when i said i didn't want endless biblical quotes i was trying to sway people away from what i usually see around here; picking a passage from the bible and then not explaining it in relation to the question.

if you scroll up you'll notice that aji was kind enough to explain his quranic verse.

thanks,

i'm sorry if some of you have got the wrong end of the stick.

@ Exu,
Our Christian counterparts are known for petty jealousy like a new wife . Don't worry about that.

There's this guy who narrated his experience with GOD. He said on a sunny afternoon, he had no money (no single thing on him) and he had to go to his examination centre. He then prayed to God that if by 1:30pm he doesn't get any money, he'll deny HIM. He said he prayed fervently with FAITH. Eventually, when it was 1:30pm exactly, he heard a knock on the door and when he opened, he saw someone who was asked to deliver to him, a certain amount of money; the exact amount he needed. The guy was dumbfounded and praised God.

_{Now, I'm expecting y'all to submit various adjectives you have to describe the event.}

Asimiyu was a fellow student in my grammar school years. He was from a poor home, economically, and everybody knew about his condition. Also, he was not a bright student, as I was the one tutoring him math, chemistry, and physics in those days. Anyway, came back to school one day, proclaiming his belief in Jesus and all that. Why? He said: "I got home yesterday after school and was so hungry that I cried. There was nothing in my house to eat, so I proceeded to my brother's nearby house. But before I got there, I did a test of my faith, saying 'if Muhammad is truly God may I meet neither my brother nor his wife at home, but if Jesus is truly God may I meet just one of them.' When I got to the house, not only did I meet my brother's wife who fed me properly, but she even gave me a lot of money. This is my reason for choosing Christianity." Talk about being dumbfounded -- we were really flabbergasted! How could a human being be so daft like Asimiyu? It was obvious right there that Asimiyu didn't even know anything about his former religion, Islam because Muhammad is not God. I thought the bible says that man should not live by bread alone, or whatever? Man, this your example is material and so ethereal in nature! Find another reason or a more logical way of saying it. I believe in God and His existence, but people like you make those atheists sick. And you'll never win a single convert or even revert by this way of childish reasoning!

Your example and my example are in no way to be compared. This guy I'm talking about has always been a born again Christian. When he was in serious need, he summoned God and God answered his prayer. Tell me, what's materialistic about that??

Money and food are not related? What are you talking about? Both guys based their belief in what God could do for them right there and then! If your godly friend was a true "born-again" he wouldn't test God in any way. Didn't they teach us in primary school how Jesus was tested by Satan, asking Jesus to go ahead and jump off the cliff if he were who he claimed he was? Had Jesus done it then, I'm sure you people would not be talking about his death on the cross, right?

He never tested God!!! Compare your post to mine and u'll see the difference. I said this guy prayed to God because he needed something worthgiving. But your own class mate did a "test of faith" as u call it. The difference is clear enough.

Look, Goodguy, whatever you say. I think some readers can deduce intelligently from both of our writings. OK?

I know what ur problem really is. I'm sure if I'd talked about a muslim guy taking up his Quran to read and experiencing some divine miracle from God, you wouldn't be arguing.

Why must we use logic to explain the supernatural if logic is the exact opposite of the supernatural.

Layi, this is exactly what I tried explaining but EXU says using circumstances happening around us is the same thing as using logic. I really don't know how the two fit.

layi:

Why must we use logic to explain the supernatural if logic is the exact opposite of the supernatural.

Actually logic is not the opposite of the supernatural. Logic is a system of reasoning you use to reach a conclusion from premisses; It is internally consistent and has nothing to do with the natural or the supernatural.

What is considered supernatural is just these things that do not have a natural explanation (yet). It says absolutely nothing about whether or not they are true.
It is not difficult to apply logic to the supernatural. If it will lead you to a sensible conclusion is another matter entirely.

Nferyn, did you know that there are some people in this world who can tie you down and you won't be able to get up? (Believe it or not). Now tell me, what logical explanation do you have for that?

goodguy:

Nferyn, did you know that there are some people in this world who can tie you down and you won't be able to get up? (Believe it or not). Now tell me, what logical explanation do you have for that?

