Does the (Christian) God Exist?

[Conscentia]

Does God exist?
For me, YES!

But does he exist to you is a different question!

Existence is not subjective.

[Hemingford Grey]

Hint: There is only one God.

Aqua Buddha.

And Rand Paul is his prophet.

[Norcroft]

Does God exist?
For me, YES!

But does he exist to you is a different question!

Existence is not subjective.

The question of if God exists is a matter of Faith.
Either you do believe or you dont believe. And from that stems your answer.

[Luveria]

Existence is not subjective.

Either you do believe or you dont believe. And from that stems your answer.

It doesn't work that way.

If you do not believe God exists, it does not mean God doesn't exist. It means you do not believe God exists.

[Lost heros]

Existence is not subjective.

The question of if God exists is a matter of Faith.
Either you do believe or you dont believe. And from that stems your answer.

You could have faith, but that doesn't mean he exists.

[Hemingford Grey]

Either you do believe or you dont believe. And from that stems your answer.

It doesn't work that way.

If you do not believe God exists, it does not mean God doesn't exist. It means you do not believe God exists.

Doesn't it? Absolute truth can never be truly known. We can't die, see what happens and come back to say there is nothing or there is something. So regardless if we believe or not, regardless if there is a god or not (something we'll never really know), we can't know and without knowing the very existence comes into question.

Wait, trying to think if that made sense or if I put too much whiskey in my eggnog...

[Luveria]

It doesn't work that way.

If you do not believe God exists, it does not mean God doesn't exist. It means you do not believe God exists.

Doesn't it?

No.

Absolute truth can never be truly known.

Yes it can be. Many facts are easily verified.

We can't die, see what happens and come back to say there is nothing or there is something.

Yeah, it's quite obvious if a person is dead they are dead and not going anywhere. There is no evidence to suggest that people have a soul.

So regardless if we believe or not, regardless if there is a god or not (something we'll never really know), we can't know and without knowing the very existence comes into question.

Wait, trying to think if that made sense or if I put too much whiskey in my eggnog...

If there is no evidence for the existence of something, it is not worth it for a person to waste their time believing it exists. It is irrational to have belief in something that has not been shown to exist.

[Beiluxia]

Aw my gawd, yet another trite God debate thread. I think I threw up a bit in my mouth.

Where's the "I don't know" option? I'm religiously apathetic, and I don't think about religion and/or God that much. I neither claim nor dismiss the existence of an omnipotent being.

[Luveria]

Aw my gawd, yet another trite God debate thread. I think I threw up a bit in my mouth.

It's either that or abortion, same-sex marriage, communism, or gun control.

[Hemingford Grey]

Absolute truth can never be truly known.

Yes it can be. Many facts are easily verified.

Well many things we perceive as facts, many interpretations of data can be known. The whole Allegory of the Cave comes to mind.

We can't die, see what happens and come back to say there is nothing or there is something.

Yeah, it's quite obvious if a person is dead they are dead and not going anywhere. There is no evidence to suggest that people have a soul.

I don't recall suggesting or even implying the existence of a soul. Rather I argue believing in god or not determines his existence, because that's as far as it can extend. An existence in the mind, not to be derogatory towards believers, but existence is limited to the imagination. Because the afterlife, being the only test to prove existence, cannot be verified.

So regardless if we believe or not, regardless if there is a god or not (something we'll never really know), we can't know and without knowing the very existence comes into question.

Wait, trying to think if that made sense or if I put too much whiskey in my eggnog...

If there is no evidence for the existence of something, it is not worth it for a person to waste their time believing it exists. It is irrational to have belief in something that has not been shown to exist.

There are many things we believe in that are irrational: political ideologies, reverence of individuals and countries, etc. Merely because there is no evidence suggesting it doesn't mean it is a waste to wonder or even pursue. Our brains aren't going to start smoking and explode if we think about it.

Though I fear you miss my point entirely.

[Conscentia]

Aw my gawd, yet another trite God debate thread. I think I threw up a bit in my mouth.

If you aren't interested, why'd you post?

Where's the "I don't know" option? I'm religiously apathetic, and I don't think about religion and/or God that much. I neither claim nor dismiss the existence of an omnipotent being.

Either you are convinced or you are not. Pick one, because they're the only two options.
Knowledge is precisely what this thread is supposed to determine.

[Beiluxia]

Aw my gawd, yet another trite God debate thread. I think I threw up a bit in my mouth.

If you aren't interested, why'd you post?

Where's the "I don't know" option? I'm religiously apathetic, and I don't think about religion and/or God that much. I neither claim nor dismiss the existence of an omnipotent being.

Either you are convinced or you are not. Pick one, because they're the only two options.
Knowledge is precisely what this thread is supposed to determine.

I didn't say I wasn't interested, only that this topic is by far one the most overused in NSG.

