If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

Could you ask the question again please? I'm not sure I understand it correctly the way you've worded it.

How would you convince people you created them with free will?
How would you convince people you created them out of your own free will?
How would you convince people they had free will to come into existence?

I would float over all the nations of the world as a large luminescent head and proclaim my nature in all the languages. Then I might reverse the effects of industrialization, like erase all the pollution or greenhouse gasses, you know, something no one else could do in an instant.

No prob. I re-worded it above. Basically, if you were God, what would you do to show people that you existed.

I would float over all the nations of the world as a large luminescent head and proclaim my nature in all the languages. Then I might reverse the effects of industrialization, like erase all the pollution or greenhouse gasses, you know, something no one else could do in an instant.

Yeah but, one could argue that the luminescent head was some new form of technology that we don't understand, right?

Is this different from the question in the thread: What if it all turned out to be real?Say for instance for no particulair reason the one and true god desends on earth to prance about. What are the changes people would believe him?
Meaning what should he/she/it have to do/look like to convince the majority that he is indeed the true god?
Is your hypothetical god on earth as in the other thread, or is he in heaven (or some other non-earthly realm) trying to do a long-distance convincing?

He is in heaven (or some other non-earthly realm) trying to do a long-distance, or trans-realm convincing (unlike the other thread).

Is this different from the question in the thread: What if it all turned out to be real?
Is your hypothetical god on earth as in the other thread, or is he in heaven (or some other non-earthly realm) trying to do a long-distance convincing?

Considering the idea of the unlimited power of God, it could be both.

Yeah but, one could argue that the luminescent head was some new form of technology that we don't understand, right?

He would have to craft His message in such a way so that would be an impossible interpretation. He could bring back a few extinct animals, reforest the deforested lands, there is no end to the kind of things he could do to prove Himself. The fact is He could have done this long ago...

It'd probably need to be a custom made convincing. If some people on earth believed god was a strawberry flavored zebra, then convincing them would be as simple as appearing in the form of a strawberry flavored zebra. "I am your God - lick me".

For those that don't believe, a different approach would be needed. So god would need to know the mind of the individual, and what act it would take to make a convincing enough argument for the individual to brush aside illusion, advanced ET's, a deceitful demon etc in favor of an unquestioning belief that what they're seeing is from God.

I would do something that physics couldn't ever explain. Like a group of stars in a smiley face pattern.

Fascinating!

He would have to craft His message in such a way so that would be an impossible interpretation. He could bring back a few extinct animals, reforest the deforested lands, there is no end to the kind of things he could do to prove Himself. The fact is He could have done this long ago...

Yeah, I agree. Any of those things would convince me.

It'd probably need to be a custom made convincing. If some people on earth believed god was a strawberry flavored zebra, then convincing them would be as simple as appearing in the form of a strawberry flavored zebra. "I am your God - lick me".

For those that don't believe, a different approach would be needed. So god would need to know the mind of the individual, and what act it would take to make a convincing enough argument for the individual to brush aside illusion, advanced ET's, a deceitful demon etc in favor of an unquestioning belief that what they're seeing is from God.

I agree with that. Everyone needs a different type of phenomenal event.

I would take: parting of a sea, raising someone from the dead (fresh out of the cemetary), etc.

I would do something that physics couldn't ever explain. Like a group of stars in a smiley face pattern.

LOL. That be both hysterical and convinving. If I looked up into the night sky at say, Orion, and suddenly the Orien stars formed into the pattern of the words "I Am God" or a smiley face, I would believe. It's hard to rationalize stars moving into a pattern of words. Good one.

and it would convince people who hadn't even seen it happen.

What if you already are GOD? And like some fool...you are waiting around for proof when you should be proofing this to yourself?
:shrug:

It's just a question.
:)

true. Stars can't just move on their own. That would be pretty amazing to see Orien or the big dipper turn into a giant smiley face. Or if God was mad, I guess it would be an angry face!

What if you already are GOD? And like some fool...you are waiting around for proof when you should be proofing this to yourself?
:shrug:

It's just a question.
:)

But if we were God, why would we lower ourselves to human existence and make ourselves suffer? What purpose does that serve? I see your point though.

true. Stars can't just move on their own. That would be pretty amazing to see Orien or the big dipper turn into a giant smiley face. Or if God was mad, I guess it would be an angry face!



But if we were God, why would we lower ourselves to human existence and make ourselves suffer? What purpose does that serve? I see your point though.

What would a parent do for its children if that parent was full of love and patience? Does a flower bloom as soon as its seed sprouts? Do gardeners not tend their garden?

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

i would convince them the same way the real god does it: by doing nothing... by writing a book called bible, quran vedanta, dividing a red sea, lightning, tsunamis, earthquakes. then i would sit back and enjoy the show.

Since there is no God then this question is totally irrelevant.

Since there is no God then this question is totally irrelevant.

And how do you know this for sure???
Can you prove it???
:shrug:

Fascinating!

Was an episode on Spongebob LOL

Wait, it has already happened!


http://home.twcny.rr.com/startfresh/Images/untitled1.JPG

And how do you know this for sure???
Can you prove it???
:shrug:

If there is a God let it kill you, see nothing happened. ;)

If there is a God let it kill you, see nothing happened. ;)

I noticed that you didn't say "Let it kill me"

I noticed that you didn't say "Let it kill me"

Well you wanted the proof not me didn't you? ;)

What would a parent do for its children if that parent was full of love and patience? Does a flower bloom as soon as its seed sprouts? Do gardeners not tend their garden?

Yeah but, if we are God then there is no "child." If we are all God, then we created ourselves and brought suffering upon ourselves, not our children.

Parents who love their children scold them and are patient with them in order to teach the child because children don't know everything. God does know eveything, and if we are all God we all know everything and have no reason to suffer.

i would convince them the same way the real god does it: by doing nothing... by writing a book called bible, quran vedanta, dividing a red sea, lightning, tsunamis, earthquakes. then i would sit back and enjoy the show.