How on earth could I come up with a logical explanation for this:
* I don't know these people or their skills
* what exactly is tieing down?
* what did they use to tie me down?
* what exactly do you mean by getting up?
I may possibly begin to try to come up with a logical explanation once you can answer these questions

Did you read what I wrote? Did you understand what I was trying to say?

* I don't know these people or their skills - They are the rulers of this world (in the spiritual realm)
* what exactly is tieing down? - I mean tieing you down spiritually, or even physically without touching you or coming near you.
* what did they use to tie me down? - supernatural powers.
* what exactly do you mean by getting up? - exactly what you'd try to do when tied down.

Well Goodguy,

I would very much like them to try that on me. You need to be perceptive to hypnosis for it to have an effect.

I hope (but don't pray) you come in contact with one of these people one day. I believe that will make you believe there's something called "supernatural".   

Seriously though, if you've got a Bible, please take your time to read the whole of REVELATIONS. (It might be difficult for u, but please try ) You will see that the prophecies in there are being manifested today. A very good example is "Nations rising up against nations".

nferyn:

Actually logic is not the opposite of the supernatural. Logic is a system of reasoning you use to reach a conclusion from premisses; It is internally consistent and has nothing to do with the natural or the supernatural.

What is considered supernatural is just these things that do not have a natural explanation (yet). It says absolutely nothing about whether or not they are true.
It is not difficult to apply logic to the supernatural. If it will lead you to a sensible conclusion is another matter entirely.

How then do u proove the supernatural with logic? Its a worthless venture. Logic is a system of reasoning within the confines of nature. Supernatural is BEYOND nature and are events that puts us in awe. Logic can only explain a naturally occurin phenomenon. Only experience can proove the supernatural.

How can you call for an explanation of God saying you want logical answers and not quotes from scripture?

Do you think you know more logic than God who gave you the brains that you have?

Anyway, it takes God to reveal himself to you. If He hasnt yet done that its a pity 'cos no amount of logical reasoning will.

To be carnally minded (sense ruled) is death (spiritual blindness and seperation from God). You cannot percieve the living God with your senses.

layi:

How then do u proove the supernatural with logic? Its a worthless venture. Logic is a system of reasoning within the confines of nature. Supernatural is BEYOND nature and are events that puts us in awe. Logic can only explain a naturally occurin phenomenon. Only experience can proove the supernatural.

No it is not confined by the natural. You can apply logic to supernatural presmisses as well. There is nothing that can prove the supernatural as it operates outside our sphere of natural enquiry. It is very well possible that what is considered supernatural actually is very natural. the supernatural on the other hand is by definition outside the scope of natural evidence. Experience cannot prove anything. It can give you clues, but it cannot prove anything.

donnie:

How can you call for an explanation of God saying you want logical answers and not quotes from scripture?

There have been people in the past (e.g. St. Augustinus & Thomas Aquinas) who claimed that they could logically prove the existence of God without resorting to scripture. On a metaphisical level, with the right assumptions, you can logically prove the existence of God. Obviously you need to share the same assumptions if you want to believe that..
See:
http://www.existence-of-god.com/
http://www.arrod.co.uk/essays/ontological.php
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas3.html

and
http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm (but this is just making fun of the proofs, not to be taken serious)

donnie:

Do you think you know more logic than God who gave you the brains that you have?

This is starting from the assumption that God exists and gave me brain. I do not follow that assumption, as there are more plausible, evolutionary explanations for the existence of my brain.

donnie:

Anyway, it takes God to reveal himself to you. If He hasnt yet done that its a pity 'because no amount of logical reasoning will.

To be carnally minded (sense ruled) is death (spiritual blindness and seperation from God). You cannot percieve the living God with your senses.

So in essence, you can neither prove nor disprove God. You can only disprove or prove a particular instance of God through study of his properties and comparing them with what's happening in the world.

You appear to yourself to be wiser than those who just believe without quetioning hun?

How sad. I do not admire you at all. I am at rest. I have my questions answered. My hope aint in this world only but also in the one to come.

