angelo

Israel's existence as proof of God's existence makes as much sense as saying Greece existing is proof for Apollo existing.

sugarhitman

The fact that Israel has been restored and that events that are taking place there now have been foretold is proof that God...exist. To refute is one thing.....rejecting is another.

Celsus

Israel is proof of some expert historians

Johnny Skeptic

On the contrary, the partition of Palestine is a self-fulfilled prophecy. All that it takes to self-fulfill a prophecy is the belief that it is true, and enough military power to make it come true. If the Koran said that a temple would be rebuilt in Mecca, and a temple was rebuilt in Mecca, you certainly would not consider that to be a fulfillment of a legitimate prophecy.

All Bible prophecies are disputable. I wish to distinguish disputable prophecies from false prophecies. A false prophecy is a prophecy that does not come true. A disputable prophecy does not necessarily have to be a false prophecy. Even if all Bible prophecies are true prophecies, they have needlessly failed to convince the majority of the people in the world that they are true prophecies. If Pat Robertson accurately predicted when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year, that would be far less disputable than any Bible prophecy. In my opinion, no prophecies at all would be much better than 100% disputable prophecies. That is because the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), and yet Bible prophecies have needlessly cause lots of confusion. That is sufficient evidence that the God of the Bible does not exist.

One thing is for certain: If a God inspired the Bible, there are not any doubts whatsoever that he would be able to convince more people to love him and to accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will. It would certainly not have been unfair for Jesus to accurately predict what the names of the Roman emperors would be for the next 200 years, and their dates of birth and death, which would surely have caused more people to become Christians. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that.

Since Jesus made some predictions, Christians cannot get away with claiming that he did not want to use prophecy to try to influence people in future generations.

The best evidence is that if a God exists, he is probably not the God of the Bible. If the universe is naturalistic, or if some other God exists who chose to mimic the ways that things would be if the universe is naturalistic, 1) all religions that have books would be spread entirely by word of mouth, which is the case 2) humans would only able to obtain food through human effort no matter what their worldview is, which is the case, 3) it would not be surprising that the percentage of women who are theists is significantly higher than the percentage of men who are theists in every culture, which is the case, 4) it would not be surprising that the percentage of elderly people who change their worldviews is much smaller than the percentage of younger people who change their worldviews, which is the case, 5) hurricanes would kill people, animals, and plants, and destroy property as if there were not any differences between them, which appears to the case, 6) all tangible benefits would be indiscriminately distributed at random according to the laws of physics without any regard for a person's needs, requests, or worldview, and the only benefits that anyone could ask God for and expect to receive would be subjective spiritual/emotional benefits, which appears to be the case, 7) it would not be surprising that fossils and sediments are sorted in ways that are convenient for skeptics, and have convinced some evangelical Christian geologists that a global flood did not occur, which is the case, 8) no religious book would contain any indisputable prophecies, which is the case, and 9) it would not be surprising that 50% of the genome of chimpanzees and humans are identical, which is the case.

What you propose is the existence of the following kind of God:

1 - A God whose thoughts and ways are strange, and are different from our own thought and ways, but is frequently predictable, and who frequently mimics a naturalistic universe, or some other God who chose to frequently mimic a naturalist universe.

2 - A God who only wants people to hear the Gospel message if another person tells them about it.

3 - A God who only wants people to have enough food to eat if they are able to obtain it through human effort.

4 - A God who prefers to make 100% disputable prophecies when he could easily make 100% indisputable prophecies. An indisputable prophecy would be an accurate prediction regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year. No religious book has a fulfilled prophecy of that quality.

5 - A God who needlessly invites dissent when he could easily discourage dissent.

6 - A God who is not able to provide additional evidence that would cause more people to love and accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will.

7 - A merciful God who endorses eternal punishment without parole.

No rational person would believe such things.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: The partition of Palestine is a self-fulfilled prophecy. All that it takes to self-fulfill a prophecy is the belief that it is true, and enough military power to make it come true. If the Koran said that a temple would be rebuilt in Mecca, and a temple was rebuilt in Mecca, you certainly would not consider that to be a fulfillment of a legitimate prophecy.

All Bible prophecies are disputable. I wish to distinguish disputable prophecies from false prophecies. A false prophecy is a prophecy that does not come true. A disputable prophecy does not necessarily have to be a false prophecy. Even if all Bible prophecies are true prophecies, they have needlessly failed to convince the majority of the people in the world that they are true prophecies. If Pat Robertson accurately predicted when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year, that would be far less disputable than any Bible prophecy. In my opinion, no prophecies at all would be much better than 100% disputable prophecies. That is because the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), and yet Bible prophecies have needlessly cause lots of confusion. That is sufficient evidence that the God of the Bible does not exist.

