my question is this, do you really think we believe what we do without it having been proven to us, I mean, if there are that many crazy people around you have bigger problems than whats going on in iraq.
2007-03-30 09:06:55 · 12 answers · asked by elhefe1968 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
yes I personally have proof beyond a doubt
2007-03-30 09:42:51 · update #1
well J.P. if GOD was my personal butler and jumped when i said you would have your proof ..............but then he would not be GOD would he
2007-03-30 09:45:19 · update #2
If God's existence has been proven to you, can you share that information with us? I'm sure we'd all like to know, and I'm willing to admit I'm wrong if proven so.
So will your evidence hold up against rational, scientific, and skeptical scrutiny?
2007-04-02 08:48:05 · answer #1 · answered by psykomakia 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you don't know what the word "proof means as we use it. Religious people believe a vast array of very different and mutually exclusive things. From the beginning of humanity there appear to have been tens of thousands of religions, all different, all making different and conflicting claims about the nature of reality. Considering this vast array of possible religions and beliefs, doesn't it strike you as odd that when someone has a religious experience it's almost always is the religion or one of the religions that are mainly believed by his or her own family and community? For instance, it's rare for someone in Birmingham, Alabama to have a religious conversion experience in which the principle deity is a god with a blue elephant head. But in India this God has many devotees. Apparitions of the Virgin Mary are commonplace in Catholic Latin America, but not in Buddhist territories. If religion actually has something to do with the eternally valid, then why are religious details entirely determined by local culture, just like yours were?
Suppose a new prophet pops up with a revelation from God that contradicts previous claims of revelation. How do we know if it is valid or not. Or course you have ask for the evidence, and it's not sufficient to say he's really charismatic or he waives his jacket and people fall down. All sorts of people have "revelations" and "conversionsexperiences" that contradict each other. They can't all be right and could all be wrong.
Generally, when I ask someone like you for proof what I get is "prove it's not true." Because in fact you really don't have any proof. What you have is assertion, mere claims and occasionally clever rhetoric. You can't produce a live Jesus. You can't personally perform any miracles despite that your god supposedly dwells inside you. And if you're like most Christians, you know a whole lot less about your faith than I do. But you have the chance to add details to your post. So what's your hard evidence? Claims of fulfilled prophecy? Christians have cooked up various supposed fulfillments to assure us the end world the end is at hand thousands of times over the past 2000 years, which just shows how vague and all purpose these "prophecies" are.
Like me and everyone else who ever was a Christian, you had an emotional experience based in your own emotional needs, not based in some supernatural and unmistakable display of power. You were given "reasons" to believe afterward, but you didn't really question them or examine them critically, did you? Because in fact you had already believed "on faith" and then went looking for reason to believe you didn't simply do something gullible in a fit of emotion.
But go ahead, show us proof, not jst claim a dead man got up after being dead three days, something which no one has ever seen happen, not you, not me nor anyone we know.
2007-03-30 16:40:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The word "proven" is a dodgy one to use, if here it implies "settled for ever beyond doubt".
I was a convinced Christian before I became an atheist. I thought what I believed was right, so I might have said "proven", then.
But I have changed my mind for what seem, to me, to be good reasons.
Discounting those who do not reflect at all, and those who lie for social or other reasons, that still leaves the vast majority who believe what they believe honestly.
But those honest beliefs are widely disparate.
And cannot all be correct.
2007-03-30 16:22:32 · answer #3 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are right, of course. But, I have found that the Atheists that hang out in the R&S category are basically here to either try to find that proof you are talking about, or to try to get us to disbelieve in a Person that we know and love. It's just like the Bible says (I'm paraphrasing), The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to them that are perishing, but it is the power of God unto salvation to those who believe. An Atheist usually doesn't believe in anything spiritual. And, spiritual things can only be understood by the spirit. So, if a person has cut off that option in their mind (that they have a spirit living inside their body), then they will never understand. Peace
2007-03-30 16:17:32 · answer #4 · answered by superfluity 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know it's funny because I asked a question to Theists if Theism is the logical choice. I think you will be surprised by the responses. There were some who answered no to the question. I have the proof if you're interested. If so just click this link right here.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgZVVWbHzZki_WEVY_Spj0jty6IX?qid=20070326152152AAcdHpb
2007-03-30 16:16:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
WHAT?!?! so it was proven to you?? I don't get your question and I do think that such a large portion of the world believing in a fantasy is a pretty big problem especially since they all think their particular fantasy is the right one and that killing people is ok in the name of their particular fantasy.
2007-03-30 16:13:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How has it been proven to you? By faith? The Bible is too vague and easily debated to prove much of any point...hence the many different religions interpreting the same scriptures differently.
2007-03-30 16:11:04 · answer #7 · answered by James M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Proven to you does not necessarily mean that it IS proven. How do I know what your standards for proof are?
2007-03-30 16:09:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Since the essence of faith is believing without seeing and proof denies faith, I would think that's what you believe, yes.
2007-03-30 16:16:35 · answer #9 · answered by Julia Sugarbaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Proof is something that can be duplicated and demonstrated reliably.
No theist has ever done this.
I am willing to entertain the possibility that you indeed have proof. Demonstrate it for me please.
2007-03-30 16:10:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