# What Would It Take to Prove God's Existence to You? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 8, 2000, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498 "2000-08-08T01:01:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/201 "2000-08-16T13:23:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Sure. Why not. But that’s not the same as dissmissing them in a belittling fasion. Unfortunately, your own reasoning skills have failed you. You did not consider whether what you saw as a flippant comment was not a cogent summary of a subject already discussed in some detail. The admonition that reason is no more valid an epistemology than any other was appropriate, given the circumstance that the poster who invoked reason did so condescendingly and arrogantly, which he himself graciously admitted. > [@](#): > > It’s not a perticulularly useful observation, though. Because pretty much by definition it allows you no way to proceed, either in debate, or in real life. A debate may be held within any arbitary epistemology. Using a scriptural epistemology, for example, two debators can have at it, slinging Bible verses at each other the way you and I might sling logical implications. Real life, in my opinion, calls upon an emprical epistemology far more frequently than it does a deductive one. Most people do not reason their way through their daily routine. They rely on their experience. > [@](#): > > Unless you have to reassess your entire mindset on a radical level, which is fairly uncommon unless you’re a big fan of mind altering drugs. It has intellectual value, of the “doubt everything” nature, but it’s not [relevant] here. I think the news that skepticism is not relevant here will take many by surprise. > [@](#): > > If you don’t agree to accept reason, at least theoretically, we can’t have an argument, or much of a discussion, for that matter. And if you do, it’s a [non sequitur], and an irritating one, to bring it up in the middle of a discussion. I “accept” all epistemologies, including the one implicated by SeatTime’s derision. Even including the one you are using here: bullyism. * * * Incidentally, I would like to say that SeatTime’s acceptance of responsibility for his inappropriate remark left upon me the impression of him or her as a thinking person of good character. ---
**Author:** ![Ura-Maru](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/51bf81/32.png) [@Ura-Maru](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ura-Maru)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/202 "2000-08-16T14:54:03Z")
> [@](#): > > Unfortunately, your own reasoning skills have failed you. They often do. > [@](#): > > You did not consider whether what you saw as a flippant comment was not a cogent summary of a subject already discussed in some detail. That’s true. I freely admit that have not read every thread on this message board. I assumed, incorrectly apparently, that if you had been doing so, you would have included some kind of refrence to it. Considering that the person to whom the comment was directed at seemed to be quite new, I assumed that if one was referencing a previous arguement, one would direct them to it, or at least mention it’s existance. Obviously, it’s possible that I could miss such a reference. In which case, I assumed (incorectly, apparently) that I would be politly corrected. > [@](#): > > The admonition that reason is no more valid an epistemology than any other was appropriate, given the circumstance that Perhaps. I would respond that SeatTime’s irritation was fully appropriate, or at least understandable given the circumstances, though he perhaps overstepped himself. And I’m not quite sure how your response applied to SeatTimes statements. Perhaps you could enlighten me? > [@](#): > > the poster who invoked reason did so condescendingly and arrogantly, which he himself graciously admitted. Actually, he confessed to arrogance, but not condisention. And since were talking about it, “Your own reasoning has failed you.” strikes me as more than a bit condisending. But that’s not germaine. > [@](#): > > A debate may be held within any arbitary epistemology. Using a scriptural epistemology, for example, two debators can have at it, slinging Bible verses at each other the way you and I might sling logical implications. Yes, but for the action of debate to be recognizable as such, implies a certain level of acceptence of reason, doesn’t it? How does one define and conduct a purely scriptual, totally reason free debate? > [@](#): > > I think the news that skepticism is not relevant here will take many by surprise. I’m sorry. I wasn’t aware that every subject here had to be traced back to absolute first principals every time it was brough up. I would ask why so few of the other GD posts do so, though. Can we stop being snide to each other now? My response was not intended to mock you or anyone else. I was trying to understand what you were saying, to the best of my obviously inferior abilites. > [@](#): > > I “accept” all epistemologies, including the one implicated by SeatTime’s derision. Even including the one you are using here: bullyism. I wasn’t aware that I was being a bully. You seem to be offended by my responses, I apologize. I thought I was defending SeatTime from the same, in fact. Summary: May I ask what came across as “bullyism” in my posts, so I can avoid it in the future? I apologize that I am not familiar enough with this board to understand all of your references, and by extention for whichever of my comments offended you. However, I do not feel that the hostility in your own response to me is justified, as it does not seem to be in jest. – “I wish they hadn’t lead up up the giant spider route if they wern’t able to deliver one.” ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/203 "2000-08-16T15:12:27Z")
