I’m in a strange place: very conservative, but not Christian

[BeyondET]

We see change. A seed grows into a plant, a timelapse of it quickly reveals the change it’s gone through. Time is quantifiable, just look at any clock. God himself however, you would be unable to quantify since a property of God is timelessness, being eternal and outside of time according to theology.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t worship science either. I see the argument of, “Yeah well science doesn’t have all the answers.” This is true and it is indeed a gap…but that gap does not automatically mean “it must be God.” All I’m saying is…there is a gap. Science can’t prove god, theists can’t prove god. What I can do though, is point out how their claims and assertions of God’s existence are logically and evidently unsubstantiated in the very end.

I appreciate the Christians (and any religious person for that matter) can admit that in the end it’s all just faith. “You just gotta have faith.” And I don’t operate based on just having faith. There are probabilities of things (that we already know of) which can happen such as the % of people that would die in a car accident without a seatbelt, but I do not consider those related to having faith in any way (in case someone wants to equate having faith with taking some risk in day to day life).

Indeed it is measurable but time itself can't be seen or touch so it's more of a concept then something tangible.

Timelessness like time is a state of being.

The age old question on how did the universe start from nothing rather a religion position or not. It's seems nothing isn't plausible.

Like what came first the seed or the planet that produces the seeds.

 

[BeyondET]

Oh i know what TIME IT IS ................ITS TIME TO PRAISE THE GLORIOUS LORD .

Indeed some need a little time though to step into the unknown. patience is truly virtue

 

[BeyondET]

things don't come about by random chance, here's a video explaining that.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

The burden of proof is on them and unfortunately their actual “evidence” is not very compelling.

Actually the "Burden of Proof" isn't on "Christians" at all. NOBODY comes to Christ except they be "Drawn to Him" by God (John 6:44). The simple fact that you're here, and that you're concerned about Him at all indicates that He's working in your life. I'd ask Him about that. When He comes with His evidence (normally Conviction of SIN and of Judgement), it'll be VERY compelling.

 

[Romanov2488]

Actually the "Burden of Proof" isn't on "Christians" at all. NOBODY comes to Christ except they be "Drawn to Him" by God (John 6:44). The simple fact that you're here, and that you're concerned about Him at all indicates that He's working in your life. I'd ask Him about that. When He comes with His evidence (normally Conviction of SIN and of Judgement), it'll be VERY compelling.

The burden of proof is on anyone making a claim that a certain deity exists of any religion. I am not concerned about God, I am concerned about the ‘evidence’ that is being presented by those who make the assertion. I will be concerned about God once there is evidence of one. A reply such as, “It will be too late by the time you have evidence.” Still does not convince me.

Suppose some random stranger walked up to you on the street and said. “Give me 20% of your income.” You ask him, “What’s in it for me?” He holds up a religious text, “Says here there is a god. Here is what happens if you accept him and if you don’t accept him.” You then ask, “Do you have any actual evidence of this god you speak of?” His only reply is, “There is no need for evidence, there is no burden of proof to meet, it is completely faith based.” Would you do it?

 

[Romanov2488]

Problem there is that atheists wouldn't accept any evidence at all..
What "evidence" would you accept as 100% proof of God?
PS- Full marks to Dawkins for saying-

View attachment 24500

And his remarks are in line with atheism. Atheism doesn’t assert a negative belief (there is no god). That would be anti-theism. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god(s). Nothing more, nothing less. Even those who are agnostic (they do not know) are also atheists, because they lack the belief.

 

[Romanov2488]

Be careful with labels. They advertise themselves as descriptors but all too often become pre/proscriptions instead. For example, a "Christian" label purports to mean "a follower of Jesus" but far too often warps into "a political conservative", which means adopting lock-step the cannon of conservative policy. I adamantly reject this which is why I prefer to throw labels out the window whenever possible. Labels are, in essence, idolotry.

Correct. I like to think of labels more as indicators of a general behavior. There only there as a means of communication to get a general idea of what is being communicated. It would be silly to be in lock-step with every single conservative policy if someone were to say they follow Jesus.

 

[Aunty Jane]

And I couldn’t get into it primarily because I can’t put my faith in something that cannot be proven. I am in no way insinuating that God does not exist because I can’t prove it. But, it is the assertions of people who claim God exists that places the burden of proof on them.

