It's more likely reindeer can fly, than the idea there's no God?
There's a better chance of there being a snowman named frosty,than the Bible not being true?
Odds are better for a fat man with crinkle white hair,red and white suite ad black boots than your Idea that Jesus is not God?
More possible of migit men with green suits and pointy hat and shoes; than your delusion that you wont have to stand before the King of kings and Lord of lords?
Better chances of a reindeer with bright blinking red nose;than your delusion that this world is not created by God and His likeness?
Jesus Christ is waiting on you to accept Him as your Lord and saviour so he can help make you more than you appear to be?
Matthew 10:39-He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
Did you know?
2006-12-21 11:52:16 · 16 answers · asked by Maurice H 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I believe in God, but your rationalization and statistics doesn't make God so. It isn't likely to persuade anyone to convert, either.
2006-12-21 12:10:58 · answer #1 · answered by The Doctor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I still haven't seen evidence of God existing. However, I have seen a lot of claims of evidence of God debunked throughout human history. It looks like the probability that God does not exist continues to grow, which means the probability He does exist becomes slimmer. Let me explain how this works.
Consider an empty box. If someone put a statue in a box and closed it up, there are several ways you can tell that the statue is in the box: you can weigh it; you can x-ray it; you can shake it. You can acquire evidence to indicate that there is a statue in the box. Now, remove the statue from the box and close it back up. Now, give it to someone to prove that there is nothing in the box and partner him or her with someone who believes there is something in the box, but it’s feature are unknown. If they weight it, the believer can say that it is something incredibly light; if they x-ray it, the believer can say that it is invisible to x-rays; if they shake it, the believer can say it doesn't move. You know there's nothing in the box because you removed the statue, but the believer can come up with an infinite number of ways to say the other person is wrong. One could even cross-reference all the tests to show that all the signs that there is something in the box don't indicate that anything is in there now, but the believer can keep coming up with ridiculous ideas because he or she isn’t limited by evidence.
This is similar to humanity's experience with God. The more we come to understand about the universe through science the more tests we put on the box, and the more tests show us that there is nothing there. The history of science is the deconstruction of what we used to assume was God's role in the universe. Some of the basic scientific beliefs you probably hold today were considered heresy back only a few hundred years ago. Everything that people said were indications that God was in the box: the sun revolving around the earth, the earth as the center of the universe, divine right of kings, disease, famine, complexity, etc. have been proven time and again to correspond to the basic physical laws. God went from directing the Sun across the sky, to not even being in control of the weather. All God seems to do today is maybe randomly answering some people’s prayers, but not all people and certainly not all of the time—certainly, not enough to give up one’s health insurance. All of our provable repeatable data points to nothing being in the box. That's your evidence. And like the box, someone keeps trying to come up with ways to say the tests don't tell us everything, but those critics don't come up with a way to show us with evidence that there is anything in the box. We've done our tests and shown our data, we're waiting for someone else to come up with the evidence that we're wrong.
2006-12-21 20:01:39 · answer #2 · answered by One & only bob 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"More possible of migit men with green suits and pointy hat and shoes"
The most painfully ironic thing about this statement is that the Bible talks about giants -- so, what, midget men are totally unbelievable, but huge men are completely believable? I think both of those things are pretty much on the same level of absurdity, man.
2006-12-21 19:56:41 · answer #3 · answered by . 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Um....no I didn't know that. Probably because none of it is true. Of course, if you want to talk about flying reindeer, at least reindeer actually exist. The non-flying variety anyway. No such evidence for god though.
2006-12-21 19:55:15 · answer #4 · answered by John S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You make a lot of claims. Can you back any of it up with worthwhile information.
By the way... Whatever happened to the talking snakes with legs?
2006-12-21 19:59:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Santa Parrot hit the nail on the head. He's exactly right!!
He only whistles the truth.
2006-12-21 20:10:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
As long as you're quoting Matthew, check out Matt. 6:5-6. Therein lies wisdom.
(Psst..... atheists don't believe in Santa, either.)
2006-12-21 19:59:30 · answer #7 · answered by link955 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Did you know it's all just mythology and folklore? It all has some value be it entertainment or to teach a lesson, but nothing more really.
2006-12-21 19:55:00 · answer #8 · answered by . 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uh, no, both of those things are equally unlikely.
Does quoting a Bible verse make it true? I, too, can quote a Bible verse. Still doesn't make it true.
2006-12-21 19:57:02 · answer #9 · answered by Nowhere Man 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who's *** did you pull those statitistics out of?
And learn to spell... Migit is not a word.
2006-12-21 20:01:58 · answer #10 · answered by Emma 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