**Ura-Maru** > [@](#): > > May I ask what came across as “bullyism” in my posts, so I can avoid it in the future? I apologize that I am not familiar enough with this board to understand all of your references, and by extention for whichever of my comments offended you. However, I do not feel that the hostility in your own response to me is justified, as it does not seem to be in jest. I admire your tenacity, an attribute that my God admires as well. What came across as bullyism to me was the resurrection of a topic that had been settled. SeatTime and I had made peace with one another. To recap events, Friend of God was making an argument from a combined revelation and scripture epistemology, and yes, he was being a jerk. I warned him some time ago that, unless God would call upon his expertise when He made His judgements, that he should stop intimidating others with his judgementalism, and get out of that devil’s playpen as quickly as he could. He pooh-poohed my advice, and now has hoisted himself by his own petard.’ **That notwithstanding** , he stated correctly that God requires that we become like little children. It is a metaphor, and like all metaphors can be interpreted various ways if the context is unknown. But in that context, Jesus meant that we must have the innocence of children, and trust God the way children trust their Father (assuming their Father is a decent man). In other words, we must use an epistemology of faith. SeatTime’s remark, born of frustration and impatience, equivocated the implication of the metaphor. I could have let it stand, but there are thousands of lurkers here who might fail to separate the grain from the chaffe in this jumble of ad hominem assaults. I simply wanted it known that an epistemology of reason is no more valid than an epistemology of faith. _Particularly_ in matters metaphysical. SeatTime then disarmed me totally by proving his or her own good character, whereupon I welcomed him to SDMB. When I turned around, — **bang!** — there you were. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/204 "2000-08-16T16:02:10Z")
You are no friend of God, nor any friend of man. You claim God spoke lies to you, you spread those lies in His name. You are prophesying lies in Gods name. Whom have you served? Here you have been mercifully unsuccessful. In this forum you have faced those among unbelievers who are wise, and intelligent, and see your vain posturing for what it is. Among the Faithful here, you have been given much good advice, and courtesy. Too much courtesy, I think. For the second time, I rebuke you in Jesus’ name. You said God spoke to you, and reported your own vain words to us. That is self-love, not the true love of Christ. You have sought to be the source of salvation, and quickly become the source of lies. Repent, and be gone. In His name I deny you. I commend you to His care, and love, if you have humility enough to seek Him now. Tell your lies in your own name, lest you lead others away from the Lord. Or tie a millstone around your neck, and throw yourself into the sea. It would be better for you. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Satan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Satan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Satan)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/205 "2000-08-16T16:52:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Triskadecamus \* > > **For the second time, I rebuke you in Jesus’ name.** Does this mean his head is gonna start spinning around and he’s gonna spit up pea soup now? COOL! * * * Yer pal, Satan [sub]I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR: Four months, one week, 14 hours, 52 minutes and 8 seconds. 5184 cigarettes not smoked, saving $648.10. Life saved: 2 weeks, 4 days, 0 minutes.[/sub] **_"Satan is not an unattractive person."_-Drain Bead** [sub]Thanks for the ringing endorsement, honey![/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/206 "2000-08-16T17:04:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Satan \* > \*\* > > Does this mean his head is gonna start spinning around and he’s gonna spit up pea soup now? COOL! > \*\* No, that takes three times. Hopefully he won’t make me go that far. 🙂 Tris ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2000, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/207 "2000-08-16T17:31:40Z")
Tris, I am not worthy even to lie down at your feet. How you have glorified Him! I’m sorry to have saddled you with those remarks. I love you. ---