In my personal opinion, I have no clue whether or not God exists. Being raised in a non-religious family, I've never had a spiritual aspect or perspective in my life. It's unlikely I ever will either. On the other hand, I completely understand why people raised in a religious household would have a different perspective of their life. Sometimes I do wonder if there is/are someone/others watching over us, but I'll probably never know for certain, maybe at least until I die. What's wrong with admitting that I simply don't know if God exists?

[Hemingford Grey]

If you aren't interested, why'd you post?


Either you are convinced or you are not. Pick one, because they're the only two options.
Knowledge is precisely what this thread is supposed to determine.

I didn't say I wasn't interested, only that this topic is by far one the most overused in NSG.

In my personal opinion, I have no clue whether or not God exists. Being raised in a non-religious family, I've never had a spiritual aspect or perspective in my life. It's unlikely I ever will either. On the other hand, I completely understand why people raised in a religious household would have a different perspective of their life. Sometimes I do wonder if there is/are someone/others watching over us, but I'll probably never know for certain, maybe at least until I die. What's wrong with admitting that I simply don't know if God exists?

Because if you don't pick the blue or the red pill, you will die....eventually from super-aids.

It's like regular aids, but a thousand times that.

Now pick, Mr. Anderson. Morpheus' life hangs in the balance.

[Conscentia]

If you aren't interested, why'd you post?


Either you are convinced or you are not. Pick one, because they're the only two options.
Knowledge is precisely what this thread is supposed to determine.

I didn't say I wasn't interested, only that this topic is by far one the most overused in NSG.

In my personal opinion, I have no clue whether or not God exists. Being raised in a non-religious family, I've never had a spiritual aspect or perspective in my life. It's unlikely I ever will either. On the other hand, I completely understand why people raised in a religious household would have a different perspective of their life. Sometimes I do wonder if there is/are someone/others watching over us, but I'll probably never know for certain, maybe at least until I die. What's wrong with admitting that I simply don't know if God exists?

So you aren't convinced and are therefore an atheist.

What's wrong with admitting that I simply don't know if God exists?

It's off-topic. The thread's purpose is to determine whether or not he exists.

By the way, God cannot exist because of Ba'al Gat'yter the omnipotent god-eater. Being god-eating, Gat'yter will immediately cause any gods that do exist to cease existing. Any proof that demonstrates that Ba'al Gat'yter does not exist could also be applied to prove that God does not exist. If no such proof exists, then God cannot exist because of being eaten & thus destroyed. Either way, God does not exist.

[Beiluxia]

So you aren't convinced and are therefore an atheist.

(Image)

What's wrong with admitting that I simply don't know if God exists?

It's off-topic. The thread's purpose is to determine whether or not he exists.

You're right on one thing: I would consider myself an agnostic atheist. But I have not solidly ascertained either way when it comes to existence of Him, or any other god(s) for that matter.

From the OP's very own words, the thread's purpose is not to determine the existence of God; we're merely here to discuss what we think about God's existence (or lack thereof). In my opinion, it's possible that there's a God/gods/something-out-there. In my opinion, it's scientifically impossible (as far as we know today) to determine supernatural phenomena, especially one of this scope and magnitude, since science deals with the natural world.

So, what do you think? Do you think God (the one that is mentioned in the Bible) actually exists? It's a question that I want to hear (hopefully different) answers and explanations for. Remember, nobody should try and force their own religion on others. I just would like to hear your opinion and some explanation as to why or why not, and maybe respectful response to others' arguments.

Do you honestly think one online thread about God is going to determine, without a doubt, the very existence of God when countless other philosophers and researchers throughout millenia have failed to and have yet to reach a solid consensus? I'm only here to discuss, as the OP suggests, not determine.

[People Who Say Ni]

Does God exist?
For me, YES!

But does he exist to you is a different question!

This ignores things called objective realities, ie facts. Whether God exists or not is objective. Also, because his properties are outlined in The Bible, he is also falsifiable. If not for the stubbornness and refusal to listen to reason by so many theists, he would be accepted as a mythical concept.

[Conscentia]

So you aren't convinced and are therefore an atheist.

(Image)

It's off-topic. The thread's purpose is to determine whether or not he exists.

You're right on one thing: I would consider myself an agnostic atheist. But I have not solidly ascertained either way when it comes to existence of Him, or any other god(s) for that matter.

From the OP's very own words, the thread's purpose is not to determine the existence of God; we're merely here to discuss what we think about God's existence (or lack thereof). In my opinion, it's possible that there's a God/gods/something-out-there. In my opinion, it's scientifically impossible (as far as we know today) to determine supernatural phenomena, especially one of this scope and magnitude, since science deals with the natural world.

Ah, Well the title is misleading.

What about Ba'al Gat'yter the omnipotent god-eater?

[Beiluxia]

You're right on one thing: I would consider myself an agnostic atheist. But I have not solidly ascertained either way when it comes to existence of Him, or any other god(s) for that matter.