Yorda, if one person got to witness a miracle like raising of the dead and parting of a sea, doesn't that give them an unfair advantage in faith?

I noticed that you didn't say "Let it kill me"

I see that you are still with us, now doesn't that prove there's no God?

Yorda, if one person got to witness a miracle like raising of the dead and parting of a sea, doesn't that give them an unfair advantage in faith?

people don't get more faith from seeing miracles, they see miracles because they have more faith. that's why some people see paranormal things like ghosts and UFO's but scientists never see them.

i couldn't show miracles to everyone because miracles are supposed to be special. if i would show them to everyone, i would have to show them every day, and soon they wouldn't be miracles anymore... they would be every day things, like gravity and the sun.

I see that you are still with us, now doesn't that prove there's no God?

Umm... first of all you didn't ask it (God) to kill me, you asked it to kill Jozen-Bo.

Secondly, just because you said 'let it kill you' Does not mean that God (if he existed) must do what you ask... Therefore, it is proof of nothing.

Now, if you were to stand on a hilltop in a thunderstorm and openly forsake God... show your utter contempt for the very idea that God exists and then say something like 'If God exists let him strike me down where I stand!'... Then (if he hadn't struck you down) I would say you have some (weak) evidence for the non-existence of God... but still no proof.

Being unknowable, I'd have no way of convincing them.. lol
Otherwise I would just show myself, maybe perform some miracles.. :cool:

Being unknowable, I'd have no way of convincing them.. lol
Otherwise I would just show myself, maybe perform some miracles.. :cool:

Why is God unknowable?

Why is God unknowable?

I... dont know..

If you were God, how would you...
simple show them the trick

Therefore, it is proof of nothing.


Exactly!! ;)

Exactly!! ;)

smartass!

It is NOT PROOF.

As for the OP... I like the Star Idea. Also some sort of message hidden in the very physics of the universe would be convincing... like in CONTACT... a message hidden in the number Pi.

I would appear in the sky and tell them who I was, just before killing them all with plagues of katana wielding koalas.

I would appear in the sky and tell them who I was, just before killing them all with plagues of katana wielding koalas.

This proves God doesn't exist.. in some wacky way.. lol

I would appear with my big sack on shoulder.
Throwing out presents........Free JESUS CREAM for everyone....

He could simply show how he created the universe and anything, perhaps show us enough to do some expereimentation of ourselfs.
Making it more likly that he is god then that he isn't

I might also send a messenger down in the form of... hmm... let's say... SUPERMAN!... But his name would be Jesus II, he would be invulnerable to crusi-fiction. He would fly around and heal people with a touch, fight crime, and just generally be an all around good guy. Of course he would have to live forever, otherwise how would our children's children's children know that he wasn't just some made up story in a book. No, let's stick with the star or message idea.

people don't get more faith from seeing miracles, they see miracles because they have more faith. that's why some people see paranormal things like ghosts and UFO's but scientists never see them.

i couldn't show miracles to everyone because miracles are supposed to be special. if i would show them to everyone, i would have to show them every day, and soon they wouldn't be miracles anymore... they would be every day things, like gravity and the sun.

I'm not asking for a miracle every day. I'm asking for one giant, undeniable miracle per generation. For example, the stars aligning into a giant smiley face or an "I AM GOD" pattern once a generation for everyone to see.

Also, here's your statement:

"People don't get more faith from seeing miracles, they see miracles because they have more faith."

The Bible, which you said was written by God himself, states the following in John 20:30-31:

"And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name."

So the Bible says miracles are to increase people's faith, or to give them faith in Jesus.

So you're wrong, I think, about the purpose of Jesus'/God's miracles. And I don't see any problem in moving the stars around once every 40 or so years.

I wouldn't.
I'd let them have their free will and sit back and watch.

This proves God doesn't exist.. in some wacky way.. lol

I guess your right! :shrug:

I wouldn't.
I'd let them have their free will and sit back and watch.

What would you do when they start killing each other in religious wars ?

I guess your right!

:D
:cool::m:

What would you do when they start killing each other in religious wars ?

Continue to sit back with a cold drink?

Continue to sit back with a cold drink?

I hope he will come up with another answer.. :(

I hope he will come up with another answer.. :(

Why not thats what gods doing right now, just follow his example. :shrug:

Why not thats what gods doing right now, just follow his example. :shrug:

On the other hand.. I wouldn't even wait for them to kill each other.
If I was God and saw what has become of the world.. bye bye humans.. :mufc:

On the other hand.. I wouldn't even wait for them to kill each other.
If I was God and saw what has become of the world.. bye bye humans.. :mufc:

Death by ninja koala? :D

Death by ninja koala? :D

More like ashes to ashes me thinks.. :scratchin:

lol

More like ashes to ashes me thinks.. :scratchin:

lol

how unoriginal of you, come on you can do better your god afterall :bugeye:

Like one Massive Cremation

I hope he will come up with another answer.. :(

Nope.
Same answer.

If I created beings with free will, they would be just that.

Think of it this way...

Most religions say that there is an eternal, non-corporeal paradise that we go to after death.
What, then, does this existence offer us that paradies does not?
What is the difference between there and here?

1 Sensual experience
2 Mortality/Danger/Excitement/Passion

These are the things that make life here what it is.

Mortality comes part and parcel with physical existence.
The ability to feel, implies the ability to feel pleasure and pain - they are just extremes of the same sensations.

Without risk there is no excitement and passion.
Without exciement and passion you have statsis.

Without consequences, you have no reason to act.

This life is a gift in it's many forms.

Aside from that, no matter how much suffering one may endure in this lifetime, it is nothing but a drop of water when viewed against the backdrop of eteral pleasure, no?
80 years of constant pain would not amount to a hangnail in an eternity of pain-free existence.

Furthermore, nearly every bit of suffering one must endure in this lifetime is caused by human beings.
It is our choice to make.

If we did not have the choice we would not have free will.

I prefer to be a man in pain to being a puppet in any scenario.

