As others have picked up on, the real question here is if God exists, why doesn't he make his presence unquestionable. It would be trivially easy for such a being.

As I asked earlier, what is God's goal? Is it simply that he wants people to know that he exists? This is what you are arguing against and yet you have not provided any foundation for this assumption.

I agree, but I think the questions about why he doesn't write a message on the moon just come off as silly, and really, they are.

Why can't we just get to the point and say, if God exists, why doesn't he give us better evidence of his existence? Or, more specifically, if God exists, and God requires belief in him to have a sweet afterlife, then why doesn't he give us better evidence of his existence?

My problem with this, and as I've said it before, that whatever god's end game is, he could have achieved it with a much more peaceful, happy world. If its a lesson he wants us to learn, why not just have us be born already instinctively knowing the lesson? The whole deal with free will is a convenient explanation, but it doesn't ring true except to describe why things are often so ****ty here on earth. It doesn't mesh with a loving god (although I agree there is no reason to believe if God exists that he's also all-loving).

The mythology itself argues against the free will angle, since Satan apparently has no doubt about God's existence and disobeyed him. Neither did Adam and Eve.

All of this is especially true if the punishment for not following God's commands is eternal damnation (less so if its just obliteration)

Sure...think about the parlay that is required. Suppose 1 in 1000 planets have large moons(like ours...roughly 25% the size of earth). Further suppose only 1 in a 1000 planets develope intelligent life. Lastly suppose that it is a 1 and 1000 chance that the intelligent life which developes on that planet just happens to develope at exactly the same time when the moon of that planet is at a distance so it appears to that intelligent life to be the same size as the their sun(orbital distances of moons change over time...A couple of million years from now there will not be total eclipses on earth).

1000X1000X1000=1 billion.

Change it to 1 in 10000 shots and its a 1 trillion.
Change it to 1 in a million shots and its 1 quintillion (1 billion billion)

Now if you looked up at the moon and saw the face of Christ carved into it, would you really think God did the carving or space aliens? A total eclipse might just be a less ambigious sign than some carved face.

why did you ignore the verse from 2 Peter that i put up.

Here this picture that is claimed to have confirmed General Relativity.

I'm sure some is going to bitch that the moon is waaay to white.

He gives plenty of proof of existence to those who turn to him and listen.

This is something that you have to show, not just assert. And I have never once seen a good reason to believe this to be true.

What if there is something different in learning a lesson then knowing a lesson? Is it not possible that there is a real difference? I have said before that all of this is wrapped up in the fact that God wants to be in a true love relationship and that this is not possible without choice. Love cannot be without choice with a contingent being. Love must involve choice. If you can prove to me otherwise then I will be forced to completely rebuild my worldview, but until then I must continue to hold it.

I just don't agree at all. How does it not ring true?

How does it not mesh with an all loving God? As far as I can tell it can be no other way with an all loving God. I don't see how God could be all loving without us having free will.

Hadn't got to is, sorry. I agree that his want is that none should parish. But then you have to ask what it would mean to not parish. In other words, what path must one take to not parish?

If your answer is simply to come to a realization that God exists, then the question in the OP would be legit.

But if on the other hand the answer would be to enter into a love relationship with your creator. Then it is not so clear that just knowing God exists would ensure that, or would even be better than the way the world is set up now (at least according to christian theology)

Any difference in learning a lesson or just being born knowing it is trivial, unimportant. The reason is due to the pain and suffering caused by those who don't do a good job learning the lesson.

You talk about true love. I love my children with all my heart. My primary concern is their wellbeing. It is far less important to me whether they love me back. At this stage they do, unconditionally (they're under 4) and I truly hope they always will. But my job in loving them is to spare them pain. Now, that may mean I have to administer some tough love. I may need to cause them short term pain at times for long term gain. I must do this because the world is the way it is. However, for a god, this problem doesn't exist. If he truly loved us he wouldn't care about being loved back. Do you really disagree? I don't think you've ever said you have kids, but try and imagine that kind of relationship. I think you'll see what I'm getting at.