In my weakness i am made strong.

But the wisdom of this world is turned into foolishness by the one who controls eveything.

The natural has never and can never superceed the spiritual. The spiritual controls the natural.

Everything that was created is temporay, they all have death in them, they are subject to change. The only everlasting being is God Himself.

When all fails and comes to and end, His word remains forever.

The politics, education, technology, and all the wisdom of this world are programmed to fail and are already failing if you can percieve.

One may succeed in proving God logically, but logic cannot take you all the way. You will have to listen to what he says about Himself and believe it.

Nice talk, donnie.

If the Bible can be proven to be true, I believe that's enough proof to show that God exists. The story about the ark of Noah which was written thousands of years ago has actually been proven to be true. Traces of the same ark have been found by archeologists on Mt. Ararat in Turkey.

I do not want to discredit googuys story but from the nferyn i know, he'll probably tell you that only proove the existence of the airk (if at all it wasnt another ark). IT DOESNT PROOVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.


But like i said earlier nferyn, if experience doesnt proove anything, then nothing will cos in the actual fact, the word proove got its origin from the fact that we didnt or are yet to hav the experience so we need other sources to deduce the existence of that "truth".

goodguy:

Nice talk, donnie.

If the Bible can be proven to be true, I believe that's enough proof to show that God exists. The story about the ark of Noah which was written thousands of years ago has actually been proven to be true. Traces of the same ark have been found by archeologists on Mt. Ararat in Turkey.

Goodguy, the story about the ark is blatantly false in all it's aspects, unless of course God decided to use the mechanism of evolution on steroids to come to our current biodiversity on earth (and then trick us into believing that the genetical clock points at millions of years of evolution instead of a few hundred years). He would also have had to temporarily suspend about any law of nature in existence to make the engineering of the ark (out of wood - there are not enough trees on earth to make that possible - and it could still not be structurally sound, actually no material is in existence to make such an ark possible) and the climatological conditions (more water available on earth that all of a sudden just disappeared after the flood) of the great flood at all possible.

The story of the ark is also present in very similar format in most of the religions of the Middle East (among them Mithraism of ancient Persia), this indicates that the flood was a local catastrophical event that happened about the time that a breach occurred between the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean and that for the communities on these shores, it looked as if the world is coming to an end (think about it as Katrina X 10.000 without our current technological protections)

nferyn,

You wrote to GoodGuy:

...the story about the ark is blatantly false in all it's aspects, unless of course God decided to use the mechanism of evolution on steroids to come to our current biodiversity on earth (and then trick us into believing that the genetical clock points at millions of years of evolution instead of a few hundred years).

I hate to comment on this because I am not sure what you are saying...
but...Know this:
Ec 1:9
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
Ec 1:10
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
Ec 1:11
There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

He would also have had to temporarily suspend about any law of nature in existence to make the engineering of the ark (out of wood - there are not enough trees on earth to make that possible - and it could still not be structurally sound, actually no material is in existence to make such an ark possible) and the climatological conditions (more water available on earth that all of a sudden just disappeared after the flood) of the great flood at all possible.

Mt 19:26
...With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

I am going to try to explain this in "short-form" but if you do not know the Bible very well I will lose you by not taking time to do this in "long-form"  Try to stay with me:

Ge 1:6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

Ge 1:7
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament and it was so.

Ge 1:8
And God called the[b] firmament Heaven[/b].

Firmament, Heaven, divided the waters, above, from the waters, below...

Ge 1:9
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Ge 1:10
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas

Earth, dry land, was more land mass than we know today and the seas were much less than we know today.

Ge 2:5
...the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth...
Ge 2:6
But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

Ge 7:4
For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Ge 7:10
And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.
Ge 7:12
And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
Ge 7:19
And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
Ge 7:20
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered
Ge 7:24
And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

This was the waters above the firmament being released by God upon an unbelieving earth.

Ge 8:1
And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged;
Ge 8:2
The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
Ge 8:3
And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.

The waters returned "off the earth" by the wind moving them and formed the large masses of water we have today, leaving a lot less land.

