific conclusions ever made are based on a false assumption?