One thing is for certain: If a God inspired the Bible, there are not any doubts whatsoever that he would be able to convince more people to love him and to accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will. It would certainly not have been unfair for Jesus to accurately predict what the names of the Roman emperors would be for the next 200 years, and their dates of birth and death, which would surely have caused more people to become Christians. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that.

Since Jesus made some predictions, Christians cannot get away with claiming that he did not want to use prophecy to try to influence people in future generations.

The best evidence is that if a God exists, he is probably not the God of the Bible. If the universe is naturalistic, or if some other God exists who chose to mimic the ways that things would be if the universe is naturalistic, 1) all religions that have books would be spread entirely by word of mouth, which is the case 2) humans would only able to obtain food through human effort no matter what their worldview is, which is the case, 3) it would not be surprising that the percentage of women who are theists is significantly higher than the percentage of men who are theists in every culture, which is the case, 4) it would not be surprising that the percentage of elderly people who change their worldviews is much smaller than the percentage of younger people who change their worldviews, which is the case, 5) hurricanes would kill people, animals, and plants, and destroy property as if there were not any differences between them, which appears to the case, 6) all tangible benefits would be indiscriminately distributed at random according to the laws of physics without any regard for a person's needs, requests, or worldview, and the only benefits that anyone could ask God for and expect to receive would be subjective spiritual/emotional benefits, which appears to be the case, 7) it would not be surprising that fossils and sediments are sorted in ways that are convenient for skeptics, and have convinced some evangelical Christian geologists that a global flood did not occur, which is the case, 8) no religious book would contain any indisputable prophecies, which is the case, and 9) it would not be surprising that 50% of the genome of chimpanzees and humans are identical, which is the case.

What you propose is the existence of the following kind of God:

1 - A God whose thoughts and ways are strange, and are different from our own thought and ways, but is frequently predictable, and who frequently mimics a naturalistic universe, or some other God who chose to frequently mimic a naturalist universe.

2 - A God who only wants people to hear the Gospel message if another person tells them about it.

3 - A God who only wants people to have enough food to eat if they are able to obtain it through human effort.

4 - A God who prefers to make 100% disputable prophecies when he could easily make 100% indisputable prophecies. An indisputable prophecy would be an accurate prediction regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year. No religious book has a fulfilled prophecy of that quality.

5 - A God who needlessly invites dissent when he could easily discourage dissent.

6 - A God who is not able to provide additional evidence that would cause more people to love and accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will.

7 - A merciful God who endorses eternal punishment without parole.

No rational person would believe such things.

arnoldo

The Palestinian and Jewish people each deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. At the end of WWII the Jewish people desperately needed a homeland to end their exile which began in the year 70 AD. The Romans had the might to cast them into exile but that did not make it right. From your POV the Jews had the might to return to the land of Israel but that did not make it right. Politicians are looking for a way to divide the land of Israel between the jews and palestinians. Solomon also was faced with a similar situation. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

Shalom,
"Arnoldo"

Johnny Skeptic

That will not do. If the Partition of Palestine was not a fulfilled prophecy, if Jewish and Palestinian history had been reversed, and Hitler and other parties had persecuted Palestinians instead of Jews, you are well aware that the 32 Christian nations that voted in favor of the partition would not have awarded control of Jerusalem to the Palestinians, and a grossly disproportionate amount of land per capita like the Jews got. If those 32 nations would have awarded control of Jerusalem to the Palestinians, and a grossly disproportionate amount of land per capita, that would have been a good case for a legitimate fulfilled prophecy, but you are well aware that that would not have been the case.

All Bible prophecies are disputable. I wish to distinguish disputable prophecies from false prophecies. A false prophecy is a prophecy that does not come true. A disputable prophecy does not necessarily have to be a false prophecy. Even if all Bible prophecies are true prophecies, they have failed to convince the majority of the people in the world that they are true prophecies. If Pat Robertson accurately predicted when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year, that would be far less disputable than any Bible prophecy. In my opinion, no prophecies at all would be much better than 100% disputable prophecies. That is because the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), and yet Bible prophecies have needlessly cause lots of confusion.

One thing is for certain: If a God inspired the Bible, there are not any doubts whatsoever that he would be able to convince more people to love him and to accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will. It would certainly not have been unfair for Jesus to accurately predict what the names of the Roman emperors would be for the next 200 years, and their dates of birth and death, which would surely have caused more people to become Christians. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that.