If I were God I most certainly would not intervene - and that would not make me malevolent - forcing the hands of the beings I supposedly ceated with free will would make me malevolent.

how unoriginal of you, come on you can do better your god afterall :bugeye:

I don't want to leave a mega-pile of rotting flesh behind..

Like one Massive Cremation

No, just instant fertilizer.. lol

Nope.
Same answer.

If I created beings with free will, they would be just that.

Think of it this way...

Most religions say that there is an eternal, non-corporeal paradise that we go to after death.
What, then, does this existence offer us that paradies does not?
What is the difference between there and here?

1 Sensual experience
2 Mortality/Danger/Excitement/Passion

These are the things that make life here what it is.

Mortality comes part and parcel with physical existence.
The ability to feel, implies the ability to feel pleasure and pain - they are just extremes of the same sensations.

Without risk there is no excitement and passion.
Without exciement and passion you have statsis.

Without consequences, you have no reason to act.

This life is a gift in it's many forms.

Aside from that, no matter how much suffering one may endure in this lifetime, it is nothing but a drop of water when viewed against the backdrop of eteral pleasure, no?
80 years of constant pain would not amount to a hangnail in an eternity of pain-free existence.

Furthermore, nearly every bit of suffering one must endure in this lifetime is caused by human beings.
It is our choice to make.

If we did not have the choice we would not have free will.

I prefer to be a man in pain to being a puppet in any scenario.

If I were God I most certainly would not intervene - and that would not make me malevolent - forcing the hands of the beings I supposedly ceated with free will would make me malevolent.

So you would basically do the same as God does now ? Provided he exists of course..
Btw.. what is your stance on that ?

So you would basically do the same as God does now ? Provided he exists of course..
Yep.
God is a Deist.

Btw.. what is your stance on that ?
My stance is that there is no cognizant higher power - though a higher power certainly does exist.

As my user title says: "God is a Chinese Whisper".

Yep.
God is a Deist.


My stance is that there is no cognizant higher power - though a higher power certainly does exist.

Do you have any ideas as to what this higher power is ? Nature perhaps ? Or do you mean supernatural ?

Do you have any ideas as to what this higher power is ? Nature perhaps ? Or do you mean supernatural ?

Karma Manifest

I tried to explain it a bit here: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55505 a while ago, but my explanation was severely lacking and I have been working on rewriting it.

Karma Manifest

I tried to explain it a bit here: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55505 a while ago, but my explanation was severely lacking and I have been working on rewriting it.

Oh jeez.. that's looong.. lol
I don't have time for that now.. I'll read it later :)

Got to go now, have a great day/evening all !

God is not a simple concept. :D

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?
*************
M*W: I would let them know the who, what, where, why and how I created them. I'd keep in touch with them on a regular basis, and I would give them honest, open-minded guidance to survive well on this plant (that I created).

There would be no need for churches, because I would be talking directly out-loud to each each person. This wouldn't be hard, because I'm god, that I could communicate with all people at the same time. That's the advantage of being god.

People would have no reason to doubt me. That's another advantage of being god as well as you people being my creation. Heaven would truly be on Earth.

Ahh, but there are those of you who wouldn't believe in me and who would reject me. For you I have planted hell in your minds.

Since there is no God then this question is totally irrelevant.
*************
M*W: True, but can we just pretend?

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

You wouldn't, there is no Singularity. (singularity everyone in this instance believing/agreeing with the same thing)

...
The Bible, which you said was written by God himself, states the following in John 20:30-31:
...

This is one of the many conflicting statements which proves the essence of religion to be "Polymorphic Whispers" (That's the Politically corrected version of "Chinese Whispers")

The statement saying "God" writes the bible and states comment X in "John 20:30-31". Well John is in fact the author (At least for name sake) and apparently the other authors "Copied" the same material but just altered it for use in different Roman Provinces (Occupied territories) and Languages.

I would float over all the nations of the world as a large luminescent head and proclaim my nature in all the languages. Then I might reverse the effects of industrialization, like erase all the pollution or greenhouse gasses, you know, something no one else could do in an instant.

Funny enough, you are describing a second coming of the Messiah Jesus kind of event.

Yes Jesus will come in the sky and all eyes will see Him and the world’s injuries will be healed and made anew.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

And I don't see any problem in moving the stars around once every 40 or so years.

yeah.. but god doesn't want to prove his existence to us, he wants us to have free will to believe what we want.

Funny enough, you are describing a second coming of the Messiah Jesus kind of event.

Yes Jesus will come in the sky and all eyes will see Him and the world’s injuries will be healed and made anew.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Yes, it's a collective wish to undo the destruction we instinctively know we have wrought. It's pure infantile fantasy.

Yes, it's a collective wish to undo the destruction we instinctively know we have wrought. It's pure infantile fantasy.

I believe it will happen. :) If you want to believe it is an infantile fantasy then so be it.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

I would whisper to an angel and tell this angel some secrets that IT would then whisper into the head of some human in the desert of the ME so that he could then tell other people about me - and in that way they will know both that I am real as well as what my wishes are. As proof of my being real, during the night (when no one else was looking) I would take this human on a fairy-winged horsey ride up into heaven so that he could look around and see the place for himself. That way back in the morning when everyone was awake he could tell them of heaven - BOOM BABY puuuurrreeee PROOF! Also, as more proof I'd give this human some special favors, like having more wives than the other humans - Haa! Now THAT'S what I call proof. For my final proof I'd ensure that no one wrote down all these good secrets I told an angel to tell this human until, you know, sometime in the future when they could be collected from foggy old mens' memories and bark and such.

What more proof do you need? Geesh!

yeah.. but god doesn't want to prove his existence to us, he wants us to have free will to believe what we want.

Why, Yorda, did Jesus perform miracles? Just for the fun of it? Again, your claim that "god doesn't want to prove his existence to us" because of free will is completely wrong.

Jesus performed miracles to HELP people believe in him. He didn't MAKE people believe in him, that's impossible with free will. Instead, he helped them out a lot by doing many amazing things which deny physics and which, to me, constitute good evidence and would probably convince me of God/Jesus as well.