**Author:** ![Chocobo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/898d66/32.png) [@Chocobo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chocobo)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/208 "2000-08-17T02:52:29Z")
In response to an earlier post, I’ve gotta say that I have no idea about Satan and free will, etc. I’ll have to do some research, and I’ll get back to ya on that. And FoG, about the Lord speaking to you…I’m not sure _how_ the Lord spoke to you. Because, IMHO, the Lord no longer speaks _directly_ to people, such as He did in the Old/New Testament since He has no need to. That’s what the Bible is for. I believe that the Lord ‘speaks’ to us in our lives through the Bible, friends, and family. We pray, and then something in our lives happens that pertains to our prayers. _That’s_ how I believe the Lord ‘speaks’ to us. I have no problem with Christians giving their opinions of what God wants, and giving Scripture to back it up. More power to them. BUT when you start claiming that God is telling you do or say certain things in His name, then I agree (on most points) with Tris. Christians have no need for prophets in this day and age; we need Evangelists who are willing to go out and share the Gospel, the one and _only_ true word of God. Maybe if you could explain HOW God spoke to you, i.e. words, feelings, events…well, maybe then we’d all have some idea where you’re coming from, and might not be so hostile towards you and what you’re saying. ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/209 "2000-08-17T04:32:17Z")
Greetings everyone! I hope you all had a good day. I have been debating whether or not to continue point for point responses to each of these posts, simply because it’s sooo time consuming. At the same time, while I _expect_ contrary beliefs to mine on this board, I am realizing more and more that I am wasting my time even trying to have a discussion with those of you that are darned and determined no matter what. It is also a waste to discuss anything with those of you who are determined to be harsh and rude. So what I will do is pick up with my responses where I left off on page 3, but this time I will respond only to those who are polite. I am not interested in shouting matches. I am limiting my focus … I will respond to anyone who is open to politely discuss the issue of the possibility of God’s existence. I have no problem with someone disagreeing with me, even strongly, but I won’t respond to outright meanness toward me personally. I will ignore hateful and cruel comments. My revised op still stands: What would it take to bring you to a place where you believed God is real? Again, to reiterate my goals one more time: I am not attempting to “prove” God to anyone. I will reiterate again that _I_ believe solidly in God and have a personal relationship with Him. All I will attempt to do is point out an aspect of the issues you raise that you might not have considered before. Having said that … it’s time for marathon posting! And for those of you who were griping that you don’t like to read them … don’t! No one’s forcing you to. Cont’d on next post ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/210 "2000-08-17T05:03:36Z")
And _I_ repeat: You are here to convert those of us who you think you can convert, and to ignore those of us who you cannot. Your rudeness to us when you attempted a cold reading and failed was uncalled for, and claiming that attacking your motives was the same as attacking your god was juvenile. Your indignation is not any more “rightious” than ours. ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/211 "2000-08-17T05:06:02Z")
Okay, as I slide toward the bottom of page 3 of this thread, here is a comment or two from Dr. Lao: > [@](#): > > It seems to me that there are other options God could have chosen besides hell for those who don’t come to him. He could have them be reincarnated or simply have them wink out of exsistance. Correct me if I’m wrong, but souls that are damned to hell can’t repent and get out. The only reason to keep them around would be to torture them. Is it not within God’s power to cause these poor souls to no longer exist, in order to relieve them of their suffering? Or is he simply apathetic to their pain with a, “They had their chance,” attitude? If God wishes to run his universe that way, its up to him. However, he doesn’t sound very loving to me. I won’t pretend to fully understand the full ramifications of the issues you raised. I understand what you’re saying and actually you might be surprised to know that many born again Christians have wondered about this issue as well. Let me point out one or two things to consider here. First of all, even though God’s most _popular_ trait is Love, it isn’t His _only_ trait. He is also a just Judge. This is an _equally_ powerful aspect of God. He is also perfectly Holy. This is yet another aspect to consider. All of these elements come into play here. As an illustration, let me equate God’s Holiness to nuclear power. Nuclear power is something you have to handle with the utmost level