if you understand you have brain without seeing it, why not a Creator, if you see the evidence: Creation?

Question

The Bible says: (God quoted saying) Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.


I have some good news from The Bible.

He is righteous, and will judge anything you have done which is unrighteous. Are you going to collect your wages? The Bible says:

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Let Jesus collect your wages, and be thankful (repent and be thankful)

Answer 1

I'm not giving you my hard earned cash

Answer 2

I see that you've been reading your Chick Tracks! I hope you realize those things are among the most ignorant presentations of Christianity since the Inquisition was said to be an act of loving kindness. And you're showing a decidedly poor amount of original thinking.

So since you asked, here's why I don't believe in God:

First, you have to define the term "God." The problem with most theists is that this term is a moving target.

In addition, because there is no evidence either for or against the existence of God, you cannot use deductive logic (a+b=c; therefore c-b=a). You can only reach a conclusion by inductive reasoning using the balance of evidence (90% of A is also B; C is B, so the chances are 90% that C is also A).

I will assert (and others may shoot this down) that the only RELEVANT definition of God states that he intervenes to circumvent natural laws.

If God circumvents natural laws, then it is impossible to understand natural laws. All scientific findings would have to include the stipulation, "it is also possible that these results are an act of God, a miracle, thereby making our research meaningless."

However, since we have been able to expand our knowledge of natural laws (evidenced by every appliance in your kitchen), the scientific method works in this discovery. And the likely conclusion is that God, at least the intervening kind, does not exist.

Additionally, if God is defined as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing, then it is impossible to explain suffering. Either God is not all loving (he acts sadistically), not all powerful (he cannot prevent suffering), or not all knowing (he created suffering by mistake because he didn't know the consequences of his actions).

If God is less than these and/or does not intervene in our existence, then he is either non-existent or irrelevant. The classic argument is that I cannot prove that a china teapot is orbiting the sun directly across from the earth's orbit. But while I cannot prove this is not true, the evidence against it is compelling.

The evidence against God is equally compelling, and while it is not possible to prove beyond any doubt, it makes more sense to live your life as if there were not God.

It is more compelling to me that humans have invented God to reflect the thoughts of the ruling powers in a particular time. Because humans are always looking for reasons, when none are found, it was the natural inclination to declare the cause to be "God" (or gods). As the faith grew, miracles and laws have been ascribed to this Divinity, and an orthodoxy grows up around it.

Successful religions over the long run also are accompanied by some level of economic well-being to the populace. Unsuccessful ones are seen as false because they don't lead to improved lives.

Now it seems unhelpful to believe in such superstition. The only matters that aid in our ongoing well being are work, location, health, sustenance, and pure, blind luck.

So that's why I don't believe God exists. It has nothing to do with not seeing him. I also cannot see planets beyond our solar system, but others have and their existence is logically realistic. But there is a massive lack of any evidence for God's existence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and proof of God doesn't even rise to the ordinary.

♫♂♂♫

Answer 3

1. We know we have a brain because we're taught that we have a brain, whom other people (doctors, scientists) all over the world have physically seen and touched. We don't just have the understanding that we have a brain from the time we're born, just like we don't have the understanding of God or religion from birth.

2. You see creation, I see evolution.

Answer 4

I know I have a brain because I've seen people's heads been cracked open and I saw their brains. I don't think creation requires a conscious creator. The mould that grows on my fruit just grows there, it wasn't created by God.

Answer 5

What creator?? There are many creation myths in the world. Why assume that the god of the Bible is the one who created the universe?
.

Answer 6

If you believe you have a brain...why not try using it and come up with a decent question? The logical holes in your question are huge. And cut and pasted bible quotes just emphasize the fact that you can't think on your own.

Answer 7

Using you logic then how do I know I have blood if I'm not bleeding right now? You're assuming that you are right and that the world around us is a "creation", that is consciously made.

Answer 8

I have seen a brain before, but never a God.

I believe but that is a bad comparison.

Answer 9

Maybe one day you'll understand that quotes from the book you consider holy mean to non-christians about as much as quotes from marvel comics mean to you.

We can see our brains; we have equipment that does that, invented by scientists; medical professionals use it every day to save lives.

You claim the existence of something implies the existence of something else. You make no sense.

Answer 10

Because if I wanted to, I could crack my head open and look at my brain...for a few seconds, anyway. I've seen other peoples' brains. That doesn't work with God.

Answer 11

a brain has scientific proof. We know it exists because we can see it. We can test it.

THERE'S NO PROOF OF YOUR GOD. Period. No if's, and's or but's. There's no proof of your god. But REAL things can be scientifically measured and proven. A brain is one of those.

Your question is so completely illogical as to be almost laughable.