Give me proof that God is real

I looked at a verse (Matthew 28:7), and it says that Jesus rose from the dead (direct translation from Hebrew). That's not the same as resuscitation.Zagrius

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="luke1889"]That's right...Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and all the rest...they're all on the same footing so far as credibility is concerned. Like it or lump it, that the cold, harsh reality of the situation.SolidSnake35

I agree. And I love the fact that my post you qouted was conveniently ignored.

Even though I am atheist, I am still looking at it objectively. Most notably, from the mechanisms used to establish all of the known universal truths and the PROPER was to prove something.

I can't believe they do not understand that, to establish truth, you must give evidence for the positive, not fail to give evidence for the negative.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

LJS9502_basic

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="jointed"]

The scientific method can't be applied to religion...

jointed

And because it is science -- and mathematics -- which establishes all of the universal truths we currently have, religion can not be said to be a truth. At all.

Ding ding ding...cake is yours.

Heh, at least today, I get my daily overdose of frustration AND some cake.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

SolidSnake35

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

Au contraire.....my brain exists...yes. That doesn't prove to me the rest of you exist however.

[QUOTE="Diablo112688"]I think it's foolish to have faith. I understand fully though. To each his own. JC346

Foolish is that you dont even probably know what you are bilieving in.

[QUOTE="Zagrius"]I looked at a verse (Matthew 28:7), and it says that Jesus rose from the dead (direct translation from Hebrew). That's not the same as resuscitation.notconspiracy

Well, then how could it have the Hebrew word for resuscitation anywhere in it? Man, I wasted my procrastination time for no reason.

Au contraire.....my brain exists...yes. That doesn't prove to me the rest of you exist however.LJS9502_basic

to the topic creator there already have been tons of threads about this your not orginal all you've done is stir people up :|

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Au contraire.....my brain exists...yes. That doesn't prove to me the rest of you exist however.SolidSnake35

Or we could only exist in your brain.....making you a closet Cure fan.:P

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Au contraire.....my brain exists...yes. That doesn't prove to me the rest of you exist however.LJS9502_basic

Or we could only exist in your brain.....making you a closet Cure fan.:P

The empty tomb is but one of many converging lines of evidence that suggest a resurrectionnotconspiracy

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose there was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not. Damn grave robber more like.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

are we to throw out all of ancient history just because people can write stories?lnotconspiracy

I have been through this point before. There is more than just written evidence for a lot of ancient history. The pyramids? Check. Coliseums? Check. Aztec buildings? Check. Archeological finds? Check.

Religion? Nothing. Just ACCOUNTS.

what would you count as evidence?notconspiracy

Something subject that can be subjected to scientific scrutiny, so as to provide empirical evidence. Truths operate on a "beyond reasonable doubt" basis. There are many religions, none are provable because they do not provide the necessary evidence. Thus, not truths here.

Hmm. So I'd be me, and everything I am, but also everyone else too. You'd be representations of my thoughts and secret desires. It makes me wonder what the point would be though. I'd live... dream... life normally, but would I ever wake? Would there be other people, or am I everything? >_>SolidSnake35

And point of fact....could you ever know if they were real...or still figments of your imagination?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Au contraire.....my brain exists...yes. That doesn't prove to me the rest of you exist however.SolidSnake35

Or we could only exist in your brain.....making you a closet Cure fan.:P

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"] Hmm. So I'd be me, and everything I am, but also everyone else too. You'd be representations of my thoughts and secret desires. It makes me wonder what the point would be though. I'd live... dream... life normally, but would I ever wake? Would there be other people, or am I everything? >_>LJS9502_basic

And point of fact....could you ever know if they were real...or still figments of your imagination?

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

LJS9502_basic

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

How about you reason with actual facts and proofs and not with some bizarre, almost riddle-like speculation?

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

Its Easter, can't we just lay off the Religion debates for ONE day and respect each other's beliefs for a change.