Since Jesus made some predictions, Christians cannot get away with claiming that he did not want to use prophecy to try to influence people in future generations.

If the God of the Bible does not exist, obviously, his character is irrelevant. If the universe is naturalistic, or if some other God exists who chose to mimic the ways that things would be if the universe is naturalistic, 1) all religions that have books would be spread entirely by word of mouth, which is the case 2) humans would only able to obtain food through human effort no matter what their worldview is, which is the case, 3) it would not be surprising that the percentage of women who are theists is significantly higher than the percentage of men who are theists in every culture, which is the case, 4) it would not be surprising that the percentage of elderly people who change their worldviews is much smaller than the percentage of younger people who change their worldviews, which is the case, 5) hurricanes would kill people, animals, and plants, and destroy property as if there were not any differences between them, which appears to the case, 6) all tangible benefits would be indiscriminately distributed at random according to the laws of physics without any regard for a person's needs, requests, or worldview, and the only benefits that anyone could ask God for and expect to receive would be subjective spiritual/emotional benefits, which appears to be the case, 7) it would not be surprising that fossils and sediments are sorted in ways that are convenient for skeptics, and have convinced some evangelical Christian geologists that a global flood did not occur, which is the case, 8) no religious book would contain any indisputable prophecies, which is the case, and 9) it would not be surprising that 50% of the genome of chimpanzees and humans are identical, which is the case.

In my opinion, it is very improbable that a moral God exists who wants people to believe that he exists, and wants people to believe that they know what he wants them to do with their lives, but frequently mimics a naturalistic universe in predictable ways, or mimics some other God who chose to mimic a naturalistic universe, and always makes disputable prophecies, thereby needlessly undermining his attempts to try to convince people to believe that he exists.

What you propose is the existence of the following kind of God:

1 - A God whose thoughts and ways are strange, and are different from our own thought and ways, but is frequently predictable, and who frequently mimics a naturalistic universe, or some other God who chose to frequently mimic a naturalist universe.

2 - A God who only wants people to hear the Gospel message if another person tells them about it.

3 - A God who only wants people to have enough food to eat if they are able to obtain it through human effort.

4 - A God who prefers to make 100% disputable prophecies when he could easily make 100% indisputable prophecies. An indisputable prophecy would be an accurate prediction regarding when and where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year. No religious book has a fulfilled prophecy of that quality.

5 - A God who needlessly invites dissent when he could easily discourage dissent.

6 - A God who refuses to provide additional evidence that would cause more people to love and accept him without unfairly interfering with their free will.

7 - A merciful God who endorses eternal punishment without parole.

No rational person would believe such things.

Please be advised that if you refuse to directly reply to all of the arguments in this post, I will refuse to reply to any of your arguments and refer back to this post. You admitted to me in a private message that it is rude for you to refuse to reply to my posts, and that no one likes to embarrass themself in a public for by answering difficult questions that they think might embarrass them, and yet you are still being evasive at other forums, and you will not doubt continue to be evasive at this forum. I will not allow you to insist on choosing whose questions get answered, and which issues get discussed. You refuse to show me the same courtesy that you want from me. That is wrong. Do you believe that God approves of your behavior?

As I told you at the GRD Forum, I am very patient. I never quit if I believe that I have the advantage. My life expectancy is at least 15 more years. The only way that you will outlast me is to outlive me. No matter what you come up with, I will always have a counter argument. I have the advantage since all that I need to do is to keep the undecided crowd undecided, while you need to convince the undecided crowd to become Christians.

Under certain under conditions, you would not have been a Christian today, and you would have been just as certain of your worldview as you are now. It is not likely that a God exists who wants people to believe that he exists, but allows what people believe to be determined by chance and circumstance.

angelo

To arnoldo. You can pray till your blue in the face, or till the world runs out of oil, whichever comes last. There is no one there that listens to anybodies prayers.
Instead of wasting valuable time praying, why not enjoy a walk in a park or something.
Spend some time with your family or friends, you won't have them around for ever you know, for we are mortal and can drop dead at any time. What has prayer accomplished in the past? Nothing, that's what, absolutely nothing. Can you provide proof otherwise?
If you can, provide it to the James Randi organazition, and collect a million dollars. As well as us.

arnoldo

Thank you, and I agree time is limited, thus I don't understand people who want to spend their precious time attacking someone else's belief system. In any event, since WWIII is likely to start in the middle east (it's called a self fulfilled prophecy) there is no harm in praying for the peace of Jerusalem.

Johnny Skeptic

Edit: Deletion of duplicate post