of precision and balance. One wrong move and you’re dead. You take one step into a room that contains unsealed nuclear radiation without proper protection, and you’re dead. God’s Holiness is much the same way. Consider it like a reflex reaction. Imperfection comes into God’s presence and it’s instantly consumed and destroyed. On top of that, there’s God’s Justice. He sees all of us and deems every one of us guilty of a life of sin against Him. Think about it. We are in a continual, daily, purposeful rebellion against our very own creator! He finds us guilty, and His Holiness determines that eternal separation from His Presence is the only just punishment. In other words, and again I don’t pretend to fully grasp this, it would be _unjust_ to let us get away with just not existing or being reincarnated or whatever. We truly and fully deserve, every one of us me included, to be separated from God for all eternity. Our crime against God is truly _that_ great. And yes that’s an overwhelming thought. Now you might not believe what I’m saying here, but consider this for a moment. _If_ I am indeed correct on this point, is it not one of the most amazing demonstrations of love in all of history that God _personally_ came to earth as a human being to make _certain_ that there was an alternative to this? I almost erred and said “He didn’t have to”, but actually He did. Why? Because of that _famous_ aspect of His personality … His Love. He couldn’t deny _any_ element of who He was. His justice demands our punishment, His holiness demands the severity of the punishment, but His love and mercy allows a way out of the punishment. It amazes me every time I think about it. In fact, I’m glad I just typed that. My gratefulness to God is growing as I type. Thank you Lord for coming to save me. That’s why Christians call it “being saved”. We’re literally being rescued from the punishment we so richly deserve. Dr. Lao, you also said this: > [@](#): > > Regarding the OP, I agree with APB9999. Evidence of God’s existance would have to pass scientific standards for exidence. That is to say, it must be physical and repeatable by other people under the same conditions. It also must defy any attempt at a natural explanation. I think that is rigorous enough to satisfy everyone. So, FoG you can tell God that for me, and if he pulls it off he has my vote. Can you tell I like your comments? I’m sticking with them quite a bit here! 😉 Since I don’t know you I don’t know how you think about these things, but I’ve noticed that many on this board take things that God does in people’s lives and tries to turn them into coincidences. In other words, if you _really_ want to, you can find a _non_ spiritual explanation for just about _any_ spiritual experience. I don’t know if you do this or not. All I can say is this … the next time you hear a sappy-sounding Christian say that God did such-and-so in my life this week, I hope that you will consider for a moment that it’s entirely possible that He did indeed do something for that person. A complete skeptic looks for an alternative explanation and doesn’t even consider the possibility that God was, in fact, involved. I hope that you will consider the _possibility_ of His involvement at the very least. I guess what I’m getting at is I’m genuinely curious as to what level of evidence would satisfy you. For example, I’ve heard _dozens_ of stories from friends who have had to raise money for missions trips. In some cases, they just raised the money and they were off. For some others, they raised part of the money but were left short, and had to trust God to somehow bring in the rest. And He would do it in amazing ways! For example, some obscure refund check from months earlier would arrive in the mail the day before their trip, and it would contain the exact remaining amount they needed. Or in some cases, someone they didn’t even know would hear about their missions trip and give them a check for the exact amount they needed, not knowing the figures involved. There are multitudes of stories like this. But a skeptic would have an excuse for all of the above. The guy who wrote the check had a lucky guess. It was by chance. The refund check was going to come anyway, and the fact that it came the day before the trip was just a lucky break. I guess my concern for those on this board is that the standards you set are _so_ high that you will always find something to object to. I hope you will prove me wrong! The above example is just an example. I’ve seen many such things over the years. And there are always the dramatic ones. Maybe that’s what you’re talking about - the outright physical healing type miracles. Or a prophetic word that speaks directly to issues going on in your life (_accurate_ words I must add ;)). All I can say is this … I’ve seen skeptics come to healing and prophesy meetings at churches I’ve been to over the years, and I’ve seen some of them truly be moved by it. If you find a godly church in your area that regularly has meetings like that, I encourage you to check it out. You might just find the evidence you’re looking for! Well! I’ll have to redefine “marathon posts”! Dr. Lao I’m glad I got to respond so thoroughly to your post. I hope it was thought provoking. Onward! … ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/212 "2000-08-17T05:57:52Z")