Miracle Turning water into Wine
John 2:11
11 This beginning of signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory; and His disciples believed in Him.

God/Jesus proves his existence to his disciples.

Miracle: Miscellaneous
John 2:23
23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

God/Jesus proves his existence to many people.


Miracle: Feeding of the 5,000
John 6:14
14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

God/Jesus proves his existence to many people.

Miracle: Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead
John 11:45
45 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.


God/Jesus proves his existence to many Jews.

John 1:45-49
45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." 46 And Nathanael said to him, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Philip said to him, "Come and see." 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" 48 Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." 49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!

God/Jesus proves his existence to Nathanael.

John 2:18-22
18 So the Jews answered and said to Him, "What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?" 19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" 21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

God/Jesus proves his existence to the disciples.


So, Yorda, did these thousands of people Jesus performed miracles in front of lose their free will? I don't think so.


If God/Jesus doesn't like proving his existence to people, he really acted strangely in the instances mentioned above (and the hundreds of miracles that weren't written in the Bible).

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?
I wouldn't! ;)

if they knew god exists they wouldnt have free will anymore.

I wouldn't! ;)

if they knew god exists they wouldnt have free will anymore.

My original question assumes that humans can never "know" God exists. So if you were God, what would you do to increase the faith of people of your existence (not knowledge). Remember, there is nothing God can do to make us know he exists. We can't really know anything, besides the one fact that we, and only us as individuals, exist. Everything outside of that is questionable.

And again, you say trying to convince people that you exist is taking away free will. So was Jesus wrong in taking away thousands of people's free will by showing them amazing miracles as described above?

No prob. I re-worded it above. Basically, if you were God, what would you do to show people that you existed.

Why? These are creatures of limited intelligence, why bother....may be my evolution process would make these little creatures understand in about a million years...I will wait...I am God...time is nothing to me....:D

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

For starters, I'd talk back.
Ever noticed how prayer is an awfully one-sided conversation?

Why, Yorda, did Jesus perform miracles?

to help people.

He didn't MAKE people believe in him, that's impossible with free will. Instead, he helped them out a lot by doing many amazing things which deny physics and which, to me, constitute good evidence and would probably convince me of God/Jesus as well.

not even god can violate the laws of physics because the world is physical.

Miracle: Feeding of the 5,000
John 6:14
14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

most of these miracles are just metaphors for something else, not real miracles.

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

That's fairly easy...
Manifest your power.

Why, Yorda, did Jesus perform miracles?

to help people.

Okay, so John was lying when he mentioned that miracles were done and written about to help people believe.

By the way, who was Jesus helping when he shows Nathanael he had crazy psychic abilities. Or when he rose Lazarus from the dead which led many to believe? Or when he made predicitions to the desciples that "the temple" would rise three days after his death which led the disciples to believe?

most of these miracles are just metaphors for something else, not real miracles.

So the Bible, which you said God wrote, is lying about the miracles? They weren't real?

That's fairly easy...
Manifest your power.

How?

If I were God I would say it's all about faith in this world and proof isn't an option.

In the next world if proof were asked of God I'd think it quite funny if God made the questioning individual just disappear from existence.

Don't mess with the Gods with idle questions is what I say!

Don't mess with the Gods with idle questions is what I say!

If you ask idle questions about God, God will have you tortured for eternity.
If you ask idle questions about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about Iran's government, he will have you tortured and executed.

I hope God isn't like a brutal dictator who, if questioned or even talked about, tortures and executes his people.

In Iran, if they don't serve Ahmadinejad and do exactly as he orders, they will be tortured and/or executed.
According to you (I think) and most Christians, if we don't serve God and do exactly as he orders, he will execute and torture us for eternity (lake of fire).

So in Christianity, is God a dictator? I have to side with Hinduism and Buddhism here in that I don't think a "good" God could be as low as say, a Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or a Saddam Hussein, killing and torturing people because they didn't follow orders. Seems kind of illogical and "evil" to me.

Aside from that, pharaohmoan, I think God wants us to try to figure everything out and questions things. Don't you? Isn't that what free will is all about? Or does God just want everyone to follow orders and say "Yes Sir" to everything God says just because he'll torture them if they dont?

Aside from that, pharaohmoan, I think God wants us to try to figure everything out and questions things. Don't you? Isn't that what free will is all about? Or does God just want everyone to follow orders and say "Yes Sir" to everything God says just because he'll torture them if they dont?

Yes I see your point. I would imagine free will is an aspect to be considered.
Maybe if more people really believed in the potentiality of God they'd not draw any unecessary attention to themselves. I believe that if there is a God, and I believe there is, he would not be very concerned with mere mortal's activities (on the grand scheme of things).

Yes I see your point. I would imagine free will is an aspect to be considered.
Maybe if more people really believed in the potentiality of God they'd not draw any unecessary attention to themselves. I believe that if there is a God, and I believe there is, he would not be very concerned with mere mortal's activities (on the grand scheme of things).

What would he be concerned with then? Immortal's activities?

Yes I see your point. I would imagine free will is an aspect to be considered.
Maybe if more people really believed in the potentiality of God they'd not draw any unecessary attention to themselves. I believe that if there is a God, and I believe there is, he would not be very concerned with mere mortal's activities (on the grand scheme of things).

I mean I just don't see the purpose of creating people, then telling them to do something and then if they don't do it burning them for eternity. Again, I have to side with more of a Hindu view on a non-eternal hell. Who really knows though.

How?

Toward saving mankind...Frankly just as he did.
But the memory of Mircales are short and they have the problem of being so incredible that the only real impact would be on those who experienced them.
Which is the problem we have today...so miracles have a limited purpose toward that glory.

What would he be concerned with then? Immortal's activities?
In a nut shell, yes.


I mean I just don't see the purpose of creating people, then telling them to do something and then if they don't do it burning them for eternity. Again, I have to side with more of a Hindu view on a non-eternal hell. Who really knows though.

But he's not telling people what to do, that's why we have free will. One of the main things it seems he is asking of us is that we have faith in him.