If God was provable, we would not need faith.....therefore faith is not the possession of all people.

By the time God proves that he exists, it will be too late to demonstrate what you never had to begin with....a bit like asking Noah to take you on board the ark when you had ignored him for decades and he endured your ridicule......only now you believe him, so is that a ticket to get on board? Nope...you are left to swim with the sharks.

Those who have faith, have reasons for it.....just as those who have none have their reasons.
God chooses us as much as we think that we choose him....maybe the reason is that he has disqualified the faithless from becoming a citizens in his Kingdom....of what use are the faithless to him? You think he owes us proof of his existence when it is all around us?

Open your eyes....he has already proven it a million times over.

 

[Romanov2488]

@Romanov2488 This is virtually what I was going to say also.....”cause and effect” is a sound scientific principle as is the other sound scientific argument that “all life comes from pre-existing life’......the more you consult with nature, the more you see design and nothing “designed” has no designer. “Mother” Nature can do nothing without “Father” God.

Let’s take the computer we are all using as an example of design. Who would ever claim that our computers just appeared out of nowhere fully functioning, allowing us to communicate with people all over the world using an invisible signal beamed by satellites located in space?

But the computer has many components, all necessary for the thing to function as it was ‘designed’ to.
Each component was individually ‘designed’ so that when integrated with other specifically designed components, would all contribute to the full working model.

But then once the machinery is constructed, again in a very specific order, unless it is connected to a power source, it isn’t much use.
The power source is another specifically designed system and is used to make the machinery perform as it was designed to. But wait a minute.....if we want to communicate with other computers around the world, we need the Internet....another specifically designed system that allows us to do this. But again, what about the satellites that beam a straight signal around a circular planet? Who designed them and put them in their orbit? All these things have one element in common...they are all the product of intelligent design.

Do we ever stop to think how well these things are designed individually to all work together to give us these instruments that we use daily and often take for granted?

So now, what about the human body and the miraculous brain that drives it? Can you say with any certainty that something so complex was not “designed” by someone with superior intelligence? Not only the miracle that such living things exist in an environment designed to support their existence in an ongoing way, but that they have the ability to reproduce themselves using a code that is passed from one generation to the next. We are only just coming to terms with what DNA is and what it does. Did it just come out of nowhere?

What about our senses? We have the main 5, but again, if we could not see, what is the point of all the beauty that surrounds us?
If we could not hear what is the point of music or bird song or the sound of human voices?
If we could not taste, what is the point of all the different flavours we can savor?
If we could not smell things, what is the point of all those different fragrances and aromas that we can enjoy or to warn us if something is not good to consume? Or if there is something burning or rotten?
Our sense of touch is also a beautiful thing. We are tactile and so we touch things and it engenders feelings.

Can you not see the Creator’s hand in all those things? And....I have only scratched the surface....

This is the teleological argument which suggests that there must be a designer due to the complex design of existence. I want everyone to see this because it is a common argument that comes up consistently among creationists in general. The problem with this argument is that it makes use of a false dichotomy presenting pure chance and an intelligent creator as the only two possibilities when it hasn’t successfully ruled out other options. There could be some purely physical rule to the universe that somehow demands that these constants be the way they are for example.

As long as there is something about the existence of the universe that we don’t know, this argument rests safely in that ignorance. Even when this argument has been debunked, it won’t appear so to many. The refutation of this argument demands that its opponent (myself) admit ignorance which can appear to some (yourself) on the argument’s side as an admission of defeat. It is very subtle in that it can turn its fallacy into a cheap victory.

 

[Romanov2488]

If God was provable, we would not need faith.....therefore faith is not the possession of all people.

By the time God proves that he exists, it will be too late to demonstrate what you never had to begin with....a bit like asking Noah to take you on board the ark when you had ignored him for decades and he endured your ridicule......only now you believe him, so is that a ticket to get on board? Nope...you are left to swim with the sharks.

Those who have faith, have reasons for it.....just as those who have none have their reasons.
God chooses us as much as we think that we choose him....maybe the reason is that he has disqualified the faithless from becoming a citizens in his Kingdom....of what use are the faithless to him? You think he owes us proof of his existence when it is all around us?

Open your eyes....he has already proven it a million times over.

You are proposing the teleological argument towards the end here which you proposed initially in post #14. I just got around to answering it in post #29 for you (sorry, been answering to multiple people haha)

 

[Aunty Jane]

I will just address this point....please bear with me...this is a favorite topic of mine....