Lamia, regarding your brain tumor you said: > [@](#): > > That’s okay, I didn’t know a thing about the subject until I got sick. My tumor is not cureable but it is treatable. I’ll never be at 100%, but this thing is unlikely to kill me. I didn’t know they could be treatable to that degree! I am so glad that it is unlikely to be lethal in your case. I am still sorry you are having to deal with it. If you are willing for me to, I would love to pray that God would give you comfort in the midst of the trial. > [@](#): > > Let me put it this way: if I ever have a religious experience again, I will consult my neurologist. I have no reason to believe that I personally will ever have one that is not caused by my medical problems. It occurs to me that I know nothing about the religious experience you had. Would you be willing to share what it was? It might help me understand better what was going on. > [@](#): > > I do not, however, have any evidence at all that anyone has ever had a religious experience not caused by NPs. I also have a hard time understanding why the gods, if any of them exist and are keen on communicating with humans, would chose a method that looks so much like a symptom of NPs. Well, all I can offer to your first sentence here is that God is a life-changer. You don’t just have an “experience” with Him, He _changes_ who you are into something better than before. As for your last sentence … I don’t know. But again, until I know more about your experience I can’t really say much more. Ben, you said: > [@](#): > > Ah, but a perfect being would never _choose_ to rebel against God. They would _choose_ to follow God. Why don’t I have the possibility of choosing to lead a perfect life? For that matter, why did God give us the _desire_ to do evil? Hmmmmmm. Your first sentence is interesting and I’m not sure how to answer it! All I can say is God created Adam and Eve sinless, but with free will. So in a way, that’s not the same thing as saying they were created “perfect”. They were created with no sin tainting them, but they had the choice to go toward sin. Your second sentence is another good zinger. In a way, you _do_ have the possibility of _choosing_ to lead a perfect life … but you won’t be successful. I can choose to jump off the Empire State Building and survive, but it won’t work. Your last sentence I can answer. Why did God give us the desire to do evil? The answer is: He didn’t. He gave us the _choice_ between good and evil, but He didn’t give us the _desire_ for evil. That’s something I believe that we developed on our own. In fact, when you come to Christ, one of the things He does is _change_ your desire back toward wanting to do good again! > [@](#): > > I’m afraid that these kinds of Christian arguments about free will seem pretty shallow to me. Why didn’t God choose only to create those people who would become Christians of their own free will? You can’t infringe on the free will of someone who doesn’t exist, so why create infidels and villains? On the surface what you are saying sounds right, but there are a few holes. Basically … if _everyone_ chooses you, it’s not really free will. You’re _manipulating_ the situation in your favor. Truly making yourself vulnerable means giving people the choice to love or to reject you. In other words, God didn’t say, “Ok, this person is going to have a choice and I see he will choose me, so I’ll let him exist.”, and then “This guy is going to choose to reject me so I’ll blot him out of existence”. He simply says, “I’m creating this person as a separate entity from myself. This person has a choice whether they will love me or not.” End of story. Yes He might then look ahead and _see_ what that person will or will not choose, but the person already exists. Unbelievable! I’m moving on to page 4! Ura-Maru, hi by the way I don’t believe we’ve met :). You said: > [@](#): > > You know, this is by FAR the most annoying thing that prothesisers do. MANY MANY philosophies and religion, contain this element, INCLUDING modern psycology. The examples you gave are neither perticularly “christian,” nor are they paradoxes. Please refrain from claiming major issues of philosophy as your own, and THEN implying that you’re the only people who ever “figured it out.” It’s spectaularly insulting, and seems to be deceptive as well. > Sorry if that was a bit harsh, but that REALLY irritates me. Well I hope you realize that what you just stated is not exactly common knowledge amongst the masses. I’ve never heard _any_ of the things I originally said (“When you’re weak, He is strong”, “To find your life you must lose it”) in any context other than Christianity. I’m sorry you found it insulting. I’m curious about what other sources have made the same or similar statements, so feel free to fill me in if you wish. > [@](#): > > So, this should be very easy to verify, shouldn’t it? If God is willing to give you supernatural knowlage on computer repair, maybe you should