If i was god i would use my HUGE hand to flick you to the moon black and white style and then turn up on the moon as you were suffocating and say (which would be a neat trick in its self because you cant hear people speak in space) "belive in me now"?:p

Toward saving mankind...Frankly just as he did.
But the memory of Mircales are short and they have the problem of being so incredible that the only real impact would be on those who experienced them.
Which is the problem we have today...so miracles have a limited purpose toward that glory.

Saquist, would you be against God rearranging the stars into a smiley face once every 50 years just to keep reminding us of his existence? What would be wrong with that? I think it would be great.

But he's not telling people what to do, that's why we have free will. One of the main things it seems he is asking of us is that we have faith in him.

I see what you saying but not telling us what to do and then burning us for eternity because we don't do what he didn't even tell us to do is even worse!!! So God just created people, doesn't tell us what to do, then tortures us if we don't do what he hasn't told us to do?

That's like me putting a gun to someone's head, and saying you don't have to give me $5,000, but if you don't I will kill you.

As far as faith, what is the difference between having blind faith in God and blind faith in Leprachauns? Both have no material proof or evidence, so what's different about those two faiths?

Interesting question, but it has been answered for a long time:

"For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:..." Romans 1:20

In other words, all the proof necessary is right in front of our eyes, but the natural man will have none of it.

I also notice in this thread some talk about 'special convincing' being required for those who do not believe. That is quite right. The special convincing that is required is a rebirth of the heart. That rebirth must happen before men can believe, and it is a sovereign work of the Spirit apart from any will of man. In short, faith follows regeneration, not the other way around.

Saquist, would you be against God rearranging the stars into a smiley face once every 50 years just to keep reminding us of his existence? What would be wrong with that? I think it would be great.





Do you think the rearranging of the Stars would fit within the laws of the universe every fifty years? and how so?

Do you think the rearranging of the Stars would fit within the laws of the universe every fifty years? and how so?

If god exists then the laws of the universe are what he makes them, so why not?

Sorry, I can't resist. God does not exist. He is. Exist is from ex meaning from, or out of. We exist, He does not because He is neither from nor out of anything.

Sorry, I can't resist. God does not exist. He is. Exist is from ex meaning from, or out of. We exist, He does not because He is neither from nor out of anything.

Or he doesnt exist because he is just a made up concept;)

Or he doesn't exist because he is just a made up concept;)

Some people cling to that notion.

Some people cling to that notion.

Yea...idiots

Sorry, I can't resist. God does not exist. He is. Exist is from ex meaning from, or out of. We exist, He does not because He is neither from nor out of anything.

Peculiar semantics aside, do you think that God is, like 3 is? (or 4, 7, 879, or pi?)

I am not here, I am not saying this, therefore I am not

Peculiar semantics aside, do you think that God is, like 3 is? (or 4, 7, 879, or pi?)

God most certainly is though not in the same way as your examples.

maybe god is playing a game of hide and seek but forgot to tell us to find him:p

He could be hiding under some rock somewhere ready to jump out and say "your it":p

maybe god is playing a game of hide and seek but forgot to tell us to find him:p

He could be hiding under some rock somewhere ready to jump out and say "your it":p

Men vainly attempt to hide from Him: not He from them.

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

I would have just included an inescapable knowledge of my existence in their programming.

You'll probably try and argue that somehow having knowledge of an entities existence causes a problem with 'free will' but frankly I don't see how or why. Does my daughter have no free will because she knows I exist? Would it be better for the sake of her free will if I ran away the day she was born just so she wouldn't "know" me but would have to guess instead?

All these people would have the free will to decide whether to worship me, kill each other because of me and all the other stupid things religious folk do.

Of course, if I was god, and perfect in nature then humans wouldn't even exist. I would have no need or want to create pissy little creatures to bow down to me and serve me. Any god that would clearly has an ego that needs stroking.

I would have just included an inescapable knowledge of my existence in their programming.

that's a funny thing for an atheist to say because there seems to be such a programming in humans. why else would people have invented the idea of god? maybe around 85% of all people on earth believe in some higher power.

that's a funny thing for an atheist to say because there seems to be such a programming in humans.

No there doesn't. What is evident is that thousands of years of indoctrination - teaching from one to the next to the next to the next, being killed for not believing or believing other things, and so on certainly take their toll.

It is however quite reasonable that ancient people that knew nothing about anything would invent powerful forces to explain the things they witnessed. If for instance an ancient man saw a river turn red, he wouldn't diagnose it as pfiesteria he'd say some powerful force turned it to blood.

It's not much of a surprise that these so called 'gods' actually merely represent the things that ancient people saw around them. You don't find Chinese elephant gods, but you do find Indian elephant gods. South American gods resemble snakes, Egyptian gods resemble vultures and jackal. Many cultures gods resemble the stars, the sun, the moon. And so on and so forth.

90% of all people on earth believe in some higher power.

The mass majority believe that ostriches bury their heads in sand. They don't. A vast amount of people believe that humans only use 5-10% of their brain. We don't, (although I wont speak for some people around here).

That many people believe something is not an indication that it is true, or is an inbuilt knowledge of the existence of such a thing.

And, with all due respect, the mass majority of humans are stupid. It was only a week ago in the grand scale of things that they used to scalp people with headaches because they thought a demon resided within.

i would scare the living piss out of all of the apathetic, holier than thou, sin-loving, self-worshipping mother f'ers. i would prove my power and dominion by destroying this awful world of suffering and death, and create a new one of love, communion, and perfection.

i would scare the living piss out of all of the apathetic, holier than thou, sin-loving, self-worshipping mother f'ers. i would prove my power and dominion by destroying this awful world of suffering and death, and create a new one of love, communion, and perfection.

By love you mean sex? That is what we men think about all day! Then you have to provide special power to men so that they can have multiple orgasms too. Please...pretty please...

sex does not equal love, but is an expression of love. and with that said, i don't see the problem with multiple orgasms for men. i declare in the kingdom equal sex rights for men!

i can envision a lot of women reading this and saying, "multiple?!? i'd be happy with one every once in a while!"