If the Germans, French and Scottish can stop fighting for a day to observe a holiday, certainly we can too.

even if you woke up, what you experienced afterwards might still be a dream. Mr_sprinkles

[QUOTE="lnotconspiracy"]are we to throw out all of ancient history just because people can write stories?luke1889

I have been through this point before. There is more than just written evidence for a lot of ancient history. The pyramids? Check. Coliseums? Check. Aztec buildings? Check. Archeological finds? Check.

Religion? Nothing. Just ACCOUNTS.

...you are aware that a vast amount of history is based upon these "accounts"? It's not solely physical evidence like the Pyramids or dug-up arrowheads.

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose tthere was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

luke1889

And yet eyewitness accounts are considered evidence in our court system. When do you decide that eyewitness accounts are inaccurate? When they disagree with your opinion?

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

Its Easter, can't we just lay off the Religion debates for ONE day and respect each other's beliefs for a change.

If the Germans, French and Scottish can stop fighting for a day to observe a holiday, certainly we can too.

InterpolWilco

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

luke1889

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

How about you reason with actual facts and proofs and not with some bizarre, almost riddle-like speculation?

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

Its Easter, can't we just lay off the Religion debates for ONE day and respect each other's beliefs for a change.

If the Germans, French and Scottish can stop fighting for a day to observe a holiday, certainly we can too.

InterpolWilco

We...don't have a football.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose tthere was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

LJS9502_basic

And yet eyewitness accounts are considered evidence in our court system. When do you decide that eyewitness accounts are inaccurate? When they disagree with your opinion?

Well, since most of the gospels were written from 65-100 AD we can safely assume that all the primary eye witnesses (the ones that actually saw all the events) were dead

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

LJS9502_basic

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

How about you reason with actual facts and proofs and not with some bizarre, almost riddle-like speculation?

Life is not a dream. Dreams are dreams. Thus, when we are not dreaming, we are in reality...reality as defined by us. When in reality, our own existaece is proof of our own existence.

Tell me, are you always this awkward? I'm beginning to think you are.

[QUOTE="InterpolWilco"]

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

Its Easter, can't we just lay off the Religion debates for ONE day and respect each other's beliefs for a change.

If the Germans, French and Scottish can stop fighting for a day to observe a holiday, certainly we can too.

luke1889

We...don't have a football.

Well, since most of the gospels were written from 65-100 AD we can safely assume that all the primary eye witnesses (the ones that actually saw all the events) were dead

skelebull3000

That doesn't change eyewitness testimony. If that is the case....everyone who existed in history is dead. Therefore, events in history/people in history didn't exist.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

What an original thread......Prove you exist.;)

luke1889

I am sorry. I do not understand this in the slightest. What kind of zany rebuttal is this? Our own existence is evidence of our own existence. :|

I cannot fathom your thinking behind this.

There is no proof you exist. I could be imaging life in my own mind. The brain is a powerful organ. When we dream...they seem real. Perhaps life is one continuos dream. There is no proof you exist. Sorry.

How about you reason with actual facts and proofs and not with some bizarre, almost riddle-like speculation?

I just found proof that luke doesn't have a sense of humor

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose tthere was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

LJS9502_basic

And yet eyewitness accounts are considered evidence in our court system. When do you decide that eyewitness accounts are inaccurate? When they disagree with your opinion?

"he jumped out from behind a bush and tried to strangle me" believable.

"he jumped out from a bush, then shapeshifted into a giant snake and wrapped himself around my neck, squeezing the life out of me" not believable.

Life is not a dream. Dreams are dreams. Thus, when we are not dreaming, we are in reality...reality as defined by us. When in reality, our own existaece is proof of our own existence.

Tell me, are you always this awkward? I'm beginning to think you are.

luke1889

In other words....you can't prove it. Exactly. Oh...and just because you can't wrap your head around a philosophy doesn't mean I'm awkward. It means you can't think outside the box.:)

when the accounts do not agree with other evidence, or when they are no longer giving accounts of the mundane.

"he jumped out from behind a bush and tried to strangle me" believable.

"he jumped out from a bush, then shapeshifted into a giant snake and wrapped himself around my neck, squeezing the life out of me" not believable.

