by minimus 55 Replies latest jw friends
We are in a catch-22.
If God were to reveal himself to us humans, we would have to logically deduce that it was God who had revealed Himself. Yet everything that reasonably leads us to that conclusion we discount as proof ---because if it seems reasonable to us then we say it is only a reasonable event and therefore is not from God.
not a captive,
I agree (not tht it matters)
If atheist exist then God must exist
Why?
Yes everything in the universe is god, Nuclear physics is the evidential proof of this
How so?
If God were to reveal himself to us humans, we would have to logically deduce that it was God who had revealed Himself. Yet everything that reasonably leads us to that conclusion we discount as proof ---because if it seems reasonable to us then we say it is only a reasonable event and therefore is not from God.
That's not a catch-22. God revealing himself in all his glory with angel at his side is a far cry from "a birds wing reveals the glory of god"
Hey, finger--I think your opinion matters. I like to think mine does.
When the elders were trying to shepherd me back into the fold when I stopped going to meetings, I told them that the problem with my conscience, my opinion, was two things were struck off against each other- my convictions were both infinitely important and infinitely not important.
Being a little bit of of both it seemed that I needed to stick up for my understanding of God and if I'm wrong what will it matter? I can only believe what I believe is true. If I wasn't convinced by their words and the WTS well-- Let God judge me.
We matter and we don't. Even if that doesn't make sense.
Personally, I am convinced that God exists and he cares that we know he cares about us.
notverylikely--
Don't you think that we humans can reasonably ignore any proof that God could present? There is no formula to make a person believe in God. Jesus didn't even do "signs" for ones who asked for those proofs at Mt. 16:4 because he knew it was pointless. At John 12:29 There was a loud voice from heaven or else it was a thunderclap--people disagreed who stood next to each other and heard it.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean. Sorry if I don't.
But I think we are in a Catch 22 if we expect other people to make a lesson plan to prove God to us through logic.
"If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now."
— Douglas Adams (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy)
And while you're at it, shoot the ego too, if you can find it.
not a captive
thank you. I think you make sense.
Don't you think that we humans can reasonably ignore any proof that God could present?
Well that's not what you said. You first mentioned God revealing him/herself and then talked about evidence all around us. Those are two different things. If by evidence you mean "stuff is here", then there are much more rational explanations that fit the evidence.
If you are talking about god revealing himself in the sky speaking to every person on the planet with a host of angels at his side, well, that's something different.
Jesus didn't even do "signs" for ones who asked for those proofs at Mt. 16:4 because he knew it was pointless.
He did signs all the time, just not on command.
At John 12:29 There was a loud voice from heaven or else it was a thunderclap--people disagreed who stood next to each other and heard it.
Is there any reason to beleive it wasn't just thunder?
But I think we are in a Catch 22 if we expect other people to make a lesson plan to prove God to us through logic.
No, a catch-22 is a situation where the very action you have to take to resolve a situation will also un-resolve it. In the book, Catch-22 (from which the phrase was taken), pilots could only get out of flying missions if they were mentally unfit. The only way to prove you were mentally unfit was to tell someone, however, KNOWING that you were mentally unfit was proof that you were faking it and weren't really mentally unfit.
This is more of a situation where there is no way to do what you are talking about. It's just can't be done if you stick to logic and science.
Do unicorns exist?
Well, I've not been proven they exist, I have not seen the fossils nor a living example. I don't believe in them because there is a lack of proof they exist. Unicorns much like God are mentioned in the bible as being existant. They both fall under a major burden of proof of that we cannot prove either existed or exists. there is no proof other than a book if you're refering the Xtian belief system.
Just because we cannot explain things does not mean they are of a devine cause. People have been heaping blame on Gods for 1000's of years, sickness, plauges, ect... now it seems silly to us that a flu might have thought to been of the cause of a devine evil that you might have commited now... but people believed that. They did for a long time... however thanks to the realm of science and progress we understand why people get sick and have devloped treatments that will keep the person alive and limit their sickness to a couple of days not a couple of weeks. I am just but 24 but I believe that sicence and progress will uncover a deal more, even in my lifetime... we're only scratching the suface when it comes to the devlopment of human beings.
There is so much evidence to prove that men evolved from apes, beyond the whole fact that life on this planet millions of years ago was so amazing and diversly diffrent based only on the bones of past species... it's difficult for me to believe in a constuct of religion that tries to explain the beginning of time with leaving out important gaps in it's story. It's always funny how Xtians want 'Proof' that evolution happened when they cannot prove their own bullshit.