This is the teleological argument which suggests that there must be a designer due to the complex design of existence. I want everyone to see this because it is a common argument that comes up consistently among creationists in general. The problem with this argument is that it makes use of a false dichotomy presenting pure chance and an intelligent creator as the only two possibilities when it hasn’t successfully ruled out other options. There could be some purely physical rule to the universe that somehow demands that these constants be the way they are for example.

What is "pure chance" when it comes to creation? What are the odds of anything perfectly designed, happening by "pure chance"? The chances of a single living cell arising by chance on earth are extremely remote, as science knows, let alone accidentally morphing itself into all the forms of life in existence, past and present.

When you speak of "rules" who makes the rules? Do they just exists for no apparent reason and are then employed to make miraculous things happen because of some random action that just takes place without intent?

Have you ever considered the earth all by itself, as the host of myriad lifeforms?
This is not called "the Goldilocks Planet" for nothing. Without its unique features, no life could exist here. Thanks to advances in astronomy and physics, scientists have gained deep insights into the merits of our 'special spot' in the universe. To begin with, our solar system, is located in the ideal region of the Milky Way galaxy—not too close to the center and not too far from it. This “habitable zone,” as scientists call it, contains just the right concentrations of the chemical elements needed to support life. Farther out, those elements are too scarce.....farther in, there is the greater abundance of potentially lethal radiation and other factors that are hostile to life.

Earth’s orbit within our solar system is about 93 million miles (150 million km) from the sun, which is a limited zone that is habitable because life neither freezes nor fries. Moreover, earth’s orbit around the sun, is almost circular, keeping us roughly the same distance from the sun all year-round.

When compared with other moons in our solar system, our moon is unusually large in relation to its host planet. Mere coincidence? It seems unlikely. It is the principal cause of ocean tides, which play a vital role in earth’s ecology. The moon also contributes to the planet’s stable spin axis. Without its tailor-made moon, our planet would wobble like a spinning top, and the resulting climatic, tidal, and other changes would be catastrophic. Just a coincidence?

 

[Taken]

I can’t believe in something I can’t see evidence of and by the same token I also can’t make any assertions that God doesn’t exist either. logical...

Hi Romanov-
Welcome to the forum.

The Big Picture hangs on God is Invisible to the Human Eye, And God Said, and What, to Whom and How God Said.

It’s a long history when you go step by step.
Consider the basic wondering questions on all points...
Who, What, When, Why, Where, How.
...apply those questions TO that which you CAN see...being YOU.

As you apply those questions TO you, do you find, anything curious?
For example, You did not See, Feel, Recollect, Know, decide, pick, choose your own beginning?
From a seed of a man fertilizing a seed of a woman, 9 months developing, development accomplished, born, months of infancy;
That’s you, what do you recall so far?
Growing, toddler, watching, hearing, mimicking...
That’s you, what do you recall so far?
Growing, adolescent, watching, hearing, mimicking, choosing, picking...
That’s you, what do you recall so far?

Is what applies to YOU Total recall from YOUR memory?
Or is there MUCH missing? Did mommy and daddy tell you things “ABOUT” you, that YOU do not recall? Why believe it?
...Can mommy Prove when you first said mama, took your first step, spit out your first taste of peas, cried when you heard a loud noise?

...That WHY, is called Trust. It is believing without seeing, that which you have chosen to Trust.
...Even as a infant, you learned to Trust; Hungry? Mommy to the rescue. Soiled? Mommy to the rescue. Afraid? Mommy to the rescue.
Hurt? Mommy to the rescue. Cold? Mommy to the rescue.

...That WHO, is Mommy.
...That WHAT, is circumstances.
...That WHEN, is immediate and sometimes you waiting, but trusting.
...That WHERE, is when you are WITH Mommy.
...That WHY? WHY TRUST? Hangs on EFFECTS you experience.

IF and When you Examine the big picture of YOUR own WHY, in regard to a babe, child, relationship OF YOU and your Mommy, regardless if you can Analyze particular situations of Mommy’s (not knowing all things)...and some things, (not particularly to your liking or outcome)...
...Could you honestly conclude;
(Even when you DO NOT know everything About Mommy, Can not SEE Mommy...)
Mommy Loves you, Wants all good things For you, Comforts you, Delights in you With her physically or in thought?
...Could you honestly conclude;
Mommy would be jealous, if you substituted another for her?
Mommy would be angry, hurt, if you left her?
Mommy would be livid, if you campaigned to others against her?
Mommy would eventually give you the same rejection you steadfastly gave her, and wanted the same from her to just go away and leave you alone without her?