Mr_sprinkles

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

LJS9502_basic

The Qu'ran says he wasn't killed. :D

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"] when the accounts do not agree with other evidence, or when they are no longer giving accounts of the mundane.

"he jumped out from behind a bush and tried to strangle me" believable.

"he jumped out from a bush, then shapeshifted into a giant snake and wrapped himself around my neck, squeezing the life out of me" not believable.

LJS9502_basic

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

[QUOTE="skelebull3000"]

Well, since most of the gospels were written from 65-100 AD we can safely assume that all the primary eye witnesses (the ones that actually saw all the events) were dead

LJS9502_basic

That doesn't change eyewitness testimony. If that is the case....everyone who existed in history is dead. Therefore, events in history/people in history didn't exist.

The difference being that the testimonies are written when the eyewitness is alive and documented by the historians at the time, not after the death of the witness. The writers of the gospels couldn't have ever possibly spoken directly to any of the witnesses which means that large parts of the stories could've been changed through the passage of time. Until something isn't written down and just travels by word of tongue it constantly changes. Kind of like rumours at school. That makes it less hsitorically accurate.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose tthere was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

LJS9502_basic

And yet eyewitness accounts are considered evidence in our court system. When do you decide that eyewitness accounts are inaccurate? When they disagree with your opinion?

That is too general a comparison. If you're going to draw parallels, at least make sure they are just ones.

In a court of law, eye witness accounts are not based on the supernatural. If you were to stand up in court and say...

"Your Honour, it is submitted by My Learned Friend, for the Counsel for the Appellant, that the accused is not guilty of murder...for a ghost did it."

...you would be laughed out of court.

My point is that eyewitness accounts given in court have the potential of being verified. Similar religious accounts of the supernatural do not provide this luxury.

Hence why eyewitness accounts of the supernatural count for nothing.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

Zagrius

The Qu'ran says he wasn't killed. :D

But no witnesses.....

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="lnotconspiracy"]are we to throw out all of ancient history just because people can write stories?ElZilcho90

I have been through this point before. There is more than just written evidence for a lot of ancient history. The pyramids? Check. Coliseums? Check. Aztec buildings? Check. Archeological finds? Check.

Religion? Nothing. Just ACCOUNTS.

...you are aware that a vast amount of history is based upon these "accounts"? It's not solely physical evidence like the Pyramids or dug-up arrowheads.

When you have actual physical evidence like the Pyramids, written accounts based on these have a shade more credibility.

But religious scriptures support no physical evidence. This is where my issue lies. Well, that and it fails to live up-to the standard of proper evidence as prescribed by the entire scientific community.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

Life is not a dream. Dreams are dreams. Thus, when we are not dreaming, we are in reality...reality as defined by us. When in reality, our own existaece is proof of our own existence.

Tell me, are you always this awkward? I'm beginning to think you are.

LJS9502_basic

In other words....you can't prove it. Exactly. Oh...and just because you can't wrap your head around a philosophy doesn't mean I'm awkward. It means you can't think outside the box.:)

Yup very true.

There are more then this philosophy out there. The dream one is a pretty good one. Life is just a dream....

[QUOTE="Zagrius"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

LJS9502_basic

The Qu'ran says he wasn't killed. :D

But no witnesses.....

But God told that to Muhammed or something, are you calling God a liar? :shock: :P

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]The empty tomb is but one of many converging lines of evidence that suggest a resurrectionluke1889

I was referring to the tomb alone. An empty tomb proves that there was an empty tomb. Suppose there was a man. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. He was buried. One day, his grave was found to have been dug up and the body removed.

Would you assume a resurrection? Of course not. Damn grave robber more like.

But woah! What is this? We have a guy. He claimed to be the Messiah. He died. His place of burial was found to be empty. See the problem here?

Oh, and if you cite the "appearances" to various people, don't forget...just more...ACCOUNTS. No evidence.

okay, luke, there is a problem. the VAST overwhelming majority of ancient history is based on NOTHING more than accounts. just words on paper. are we to throw out all of ancient history just to suit your worldview?