There is so much more to this than I am able to write but I suggest you study your Bible and get the full story.  You will enjoy it 

RhodaRose

Hi RhodaRose,

I will answer to your post in detail, but I need some time to gather all my source material.

Regards

Nefryn,

I wonder how you strongly oppose the proof of reality of the ark when you have not listened to the details or better still comfirmed their discoveries. What happened to logical reasoning?

I have watched a documentary of the discoveries that have been made concerning Noah's ark. Concerning its size, exact location at the end of the flood, and even fossils have been discovered.

Like i always say, no physical proof of the reality of Jesus is as convincing as this deposit of the precious Holy Spirit within my heart. He is more real than anything in the world.

2 Corinthians 4:18
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

However, i promise to come up with some facts and discoveries as we go on, since that is all you rely on.

Not too long ago, explorers claimed that they had found Noah's ark atop Mount Ararat in Turkey. Yet, two years ago, what some believe to be Noah's ark was found not on Mount Ararat but on a remote site about 20 miles away, near the border of Turkey and Iran. According to the American and Middle Eastern researchers who have been to the location, the remote site contains a buried, ship like object, resting at an altitude of 7546 ft. Some 558 ft. long and 148 ft. wide, the object conforms almost exactly to the 300 x 50-cubit boat that, according to the Bible, God told Noah to build.

http://www.direct.ca/trinity/ark.html

To get more links, just type in google search bar: Noah's ark found?

Thnx goodguy

I don't really know how a boat proves the existence of a higher power...

Here's one argument.

In the universe, there must exist a first cause by which no cause precedes it. There must exist an uncaused cause. Let’s call this uncaused cause “God.” God must be by definition eternal, else God would need a cause also. All finite, changing things that exist need causes. To say "well then what caused God" assumes that God is a finite, changing thing. God, if He exists, must be infinite and unchanging else we are left with an infinite regress, which is a philosophical absurdity. The uncaused cause therefore cannot be temporal. Anything that is actually eternal by definition cannot have a cause. The question “who caused God” becomes an absurdity if applied to an eternal being. So, if God is eternal, then He doesn’t need a cause (in fact, he can’t possibly have a cause or he’s not eternal).  Therefore, if the universe is created, then its creator must be eternal else He would be part of the universe and would need a cause like everything else.

God must also have existence outside of time, else he would be part of the measurable universe, hence temporal and finite (and also requiring a cause). Time, by definition, is a measurement of change. If something does not change, then it exists beyond time. All that changes has causes for those changes. If God exists fully within time, then time itself becomes greater than God, and God becomes a limited, temporal contingent being precluding Him from being the uncaused first cause. The only way God could be the first eternal, uncaused cause, is for His existence to be unlimited by time, therefore ultimately impervious and transcendent of time. But if God is impervious to time, then He is immutable. So right off the bat, God must possess at least these two qualities: eternality and immutability. Just knowing these two attributes alone, we can eliminate millions upon millions of potential gods!! Gods such as Shiva, Vishnu, and Ra are not immutable. Gods such as Aphrodite and Poseidon are finite. In fact, all Greek gods are finite and mutable. Therefore, we can conclude that if God exists, he cannot be any of the Greek gods. Based upon just these two qualities alone, eternality and immutability, we can logically eliminate whole religions as being false. Buddhism, for example, goes out the door – and along with it, all the Baddisatvahs and the eight-fold path. A logical person would at minimum reject any god that does not possess at least these two qualities. 

It is obvious that any being that is eternal and immutable with enough knowledge to create a vastly complex universe must be highly intelligent. Highly is a serious understatement. From the tiniest particles to vast galaxies, the pure, raw intelligence that this being must possess is something that is utterly incomprehensible. He must also be extremely powerful.  This universe is awesome in its scope and magnificence. A weak being could not create such a tremendous place. But it doesn’t stop there.