If God wants the choice to be free, he could have developed any number of systems that achieve that goal without suffering. He could have had everyone go straight to heaven, stay there for a couple centuries or so, then give them a choice: stay, or have your consciousness obliterated. There is absolutely no need for this kind of audition process - if God was really all-loving.


I think I answered this above.

How about the angels? They didn't have to go thru an audition process. How did that reportedly work out for God? Most of them rebelled. Perhaps God choose the audition process simply because it maximizes the number of free willed beings which are saved.

Now you could counter claim that surely God could have done this or that and it would have been better.....but you're not really in a position to know. Its really pointless to even argue this stuff.

There are people who saw the miracles Jesus Chirst did first hand and still did not believe.

The old testastament Jews were constantly not believing God even though they saw all the things first hand that He did for them.

You comment does not stand a chance......

Again you are saying one thing, all the while thinking another. Your a hypocrite.

There is no gaurantee you will believe just because you see something.

Although that would be easier I guess, maybe? Maybe not, like I said many have seen and have not believed.

God is looking for those who have a heart big enough to believe when they have not phyically seen. Those are the people who can walk with God.

God is spirit, His word is written on plain paper but its spiritual.

In order to walk with God you have to be able to believe words, then act believingly upon them in order to see the promises and miracles of God to come to pass....

Your handicapped because you can ONLY go by your phyiscal senses until you are born again. Then you have a whole NEW avenue to learn from, to beleive, the spiritual realm.....

One of the Apostles saw Jesus Christ AFTER his ressurection from the dead, I said Apostles and he said that he WOULD NOT BELIEVE unless he could stick his hand inside the wounds of Jesus Christ.....

You would think that this man who spent all that time with J.C. would easily beleive when he saw J.C. in his ressurected body wouldn't you?

Even the best of the believers do not believe at times. So there is no way your arguement holds ANY WATER.........

Why isn't this something you have to show?

good post pletho

No ones a perfect designer, he should of gave the instant free will creation thing another go.

Says who? Why is it that part of learning is not the process itself?

Agreed.

Agreed.

I assume by pain you are talking about overall pain, correct?

Once again, I totally agree.

agreed.

Disagree. You do not know this. Unless you believe that God is not constrained by his own logic, then yes you may assert anything you like. But logically I don't think this God can exist.

This is the heart of the problem. You are looking at the situation as if God wants us to love him, and when we don't he throws a hissy fit and tosses us into hell. Is it not possible that the only way for the relationship to work is if we love him? Is it possible for you to have a love relationship with your wife if she does not love you? You may be willing to be around her, but if you wife hates you, do you think that she will stay around you? Or want to be around you? How long do you think you can keep up a proper relationship with your wife this way?

I have 2. My son is 7 and my daughter is 3 and I am planning on having another one soon. The are the greatest things in my life and I would do literally anything for them

I don't agree that there is any other way than to have the world we live in a real possibility.

So what, you get one chance and your done? And while you are there you are given no choice? No free will? Is it possible to have a choice when you are created without the ability to make choices? Are we even living really without free will? What would be different then us just being a computer program?

And if anything this world would be an audition for God. He has already made his choice, now we are deciding whether or not we want him.

Thank you for the attempt to explain your irrational beliefs. You are brave, at least.

Of course your beliefs are based on the incorrect assumption that the miracles actually occurred.

It is also possible, and far more likely, that the miracles did not occur. That is why there were so many non-believers. They had to rely on other methods, such as the threat of excruciating torture after death, and eventually infant baptism.

• Do you believe in the miracle of the floating axe head?
  
• How about the more contemporary miracles that are claimed by many denominations. The transformation or transubstantiation of "bread" and wine into the body and blood of Jesus? Do you believe in that miracle?
  
• Do you drink from the common cup, or a private shot glass? How brave are you?