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]are we to throw out all of ancient history just because people can write stories?luke1889

I have been through this point before. There is more than just written evidence for a lot of ancient history. The pyramids? Check. Coliseums? Check. Aztec buildings? Check. Archeological finds? Check.

Those examples prove NOTHING about specific figures or events. just that thousands of years ago, there were people. these people built big structures for whatever reason.

Religion? Nothing. Just ACCOUNTS.luke1889

once again, for specific figures and events of antiquity, we have nothing more than accounts.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"] what would you count as evidence?luke1889

Something subject that can be subjected to scientific scrutiny, so as to provide empirical evidence. Truths operate on a "beyond reasonable doubt" basis. There are many religions, none are provable because they do not provide the necessary evidence. Thus, not truths here.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"] when the accounts do not agree with other evidence, or when they are no longer giving accounts of the mundane.

"he jumped out from behind a bush and tried to strangle me" believable.

"he jumped out from a bush, then shapeshifted into a giant snake and wrapped himself around my neck, squeezing the life out of me" not believable.

Mr_sprinkles

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

Well....there was no shapeshifting involved in the Bible. And I find in terms of the supernatural...who is to say it can't exist. Our plane of existence is limited to our senses.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="skelebull3000"]

Well, since most of the gospels were written from 65-100 AD we can safely assume that all the primary eye witnesses (the ones that actually saw all the events) were dead

skelebull3000

That doesn't change eyewitness testimony. If that is the case....everyone who existed in history is dead. Therefore, events in history/people in history didn't exist.

The difference being that the testimonies are written when the eyewitness is alive and documented by the historians at the time, not after the death of the witness. The writers of the gospels couldn't have ever possibly spoken directly to any of the witnesses which means that large parts of the stories could've been changed through the passage of time. Until something isn't written down and just travels by word of tongue it constantly changes. Kind of like rumours at school. That makes it less hsitorically accurate.

That is just your opinion. The witnesses preached the gospel. Their words were known...just not written.

[QUOTE="ElZilcho90"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="lnotconspiracy"]are we to throw out all of ancient history just because people can write stories?luke1889

I have been through this point before. There is more than just written evidence for a lot of ancient history. The pyramids? Check. Coliseums? Check. Aztec buildings? Check. Archeological finds? Check.

Religion? Nothing. Just ACCOUNTS.

...you are aware that a vast amount of history is based upon these "accounts"? It's not solely physical evidence like the Pyramids or dug-up arrowheads.

When you have actual physical evidence like the Pyramids, written accounts based on these have a shade more credibility.

But religious scriptures support no physical evidence. This is where my issue lies. Well, that and it fails to live up-to the standard of proper evidence as prescribed by the entire scientific community.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="skelebull3000"]

Well, since most of the gospels were written from 65-100 AD we can safely assume that all the primary eye witnesses (the ones that actually saw all the events) were dead

skelebull3000

That doesn't change eyewitness testimony. If that is the case....everyone who existed in history is dead. Therefore, events in history/people in history didn't exist.

The difference being that the testimonies are written when the eyewitness is alive and documented by the historians at the time, not after the death of the witness. The writers of the gospels couldn't have ever possibly spoken directly to any of the witnesses which means that large parts of the stories could've been changed through the passage of time. Until something isn't written down and just travels by word of tongue it constantly changes. Kind of like rumours at school. That makes it less hsitorically accurate.

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"] when the accounts do not agree with other evidence, or when they are no longer giving accounts of the mundane.

"he jumped out from behind a bush and tried to strangle me" believable.

"he jumped out from a bush, then shapeshifted into a giant snake and wrapped himself around my neck, squeezing the life out of me" not believable.

LJS9502_basic

In this case...there is no evidence to the contrary however.

Well....there was no shapeshifting involved in the Bible. And I find in terms of the supernatural...who is to say it can't exist. Our plane of existence is limited to our senses.

But God told that to Muhammed or something, are you calling God a liar? :shock: :P

Zagrius

Um...no....remember whether one is religious or not...the Christian ideology was begun by the Jewish faith....there is a continuation. Muhammed had his own agenda.