This universe is not only complex, but is also sentient. You and I right now are living, breathing, sentient beings possessing emotion and awareness of our existence. A being that is eternal, immutable, highly intelligent, and extremely powerful that creates sentient beings must also be a sentient being. How could a creator create something greater than himself? NO matter how a big a robot one makes, it will still be lesser than the smallest sentient being. If god was impersonal “force”, from what part of that “force” came the intelligence to create a universe? From what part of that “force” came the ability to create sentience and self-awareness? From what part of that “force” comes the laws of physics, logic, music, hope, joy, human will? It is highly illogical to say “If god exists, then he is an unintelligent, weak impersonal being.” This is utter nonsense. Therefore, we can reject any impersonal, weak, or unintelligent view of God. There go religions such as Taoism and Confucianism. Say goodbye to Animism and all of its basic variants.

Furthermore, we can reason that God, who must be immutable, transcendent, intelligent, powerful, eternal and moral must also be infinite in his existence, else his existence would be limited. Any limiting factor on God’s existence makes him weak and dependent upon something else. Yet, if God is infinite, then He must be alone, for there cannot be two separate infinite beings – this is a philosophical absurdity as they would limit each other. And any infinite being must by definition be fully sovereign and in absolute control over all that exists. Farewell to Baha’i and Zoroaster. You can chuck aside Hinduism and all of its nearly one billion gods. They all go down the drain.  So long to Jainism and the endless brooms. Adios amigos. We can continue the process of deduction; that is, the process of eliminating potential gods as being false because they do not possess the necessary attributes of the true God. But there is a better way, rather than deducing gods from the ground up, we should begin at the top down.

Simply ask the question, “What is the greatest possible being?” This is the question asked in the ontological argument for the existence of God first posed by St. Anslem of Canterbury in the 11th Century A.D. Anslem asks what is the greatest, most perfect notion the mind can conceive of. The human mind can conceive of such a thing that no greater thing can be conceived, which means that no other thing can be considered greater than that thing. Such a thing would be powerful indeed, for its attributes would be infinite in scope.

We could imagine a being of unlimited power, knowledge, sentience, love, perfection, etc. Without repeating the ontological argument, it is important to note that the greatest possible conceivable being is a God with infinite attributes, who is eternal, immutable, perfect, etc. Now, let me ask, of all the possible gods out there, how many fit this description? The answer is only one: the Judeo-Christian God. No other God possesses the attributes of the greatest possible being, and if it did, it would merely be a “nickname” for the real God. Let me explain: Who is Norma Jean Baker? Who is Marilyn Monroe? Both are the same person. Norma Jean is fully Marilyn Monroe and Marilyn Monroe is fully Norma Jean. You can call Marilyn anything you like – you can even call her a unicorn if you want, so long as that unicorn is described as a famous blonde actress born June 1, 1926 in LA and died August 4, 1962. But whatever title you place on her, it has no effect on who she is. She remains regardless of the “name” you place on her. Atheists often compare God to a unicorn or leprechaun, an unbelievably weak argument. Let’s analyze the common atheist unicorn example:
Take an invisible pink unicorn
Give it eternality
Give it infinite power
Give it infinite knowledge
Give it complete sovereignty
Make it morally perfect
Make it loving
Make it the ultimate creator of the universe
Does it still look like a unicorn? It is now beginning to look exactly like the Judeo Christian God. It is no longer a unicorn at all. It is now the Biblical God. This argument is the same for anything.
Take an empty diet Dr. Pepper can.
Make it weigh 205 pounds.
Make it 6’3” tall
Give it human properties; strip away its metallic properties
Convert all non-life material to living material
Make it a male
Make him 29 years old
Give him a certain DNA makeup
Make him a professional baseball player
Make him the 1997 AL MVP
Well, at this point that soda can is beginning to look remarkably like Ken Griffey, Jr. If we give the soda can just a few more attributes, then we no longer have a separate entity – we just have a self-styled nickname for Ken Griffey Jr.

The greatest possible being is God. All other gods (such as Ra, Shiva, etc.) possess inferior attributes to the greatest possible being. Therefore, they are false. Any so called “unicorn” or other “god” that possess attributes identical to the greatest possible being is no longer a unicorn, but God.

Source: Unknown