Yes, overall pain. The reason the argument doesn't apply to God is that I need to use tough love on my kids to teach them how to survive this world. If they could learn the lessons and survive without pain I would do that. God, however, presumably has many more options. He does not need to create a harsh world, then use tough love. He could have a nice world and have us be born with the lessons already known.

But the wife analogy is the wrong one. The child analogy is much better. Also, as a parent I try to make sure the punishment fits the crime: if hell is a place of eternal torment (I know there is some disagreement there, but that's still the majority position) then the punishment does not fit the crime. Also, I administer punishment to my children in order to alter future behaviour. God's punishment appears to be eternal. It is punitive only, with no rehabilitative qualities. At least according to current mythology.

If there is such a thing as eternal anything: really, we humans are incapable of truly comprehending that. So allocating us in the afterlife to either place based on our earthly audition is a crazy way to have us make decisions. It's truly cruel, especially given the uncertainty that God presumably allows.

too bad God apparently doesn't feel the same way towards them, or you, or any of us.

First, you are making the assumption that free will is the ultimate value, I don't think that's a given. Secondly, these angels had free will, right? Even if we agree free will is really important, I'm not talking about eliminating it entirely: just limiting it somewhat (our free will is already quite limited, I'm just talking about a few additions).

In any event, is there free will in heaven anyway? In hell?

And if anything this world would be an audition for God. He has already made his choice, now we are deciding whether or not we want him.[/quote]

The floating axehead? I don't think you understand. The axe head was found by inspiration, by revelation and by inspired action. I have done and seen things like this many times.

The contempory miracles are lies that you mentioned, well, maybe they did happen, but they are not from the true God.... you have to understand some things which I cant really spend the time explaining to you, mainly because you do not really want to believe. You seem to want to argue and debate.

I do not drink from a cup at all. I am not Catholic. I do and have participated in communion and everyone drinks from the same cup, what would I have to be afraid of?

Honestly I understand your disbelief more than you realize and I can see why you do not believe.

But if deep down in your heart you really want to know God will teach you, when you change your motivations. As long as you are just attacking your really not going to learn if you really want to know.

Even after all the goofy posts you have posted I would still consider teaching you if you ever wanted to learn but you would need to be receptive and let me teach and you learn........

Glad you enjoyed it.......I did not use spell check, sorry for the spelling errors.

When I start to answer a question I just start typing, usually fast and hit the wrong keys alot....

Both the orbits of the Earth and the moon are elliptical, not perfectly circular. The distance between the sun and the Earth ranges from 152,000,000 km to 147,000,000 km, depending on the time of year. The distance between the Earth and the moon ranges from 385,000 km to 364,000 km, depending on the time of day.

Knowing that the diameter of the moon is 1736 km and the diameter of the sun is 696,000 km, we can determine that the relative size of the sun in the sky ranges from 1.05 to 0.96 times the size of the moon. So, no, they are not the "exact same" relative size.

While it is interesting that these objects both have similar relative sizes in the sky, suggesting that this "peculiarity" suggests the existence of your god of choice is obviously fallacious.

I agree.......I dont think that what Stu says proves there is a God....

But the fact that the whole universe exist and is so vast and detailed, points towards there being an intelligence behind it, and NO that intelligence did not graduate from M.I.T.

You can come up with any name you want for that intelligence, I know the name of the one who created it....

Elohim is His name, meaning the creator. He has many other descriptive names, such as Jehovah, El Shaddai, Jehovah-Rapha, and many other names.

The name that best displays His true nature and heart is the name he has given to the Chistians to call Him, which is "Father".

well i agree that christianity is more than just believing god exists. but his existence is a starting point. its necessary.

if i thought there was a god who wanted to have a personal relationship with me, i would be doing that!

theists seem to think nonbelievers are rejecting god. we arent. we dont believe he exists.

If you do not believe that God exist, then why do you spend so much time talking about something you do not believe in....