Continued...

 

[Taken]

Continued...
Bottom line...
No one can PROVE God to you.
Just as “YOUR experience” is YOURS ALONE “with” your own Mommy,
So also is “everyone else’s experience” THEIRS ALONE “with” God.

No one alive today, can say, ya sure, I was there and recall observing God create and make things for His pleasure, to Love, Comfort, Care for, Teach Good things, enjoy the results.

No one alive today, can say, ya sure, I can recall observing Mommy and Daddy procreating ME, for their pleasure, to Love, Comfort, Care for, Teach Good things, enjoy the results.

We sort of get a PEEK (so to speak), IF Mommy kept a Journal...or if
God kept a Journal...Revealing their INTENTS, hopes, desires and results, IF their hopes and desires are MET, or not.

Scripture IS (sort of like reading Gods Journal)...
Every individual can decide to hear it, verify it, read it, doubt it, reason it, wonder it, believe it, (taste/ experience it, like it, not like it, spit it out, like it, keep tasting it, like the results, etc.

Just a baby, afraid of the dark, who calls out...Mommy, Mommy...
Mommy can shine a light on you OR keep you in the dark and comfort, cuddle, sooth you.

God works in a parallel to THAT. ^^ IF one allows Him to do so.
And men DO call out....God, God....I’m afraid...
God May respond with Shining a Light on you....ah, ah, ah, feeling all better...Dark is gone, thanks a lot, BLIP FIX....I’ll call again when I need God...but, hey, all is good for now.

And when men call out....God, God....I’m afraid...
Hey...wait a minute....Where’s the Light? God why are you not shining a Light on me? I demand the Light, now, show me, show me...
Pfff...you ain’t real.

This man is so busy demanding the Light that he can SEE, he can not notice the “comfort” through the “darkness”.

Continued.

 

[Taken]

Continued.

Ever think about the Purpose of a Prison?
I’m sure you can recognize the Secular purpose of a Prison.
But what about the Spiritual Purpose?
...It is complete removal from ALL contact with secular pleasures and comforts.
Sure you could let society test you. Violate “a rule society has set”, eh maybe you get away with it, maybe the consequence tolerable, no big deal, maybe you agreed to borrow, pay back, didn’t, and pff a tongue lashing.
...But have YOU ever tested yourself? Completely removed yourself from all the Secular pleasures and comforts you experience and enjoy?

That is a TOUGH test. Not a test most are willing to consider or attempt.
However to any person Wondering, Vacillating, wanting another to PROVE to them God exists, I would say, PROVE IT to yourself.
Test yourself.
Take A Bible, and completely REMOVE yourself from ALL things Secular.
...Notice I did not tell you to open the Bible, or to read it...Simply HAVE it with you.

Do you think yourself strong enough to test yourself?

 

[Episkopos]

The liberals ask me how the hell are you conservative and don’t believe in god? The conservatives ask me, how the hell do you not believe in God, but aren’t liberal? I get into it with the Christians, the atheists, the liberals, and the conservatives. People say ohhh don’t let labels affect you. Those labels mean a lot. If you are Christian in the fundamental, that massively affects your political stance. And if you are not a Christian, then your political stance on issues will be seen as very unChristian by the typical Christians.

I consider myself spiritual, but not religious. I was raised Christian Orthodox but I never cared to take it seriously.

It’s just funny because I have a lot of Christian values but I never liked the idea of not being my own ultimate authority which I guess allows me to hold many unChristian values at the exact same time. It’s tough. I consider the other alternative of someone like myself to be a liberal Christian…that too is another conundrum.

Can anyone offer any insight into this?

People tend to confuse being soulish with being spiritual. There us a soulish spirituality that is really not spiritual at all. And then there is a demonic spirituality...worshiping trees and such. Stone age stuff.

No, the modern spirituality is soulish...feeling connected to nature, animals and other people. Being soulish means fully engaging your mind and heart...which is something that makes you "come alive." We do have both hearts and minds to consider. And not everyone lives at any depth within themselves. Those who do can easily mistake that for being spiritual.

