mattmahar
Full Member
`Lo, thou hast become whole; sin no more, lest something worse may happen to thee.' John 5:14
Posts: 151
|
Post by mattmahar on Nov 18, 2008 15:40:04 GMT -5
What is your best objective argument for a personal deity. I pose the question as if I myself were unaware of the complexity of theological debate.Therefore: try to convince me that - 1. The Judeo-Christian tradition may be understood as the manifestation of a conscious intervention in the life of the world by an outside source. 2. That this cultural expression is compatible with the rigorous demands of the most current understanding of science; particularly the difficult concepts of quantum mechanics. 3. That this long series of changes which have brought us to the level of understanding we today presume; may still be understood as a complete cosmology; and not itself a game of theoretical "catch-up" in order to justify beliefs in the face of relativistic viewpoints.
In Christ Matt Mahar
(The reason for this post is because a friend posed these very questions to me so I thought it to be fair by giving them an honest look through discussion and debate.)
|
|
mattmahar
Full Member
`Lo, thou hast become whole; sin no more, lest something worse may happen to thee.' John 5:14
Posts: 151
|
Post by mattmahar on Nov 19, 2008 22:41:43 GMT -5
Anybody???
|
|
mattmahar
Full Member
`Lo, thou hast become whole; sin no more, lest something worse may happen to thee.' John 5:14
Posts: 151
|
Post by mattmahar on Nov 22, 2008 10:26:46 GMT -5
From Anonymous: Matt, the best objective argument for the existence of a personal deity is the Kalam Cosmological argument. I have a presentation with the content here www.sincereanswer.com/eternity/files/doc/Cosmological.ppt. There are three premises to the argument. Each is supported by multiple lines of evidence, both scientific and logical. I look at it as a three story building and each line of evidence is a load bearing wall. As long as one load bearing wall stands, then the argument stands. The interesting thing is that a price must be paid if a line of evidence is not allowed.
|
|
|
Post by emmanuel on Nov 30, 2008 18:19:58 GMT -5
There is no sure way to prove the existence of a one true God to the masses. Many people have come to see a god how they wish to see god and believe. This even goes for the christian religion. But most people will respond to what they call faith. So the real question to ask would not be " does God exist...but rather is faith blind? If faith is blind then that is simple...that puts the burden of proof for a God to only exist in a persons mind by their personal conclusions. Personal conclusions are not valid proof.
But if faith is not blind...then there would have to absolute irrefutable evidence that God does exist. Then by that, we would know which god is the real one true God. It is quite amusing to understand that the possibility of one God existing...but two? The universe would not be big enough for two gods. It's trouble enough to try and prove one exist.
|
|