There is no god

[TomPJr]

I will begin with a question:

Is it POSSIBLE that there is no supernatural being? I'm not saying that is what you believe, I am asking if it is -possible- that you are incorrect?

Is it possible, FS, that you do not exist?

It is possible. I am open minded enough to at least accept that remote possibility.

[TomPJr]

I will begin with a question:

Is it POSSIBLE that there is no supernatural being? I'm not saying that is what you believe, I am asking if it is -possible- that you are incorrect?

My faith says it is not possible. The entire natural world testifies to His being.

But, consider this:

If you are correct that there is no God, when I die, I've lost nothing.

If I am correct that God Is, when you die, you've lost everything and face eternity in hell.

Psalm 14:1--"The fool hast said in his heart, 'There is no God.'....

I implore you to seek Him and the salvation He lovingly offers.

Loving you in the love of the Lord,

Speaker

[Guest speaker]

I will begin with a question:

Is it POSSIBLE that there is no supernatural being? I'm not saying that is what you believe, I am asking if it is -possible- that you are incorrect?

My faith says it is not possible. The entire natural world testifies to His being.

But, consider this:

If you are correct that there is no God, when I die, I've lost nothing.

If I am correct that God Is, when you die, you've lost everything and face eternity in hell.

Psalm 14:1--"The fool hast said in his heart, 'There is no God.'....

I implore you to seek Him and the salvation He lovingly offers.

Loving you in the love of the Lord,

Speaker

Please, stop using the teleological argument and Pascal's wager. They have been done to death, and refuted in like manner.

Truth is truth and will be repeated. Refuted? By whom? Those who refuse to acknowledge God.

Please consider Romans 1:18-32:

18 We see the anger of God coming down from heaven against all the sins of men. These sinful men keep the truth from being known. 19 Men know about God. He has made it plain to them. 20 Men cannot say they do not know about God. From the beginning of the world, men could see what God is like through the things He has made.This shows His power that lasts forever. It shows that He is God. 21 They did know God, but they did not honor Him as God. They were not thankful to Him and thought only of foolish things. Their foolish minds became dark. 22 They said that they were wise, but they showed how foolish they were. 23 They gave honor to false gods that looked like people who can die and to birds and animals and snakes. This honor belongs to God Who can never die.

24 So God let them follow the desires of their sinful hearts. They did sinful things among themselves with their bodies. 25 They traded the truth of God for a lie. They worshiped and cared for what God made instead of worshiping the God Who made it. He is the One Who is to receive honor and thanks forever. Let it be so.

26 Because of this, God let them follow their sinful desires which lead to shame. Women used their bodies in ways God had not planned. 27 In the same way, men left the right use of women's bodies. They did sex sins with other men. They received for themselves the punishment that was coming to them for their sin.

28 Because they would not keep God in their thoughts anymore, He gave them up. Their minds were sinful and they wanted only to do things they should not do. 29 They are full of everything that is sinful and want things that belong to others. They hate people and are jealous. They kill other people. They fight and lie. They do not like other people and talk against them. 30 They talk about people, and they hate God. They are filled with pride and tell of all the good they do. They think of new ways to sin. They do not obey their parents. 31 They are not able to understand. They do not do what they say they will do. They have no love and no loving-pity. 32 They know God has said that all who do such things should die. But they keep on doing these things and are happy when others do them also.

May the eyes of your heart be opened to His love and mercy that He wants you to accept.

Loving you in the love of the Lord,

Speaker

[MorningGlory]

Please, stop using the teleological argument and Pascal's wager. They have been done to death, and refuted in like manner.

No one has ever refuted these statements.....do you have knowledge that no one else is privy to???

[MorningGlory]

No one has ever refuted these statements.....do you have knowledge that no one else is privy to???

Allow me to be blunt - YES THEY HAVE. See above post.

Allow me to be blunter - NO, THEY HAVEN'T. See the real world.

[MorningGlory]

Allow me to be blunter - NO, THEY HAVEN'T. See the real world.

Oh I'm sorry, last time I checked, only 0.15% of the biologists and geologists in the world today doubted evolution in its entirety. Even then, many were willing to accept that other mechanisms could be responsible for evolution, far from lauding the creation of Yahweh.

Stand on your soapbox and hail the imminent demise of the theory - it's so well-supported it's not even funny

Drags soapbox out of closet.....

WHO or what theory has successfully refuted Pascal's Wager? Unless the Day of Judgement has come and gone ,unnoticed, no one can prove or disprove anything yet. And, as for Intelligent Design, who has proven the universe to be a result of random, undirected natural occurances?

[LisabethforChrist]

I know this is long but it seemed to fit here. In the news today....

Fossils challenge old evolution theory By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer

Thu Aug 9, 10:33 AM ET

Surprising research based on two African fossils suggests our family tree is more like a wayward bush with stubby branches, challenging what had been common thinking on how early humans evolved.

The discovery by Meave Leakey, a member of a famous family of paleontologists, shows that two species of early human ancestors lived at the same time in Kenya. That pokes holes in the chief theory of man's early evolution

[MorningGlory]

Let me try yet again. The Wager is lacking because it does not rule out the existence of any other Gods, and it assumes that people can simply believe in something on a whim, solely to take the "safe bet" - they cannot.

Evolution is non-random - this has been repeated endlessly on forums across the Internet. You're simply straw-manning now.

I don't need to expand on the point - apart from 99.95% of biologists and geologists who accept evolution as fact (based on 140 years of research), the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, several other Protestant denominations, the Christians in Science organisation, Orthodox and Conservative Jews, liberal and moderate Muslims, and Buddhists, either fully accept or at least do not consider evolution incompatible with their faith. Humanists, agnostics, atheists, deists etc we would assume to accept it outright.

The Wager is not something I believe in.....no, people can't simply believe because they want to; if your heart is hardened to the Truth, your eyes can't see it, your ears can't hear it. I know; I've been there. However, no one has successfully refuted anything. It's all opinion.

As for 99.95% of all those groups of people believing in evolution, so what? I believe in evolution too, to a degree, but I don't believe in man evolving from apes. Man was created, just as depicted in Genesis. No species has ever evolved into another and, please, don't cite the fruit fly or mold experiments; those have been repeated ad nauseum and still prove nothing. I don't 'straw man', FQ, and I DON'T get the bulk of my information from Wikipedia.

[ohnomelon]

Logically possible, yes. Although, I believe it is also logically very unlikely.

And a comment on Pascal's Wager:

It's a rhetorical argument, not a philosophical argument.

[hupo]

I will begin with a question:

Is it POSSIBLE that there is no supernatural being? I'm not saying that is what you believe, I am asking if it is -possible- that you are incorrect?

I'm going back to your original question as in all the debating I got lost of the OT.

This question must be answered in some kind of context.

For me the possibility doesn't exist as I believe in a supernatural being. I believe in God.

Yet, when you get into a philosophical discussion (context), then yes, the possibility exists, by the mere fact that you popped the question.

If the discussion is not a simple yes or no, but gets into proving one theory or another, then we find ourselves in a place that uses logic to prove it.

Science is based on logic and I'm not surprised at the debate going on, as Logic and faith have to many things not in common.

One cannot prove God exists, at least not in scientific or logical terms.

One cannot prove God doesn't exist as God is beyond logic... is beyond human understanding.

So in order to reply to your question I would ask you to explain what the word "possible" means and in what context.

Blessings