If for instance an ancient man saw a river turn red, he wouldn't diagnose it as pfiesteria he'd say some powerful force turned it to blood.

it's not wrong to say that a powerful force turned it into blood, it's just a less accurate description. scientists call magnetism a powerful force, but maybe future humans have a more accurate description.

it's not very accurate to say that i live in the universe... that i live in life (it would be more correct to say that i live on earth, in sweden, etc.) but it's still correct. the same way it's also correct to say that god rules everything. god is life (John 11:25), and life is all there is, so it rules and explains everything.

btw, how do you explain that the river of nile turned into blood right after aron put His rod in the river?

That many people believe something is not an indication that it is true, or is an inbuilt knowledge of the existence of such a thing.

but it could be. for example, most people are attracted by the opposite sex... that indicates that it's programmed in us. a weird example maybe, but if feelings can be programmed, knowledge could be too.

By love you mean sex? That is what we men think about all day!

men and women want to unite with each other only because they are not united with god. but it's not a bad thing to leave from home (eden) sometimes.

Sorry, I can't resist. God does not exist. He is. Exist is from ex meaning from, or out of. We exist, He does not because He is neither from nor out of anything.

Intresing.

If god exists then the laws of the universe are what he makes them, so why not?

Why would he wish to change the laws of the universe. Wouldn't that be indecisive?

The purpose of laws is so that they can be followed. Would that not imply that he was incapable of working within those laws? Would that not imply he was incapable of the foresight necessary to prepare for such a happenstance.

Humans are obsessed with shortcuts. The fast method because we can't antcipate events so we cheat and break the rule. Why would God, of infinite power, and omniscient would need to restructure the laws of the universe if he truely was omniscient?

it's not wrong to say that a powerful force turned it into blood,

What would be the function of massive Hemoglobin in the river water?

should read ...powerful and stupid force....:D

the same way it's also correct to say that god rules everything.

Which one?

Needless to say though, it's not at all "correct" unless you can establish it as being so, (i.e show a god exists).

btw, how do you explain that the river of nile turned into blood right after aron put His rod in the river?

Imaginative story telling. If we go purely from a biblical perspective then it needs to be mentioned that the egyptian magicians managed to accomplish the very same feat. Now; the fish died, the water stank and was 'blood'. If, as is likely, this was a case of pfiesteria, who was going to be able to diagnose it? So then the next 'god plague' was the frogs. Where are all the frogs going to go when the water is stinky and full of dead fish? So then the Egyptians put all these dead frogs into a big pile. What do you think the next 'god plagues' would be? Oh why, it's mosquitoes and flies. All these disease carrying mosquitoes and flies would surely cause a problem, (death of livestock perhaps, ergo the next plague).

The thing is, the very same twits that claim the plagues were god done as opposed to having natural reason do not do the same with the bubonic plague etc. Nope, they actually apply some common sense and realise these things do not happen because some sky fairy is angry, they happen because of germs and disease - but then accept the word of ancient people with no medical knowledge whatsoever for no good reason whatsoever. Twits.

Where are all the frogs going to go when the water is stinky and full of dead fish? So then the Egyptians put all these dead frogs into a big pile. What do you think the next 'god plagues' would be? Oh why, it's mosquitoes and flies.

There is no difference between natural disasters and God because God causes all natural disasters because he controls everything.

The pharaoh believed that they were natural disasters, not works of God... but the first plague that possibly caused all the other plagues didn't start naturally. God said to Moses who said to Aron to turn the river into blood with the magic wand (http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/gods/explore/main.html).

'Magic wand' might sound silly, but imagine that 'magic' was just some kind of ancient advanced technology.

There is no difference between natural disasters and God because God causes all natural disasters because he controls everything.

The pharaoh believed that they were natural disasters, not works of God... but the first plague that possibly caused all the other plagues didn't start naturally. God said to Moses who said to Aron to turn the river into blood with the magic wand (http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/gods/explore/main.html).

Wouldn't necessarily agree with this. What if God simply put systems in place and allowed the programmes to run so to speak with I might emphasize free will, including weather systems.

There is no difference between natural disasters and God because God causes all natural disasters because he controls everything.


If what you're saying was of any value I still do not see how this god would be an earthquake because he causes that earthquake. However, only an imbecile would assert that natural disasters are the actions of powerful sky beings.

but the first plague that possibly caused all the other plagues didn't start naturally. God said to Moses who said to Aron to turn the river into blood with the magic wand.


Clearly imbecilic. The only reason this kind of idiocy doesn't get you tucked away in a padded room somewhere is because ultimately such idiocy is not harmful to anyone else. The problem is, the people believing in such idiocy do not recognise it for the idiocy it is merely because they're not tucked away in a padded room somewhere.

'Magic wand' might sound silly, but imagine that 'magic' was just some kind of ancient advanced technology.

You're right, it does sound silly. As for advanced ancient technology.. I await the finding of it.

Which one?

Needless to say though, it's not at all "correct" unless you can establish it as being so, (i.e show a god exists).

It can not be had both ways. There are two possibilities: either the universe created itself, ex nihilo, or it was created by intelligence. Materialists, with a driving desire to rule God out of the conversation, postulate, with no hope of demonstration, that chance is the ruler of all things. The scientific literature is rife with just-so stories about how the universe might have come about. That these stories are not demonstrable makes no difference as long as they can be clung to as an alternative to dealing with an omnipotent Creator.

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,..."

"And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind,"

Materialism is a belief system that allows the believer to comfort himself that he is all there is. Created by chance out of nothing, with no purpose, answerable to nothing, and destined for personal extinction having learned nothing.

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

Simple. No need to show them anything. Each and every person form birth would inherently know who I am and what message I send to them. This would remained unchanged from the moment mankind was created.

It can not be had both ways. There are two possibilities: either the universe created itself, ex nihilo, or it was created by intelligence.

Or it has existed forever in some form. There are more than two possibilities here.