There is also a false spirituality...a superstitious outlook that one considers as greater than oneself...but is connected to an evil power.

Then there is being spiritual in Christ...which is the true spirituality...living in resurrection life and power from heaven.

 

[Romanov2488]

The issue with inserting God as the cause of everything in any argument is that something without any evidence for it, is being used as evidence. It does not logically follow…tentative at best. It’s like saying the cause of thunder is God bowling just because we have not yet found the cause of it. It does not follow the scientific method because the hypothesis can’t be put to the test via experimentation. I would much rather admit I do not know and leave the door open for infinite possibilities. Science cannot prove anything because it is not a closed system of propositions like mathematics and logic are, God will forever be out of its reach. However, I much prefer science to faith because science moves forward in the form of making continuous discoveries. I think science is a powerful tool which helps inform morality.

And the issue I see among many atheists is the deification of the government or state…replacing God with the state. Atheism just has a different effect on me. I see it as..hey, because I don’t worship a god, I’m not going to worship anyone or anything for that matter. Why be a half assed rebel when I can be an absolute rebel instead? People speak of separation of church and state and turn it into a tug of war by giving more power to one over the other. I think the best way to deal with this issue is to put both of them in a corner together. That way their contention becomes a more trivial matter.

Because I don’t believe in objective morality and there is nothing to stop me from doing the unthinkable…is exactly the reason I don’t do the unthinkable. Anything I decide to do therefore becomes genuine because there is no outside agency to dictate what I can and can’t do, it becomes spontaneous as well because it allows me to look at each situation individually instead of approaching it with a predetermined decision in mind. Sometimes I feel like a lot of religious hypocrisy can be fixed if those people can observe an atheist being charitable since there is no god for him to decide what is right or wrong. In fact the Bible talks about how works alone are not enough (one example of why I think the Bible has merit).

These are two reasons I’ve gotten into it with both the libs and the conservatives:

 

[Taken]

Indeed it is measurable but time itself can't be seen or touch so it's more of a concept then something tangible.

Timelessness like time is a state of being.

The age old question on how did the universe start from nothing rather a religion position or not. It's seems nothing isn't plausible.

Like what came first the seed or the planet that produces the seeds.

Like what came first the seed or the planet that produces the seeds.

Planet created. Not as we know it. It was in Water. Once extracted out of the Water, it was Dry Land and called Earth. Gen chapter 1.

Mankind created and made out of the Dust of the Earth.
Created...ie Formed.
Made......ie Given Life Gen chapter 1.

God scattered SEEDS upon the Earth, that it grow, have its own seeds within it, reproduce its same KIND of thing. Gen chapter 1

God gives every Seed, its own body. 1 Cor. 15;38

The Earth, came first Before the Seeds.
Every Seed has its own Seeds to replicate its own kind of thing.
Every Seed upon the Earth, requires the Earth (its habitat), to sustain its own life. Ponder...

About 60-70% of the Earth is water.
About 60-70% of the Body is water.

The Earth has minerals, gold, silver, iron, etc. & nutrients etc.
A Body requires those thing to live.

 

[Windmillcharge]

But, it is the assertions of people who claim God exists that places the burden of proof on them.

Yet you live in a universe that isrational, consistent and science says had a begining and youdon't know that there is a God!
Scripture says the heavens declare the Glory of God.
Your problem is if there is no God is to explain why anything exists.

What ever has a begining. Has a cause.
The universe has a begining.
Therefore there is a cause.

 

[Romanov2488]

Yet you live in a universe that isrational, consistent and science says had a begining and youdon't know that there is a God!
Scripture says the heavens declare the Glory of God.
Your problem is if there is no God is to explain why anything exists.

What ever has a begining. Has a cause.
The universe has a begining.
Therefore there is a cause.

Whatever the cause may be, it does not automatically mean it is God. Yes, I don’t know if there is a God. I admit that, I just don’t make claims of there being a god or not. All I’m saying is if one makes a claim..be ready to back it with evidence.

Here is the logical issue with the cause and effect model regarding God.

Everything has a creator.
God is that creator.
God does not have a creator.

The solution fails because it violates its own premise.

 

[Mantis]

If you don't believe in God, ask him to reveal himself to you. You may be very surprised of what happens.