From the OP's very own words, the thread's purpose is not to determine the existence of God; we're merely here to discuss what we think about God's existence (or lack thereof). In my opinion, it's possible that there's a God/gods/something-out-there. In my opinion, it's scientifically impossible (as far as we know today) to determine supernatural phenomena, especially one of this scope and magnitude, since science deals with the natural world.

Ah, Well the title is misleading.

What about Ba'al Gat'yter the omnipotent god-eater?

By the way, God cannot exist because of Ba'al Gat'yter the omnipotent god-eater. Being god-eating, Gat'yter will immediately cause any gods that do exist to cease existing. Any proof that demonstrates that Ba'al Gat'yter does not exist could also be applied to prove that God does not exist. If no such proof exists, then God cannot exist because of being eaten & thus destroyed. Either way, God does exist.

Could you please elaborate? You seem to claim that God doesn't exist, but God exists, both at the same time.

[Conscentia]

Could you please elaborate? You seem to claim that God doesn't exist, but God exists, both at the same time.

Typo. Retroactively corrected.

[Beiluxia]

Could you please elaborate? You seem to claim that God doesn't exist, but God exists, both at the same time.

Typo. Retroactively corrected.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. From my understanding, you're trying to argue two points:
1. If there's no proof to deny the existence of God, and this "Ba'al Gat'yter" god in extension, this god must also exist and would've eaten God.
2. If there's proof to deny the existence of God, and therefore "Ba'al Gat'yter" in extension, God simply doesn't exist due to actual proof.

I see two major flaws in this argument.

Let's just say in this hypothetical that God does exist for a second. The definition of the Christian God includes the fact that he is omnipotent, all-knowing, all-powerful. An all-knowing, all-powerful God would not have been eaten by this other god, since he is the ultimate force in this universe. This scenario is therefore a fallacy. Another thing is that Christianity is by its very nature monotheistic, meaning this other god wouldn't or couldn't even possibly exist in the Christian world-view. The main tenet of Christianity is the belief in one God, also making this scenario a fallacy.

[Conscentia]

Typo. Retroactively corrected.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. From my understanding, you're trying to argue two points: [...]

You've misunderstood.
My argument is that God & Ba'al Gat'yter are both unproven entities. The existence of Ba'al Gat'yter makes God's exist impossible (because Ba'al Gat'yter destroys gods). And argument that would disprove the existence of Ba'al Gat'yter would be equally applicable to God. Either way, God cannot exist.

Ba'al Gat'yter is not a god.

[Beiluxia]

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. From my understanding, you're trying to argue two points: [...]

You've misunderstood.
My argument is that God & Ba'al Gat'yter are both unproven entities. The existence of Ba'al Gat'yter makes God's exist impossible (because Ba'al Gat'yter destroys gods). And argument that would disprove the existence of Ba'al Gat'yter would be equally applicable to God. Either way, God cannot exist.

Ba'al Gat'yter is not a god.

The Christian God is, by principle and tenet, omnipotent. He is all-knowing and all-powerful. If both God and this Ba'al Gat'yter exists, this thing, or anything else in existence in this universe, cannot destroy him according to Christian beliefs. Yet, you insist he can, making this a fallacy. An all-powerful God + an all-destroying entity = not logical in our universe. It's like the question of what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable force; there's no answer because in this universe such an occurrence is not possible in this universe.

[With Teeth]

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. From my understanding, you're trying to argue two points: [...]

You've misunderstood.
My argument is that God & Ba'al Gat'yter are both unproven entities. The existence of Ba'al Gat'yter makes God's exist impossible (because Ba'al Gat'yter destroys gods). And argument that would disprove the existence of Ba'al Gat'yter would be equally applicable to God. Either way, God cannot exist.

Ba'al Gat'yter is not a god.

I would say that's not even a logically possible being.

[Conscentia]

You've misunderstood.
My argument is that God & Ba'al Gat'yter are both unproven entities. The existence of Ba'al Gat'yter makes God's exist impossible (because Ba'al Gat'yter destroys gods). And argument that would disprove the existence of Ba'al Gat'yter would be equally applicable to God. Either way, God cannot exist.
Ba'al Gat'yter is not a god.

The Christian God is, by principle and tenet, omnipotent. He is all-knowing and all-powerful. If both God and this Ba'al Gat'yter exists, this thing, or anything else in existence in this universe, cannot destroy him according to Christian beliefs. Yet, you insist he can, making this a fallacy. An all-powerful God + an all-destroying entity = not logical in our universe. [...]

Exactly - therefore neither exists.

[Conscentia]

You've misunderstood.
My argument is that God & Ba'al Gat'yter are both unproven entities. The existence of Ba'al Gat'yter makes God's exist impossible (because Ba'al Gat'yter destroys gods). And argument that would disprove the existence of Ba'al Gat'yter would be equally applicable to God. Either way, God cannot exist.
Ba'al Gat'yter is not a god.

I would say that's not even a logically possible being.

Ba'al Gat'yter is as logical as God.