That's the thing with theists though, they assert that "everything must have a creator". So what created the creator? "Oh, well he doesn't have a creator" and yet cannot fathom that the universe itself need not have 'been created'.

Materialists, with a driving desire to rule God out of the conversation, postulate, with no hope of demonstration, that chance is the ruler of all things.

This is typical theist nonsense. Nobody I know has a "desire to rule [a] god out of the conversation", it's simply that there is nothing to suggest that a god need fit into it. If you have some evidence of course, most of us are more than happy to take note.

The scientific literature is rife with just-so stories about how the universe might have come about.

Typical theist bullshit. It's amusing to me how scientific literature comes down to little more than made up stories while completely nonsensical ancient texts are considered the final truth of the matter. It's pathetic.

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,..."

"The pursuit of knowledge, unless sanctified by a holy mission, is a pagan act and therefore vile." St Bernard of Clairvaux

Not a lot seems to have changed. Those on one side seeking knowledge, those on the other claiming they already know it all, look it's written in this book it must be true. Sorry, who is the wise that became the fool?

"And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind,"

"What if we picked the wrong religion? Every week, we're just making god madder and madder!" Homer Simpson

What god exactly are we talking about here? There's millions of them, oh but wait.. you're wise aren't you? You already know exactly which god is the genuine article, you know exactly what that genuine god wants you do to, you know exactly what that god does and when he did it.

It comes down to the theists inability to accept that there isn't an answer for everything just yet. They whine continually at science because it doesn't know everything and so settle on some ancient text and consider it the answer to everything. Oh it's so stupid.

Materialism is a belief system that allows the believer to comfort himself that he is all there is.

You're talking bollocks. It's not an issue of comfort, it's an issue of what is and is not evidenced.

Created by chance out of nothing, with no purpose, answerable to nothing, and destined for personal extinction having learned nothing.

Your issue seems to be one of common emotional problems.

1) No purpose.

It strikes an emotional chord with the theist which is why he cannot accept it. He feels that he must be important, must be chosen, must be loved and so on.

2) Answerable to nothing.

You're talking bollocks. We're all answerable. Answerable to parents, teachers, employers, the law, the wife etc etc. I know of nobody that has an issue with being answerable to someone else. Do you have any evidence to support the claim to the existence of your specific chosen god? No, you don't. I do not have a belief in that specific god of yours, or anyone elses, or leprechauns precisely because of that. It has nothing whatsoever to being answerable.

3) Personal Extinction.

Get over it. I understand it's scary, sure I don't want to die either. I'm sure even slugs and pubic lice don't want to die but that is the way it is. That you need to envision life part II in a golden city in the clouds is clearly because of emotional feelings and fears. Will there be pubic lice in this heaven of yours? If not, do you espouse that pubic lice just cease to exist? If so what separates you? Ah yes, you're special aww.

4) Created by chance.

One can say it was chance. Chance that your parents met each other, fell in love and chance that the specific sperm that is you actually wriggled the fastest. You know there's something like a 39 followed by 57 zeros to 1 chance that "you" would exist, but here you are.

This god of yours did not pick out the specific sperm that is you and give it a push up the ass. This god of yours did not magically move your mother into the path of your father. This god of yours did not magically cause chemical reactions that caused your father to love your mother and this god of yours did not magically ensure that you were not one of the unlucky 1 in 3 first time pregnancies that ends in miscarriage.

There's no magic to be found here.

Nice ad hominem. I particularly like the vulgarities peppered throughout your response to my opinion. I think you know very well what my point is, yet choose to deflect it with vitriol.

Nice ad hominem.

Where? I did not insult you once.

But yes, I do speak in a frank manner. I suppose some people can be overly sensitive which is fine, but I do not see how you can summise that I am deflecting from your points when I looked at each of them individually and explained how they were wrong.

1) You asserted that there were two possibilities. I explained how this was incorrect.

2) You claimed that materialists have a "desire" to rule god out. I explained how this was incorrect.

3) You then claimed that materialism is a belief that makes people comforted by thinking they're alone, a nobody, and are going to die and cease to exist. I explained how this was incorrect, indeed it's the complete opposite - theists have gods for comfort so they don't think they're going to cease to exist etc.

Did you have any form of rebuttal to that?

If what you're saying was of any value I still do not see how this god would be an earthquake because he causes that earthquake.

according to hindus, god is in everything so he is everything. the bible also says that god is omnipresent. god is like the force in star wars.

according to hindus, god is in everything so he is everything. the bible also says that god is omnipresent. god is like the force in star wars.

I think that is a very good analogy, if God existed..

according to hindus, god is in everything so he is everything. the bible also says that god is omnipresent. god is like the force in star wars.

So... if the hindus said it, it's gotta be true? Still, I suppose we'll all just have to be careful while walking through the park not to step on the god that some dog left behind.

I think that is a very good analogy, if God existed..

god is the self (life[force], consciousness) because it's in everything. i think therefore i am "i am" (god).

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

The easiest way is the same as any other field of knowledge that is advanced and vouches for credibility - establish the qualification of persons who know it.

Your question could just as easily be "If you were a physicist how would you convince people that electrons exist?"

Unless there is some agreeable consensus on what it means to be a "physicist" (or how their claims can be verified) there is no scope for even beginning on such claims.

Unfortunately this lack of foundational knowledge is quite prominent, so a lot of what goes down in the name of discussing god's existence is incredibly speculative ...... with perhaps more a focus on sexy philosophical sound bites than any substantial knowledge.

The easiest way is the same as any other field of knowledge that is advanced and vouches for credibility - establish the qualification of persons who know it.

Your question could just as easily be "If you were a physicist how would you convince people that electrons exist?"
:bugeye:
You seem to be confusing the original question with "If you were a theologian, how would you convince people that God exists?"

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

I wouldn't. They'd be just one petridish among others. Sure they have free will, but only within the constraints of the medium and conditions I provide.

I never communicate with bacteria or viruses either or care if they know I exist.

I never communicate with bacteria or viruses either or care if they know I exist.

Is that how you equate mankind? tsk tsk

Is that how you equate mankind? tsk tsk

Dust to dust. :shrug:

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

In addition to free will, I had provided human with instinct to do quest, along with everything they need to endeavor it, up to certain limit. Until they realize their limit, facing cul de sac with only one stance: I am the ultimate target of that quest.

No, there is no need to carry out any acts of convincing anything to anyone anymore.

If you were God and you created humans (humans have free will), how would you convince them that you exist?

I would create women.

:bugeye:
You seem to be confusing the original question with "If you were a theologian, how would you convince people that God exists?"
not really on two counts

1 - Its not clear how theologians have any great insight into the nature of god (generally theologians prefer to keep the nature of god ambiguous and pliable since it allows them to drive home their personal speculations)

2 - and even if one was prepared to accept theologians as the principle bearers of knowledge of god, being a theologian would have absolutely no significance unless issues I raised had been dealt with.

Where? I did not insult you once.

In as much as I am obviously a theist to refer to a statement of mine as "typical theist Bull...." is a direct and intended insult. I was, however, not offended. I just took note of it.

But yes, I do speak in a frank manner. I suppose some people can be overly sensitive which is fine, but I do not see how you can summise that I am deflecting from your points when I looked at each of them individually and explained how they were wrong.

You did not "explain why they were wrong". You said what you think, which differs from what I think, and with that I have not the least problem.

1) You asserted that there were two possibilities. I explained how this was incorrect.

I am well aware that there remain a few people who propose the "always existed" idea. I left it out because it has vanishingly small support in the scientific community.

2) You claimed that materialists have a "desire" to rule god out. I explained how this was incorrect.

No. You didn't. You merely reject the idea. You said you see no reason to consider a God, and I am sure you don't. Perhaps you will present a workable mechanism by which everything appeared out of nothing. Until then you might want to keep your options open. And you are no doubt aware that such evolutionary notables as Dawkins freely state that no matter what the evidence to the contrary the notion of God can not be permitted. So I am quite accurate when I say that a desire to rule God out of the conversation is a prime desire, whether conscious or unconscious, of materialists.

3) You then claimed that materialism is a belief that makes people comforted by thinking they're alone, a nobody, and are going to die and cease to exist. I explained how this was incorrect, indeed it's the complete opposite - theists have gods for comfort so they don't think they're going to cease to exist etc.

Did you have any form of rebuttal to that?

No insult intended, but your response to my statement is facile. For example, when I said answerable to nothing it was obvious that I wasn't speaking of the mundane affairs of everyday life. As I said: facile. Your exposition of 'chance' is equally void of content.

I do not expect you, or anyone else, to instantly accept my words. What I came here hoping to find was a few people willing to engage in intelligent discussion. I have not, and never would, respond flippantly or dismissively to contrary views.

In as much as I am obviously a theist to refer to a statement of mine as "typical theist Bull...." is a direct and intended insult. I was, however, not offended. I just took note of it.

It is quite typically mentioned by theists and is bullshit. It's not an insult to you, it's the reality of the situation. Of course if you would care to take the time to do a study of these "materialists" and ask them if they "want to rule [a] god out of the conversation" as opposed to just don't believe in one so therefore do not include it then you would undoubtedly come to the same conclusion.

But then I do wonder; how many "materialists" have you asked or consulted on the matter? Did you get your data from them or from theists? Was it something you heard at a local church meeting? Where did you get this rather bizarre information?

[edit] P.S And which god exactly is it they have this overwhelming desire to leave out of conversations? Thor perhaps? Odin, Apollo, Abellio? Which one?

You did not "explain why they were wrong". You said what you think, which differs from what I think, and with that I have not the least problem.

I see. So this then would be a case of what an atheist thinks about being an atheist vs what a theist thinks an atheist is.. Hmmm, I wonder who would be the more informed.

I am well aware that there remain a few people who propose the "always existed" idea. I left it out because it has vanishingly small support in the scientific community.

Source please. It would seem we are hanging around in different parts of that scientific community. Is this another snippet you got from church? But, suffice it to say, "there are only two possibilities" has no support in the scientific community, and neither does one of those two being a god have any support in the scientific community, so why oh why didn't you leave that out as well?

You said you see no reason to consider a God, and I am sure you don't. Perhaps you will present a workable mechanism by which everything appeared out of nothing.

Was done on my last post to you. Oh wait, it apparently has little support in the scientific community and thus should be left out. Guess we're right up shit street if we want to mention omnipotent space fairies.

And you are no doubt aware that such evolutionary notables as Dawkins freely state that no matter what the evidence to the contrary the notion of God can not be permitted. So I am quite accurate when I say that a desire to rule God out of the conversation is a prime desire, whether conscious or unconscious, of materialists.

Well I haven't watched or read everything he has been a part of so if you perhaps have a link to a relevant quote or vid then please do. In the meantime I think you should take into consideration that the words of one specific person do not in any way afford you the right to lay it on everyone or to amusingly claim that your statement is "accurate" on the basis of that one individual.

"I know a German nazi so all Germans are nazis"

Surely you can see where you're going wrong?

For example, when I said answerable to nothing it was obvious that I wasn't speaking of the mundane affairs of everyday life.

I'm sorry, but "answerable to nothing", would include those things that you personally consider 'mundane'. We are answerable, all of us.

You claimed that materialists have a 'belief system' which serves to comfort them against the idea that they are answerable to some specific higher power. There are most likely hundreds of thousands of higher powers you don't believe in. Your own claim would mean that you don't believe in these hundreds of thousands of gods for comfort [against the idea that you are answerable to them]. It is stupid at best.

Regards

As you wish. I will continue to look around here for a mind that is not closed.

Ohh, that's how it works.. :bugeye:

As you wish. I will continue to look around here for a mind that is not closed.

Hi Old Man,
I know that SnakeLord is abrasive, but I don't think he intends to be insulting. He is attacking your views quite aggresively, but he is not attacking you personally.

If you want to keep your promise:
I have not, and never would, respond flippantly or dismissively to contrary views.
Then perhaps you should reconsider your dismissive response?