try this with something that you have no previous training with, and thus _couldn’t_ be pulling out of your subconcious. Maybe advanced molecular biologly? But it’s not a game or magic show, that’s just it. God gives you wisdom to deal with the issues _you_ are dealing with in your day and in your life. Truthfully, I have a funny image in my head of me doing what you suggested. I’m sitting there with a molecular biology book asking God to explain it to me for no real reason, and I can just picture Him looking at me incredulously, laughing, and saying with a grin “You’ve _got_ to be kidding me!” > [@](#): > > Have you really considered the claim you’re making here? God is dropping predigested solutions to technical problems directly into you’re brain? Not that he’s motivating you to better yourself at your profession, or that he’s nudging you along to help you with your day to day life, or that he’s helping you to rember things, but that he’s acctually downloading specific information into your brain? You seem to think that the two are mutually exclusive. They aren’t. God does _both_. He directs me, motivates me, etc etc to pursue my career and study and learn and use the gifts He’s deposited in me. No question about it. But also, there are always opportunities for God to show Himself in the workplace (and life in general). Sometimes, despite all your training and understanding and experience, you come across a brick wall and you just don’t know what to do next. It’s in _those_ moments that calling out to God can produce some rather amazing results. Regarding being a minority you said: > [@](#): > > And imagine how much worse it would be if, instead of being an adult volentrily exposing yourself to this for a couple of hours a day of occasionaly rude arguement, you were a young, unpopular child, being forced to endure this for six hours a day from both your peers and teachers. Actually, while it wasn’t quite _that_ bad, I _was_ the most teased and picked on kid in school from first through sixth grade. Believe me, I know it’s no fun! I learned a lot through it though, and like everything, God even took a bad thing and somehow managed to turn it around and sqeeze some good out of it. Regarding miracles happening overseas regularly, you said: > [@](#): > > Really? Why don’t we hear about them? Truthfully, because the media could care less, apparently. I’m saying this based on numerous reports over the past few decades, scattered in various magazines and newspapers from various sources. But I’ll see if I can find any Internet links that might have some of the specific examples. I will even bet there’s a website or two dedicated to reporting this kind of stuff. Regarding God revealing Himself in mysterious ways to people who’ve never had missionaries, you said: > [@](#): > > Basically, this would mean that those born into christian areas in general, and those born into christain religion specifically, are far less open to God than those who arn’t. After all, the pigmies and the ainu had no need of an organized religion to bring them to God, but one of my friends needed to be born not just in a largly christain region, but also to have both his parents churchgoers as well, to get an equal shot at heaven. Kinda makes him look bad by comparison. I _think_ I’m following here, but help me if I’m missing something. Are you saying your friend must be a weaker person because God had to put him in a home with Christian parents to get him saved, whereas a tribe that never had a missionary didn’t need any Christian influence at all to get saved, so that makes them “better”? _If_ that’s what you mean, I would have to disagree. Your friend simply had an _easier_ and more _obvious_ way to come to Christ. If anything, that’s what motivates us to go to the mission field … to make the gospel plain and simple to all who want to hear it. Regarding how sinful we are, you said: > [@](#): > > If it’s that much worse than ANY of us realize, how come you know about it? Why do you assume that christains have a harsher view on “human nature” than everyone else? The only reason I know about it is twofold: God showed me my _own_ sinfulness, and – (the atheist’s _favorite_ reason of _ALL TIME_!) – the Bible says in rather stark terms that we are all inherently sinful. As a sampling, check this out: > [@](#): > > There is no one righteous, not even one; > There is no one who understands, > No one who seeks God. > All have turned away, > they have together become worthless; > there is no one who does good, > not even one. (Rom 3:10-12) Regarding my friend’s leg getting healed you said: > [@](#): > > If this is so, it should be in her medical records, no? A broken bone healing in a couple of days is proably worthy of a post it note or something. > > I’m sorry, but this is classic “frend of a friend” type of evidence. The most honest of people tend to exagerate five year old stories that have great signifigance to them. > > And even if it went EXACTLY as your friend described, there are other possible, (though fairly unlikly) explanations. Maybe her bone wasn’t really broken. > > And if her leg WAS healed by a miricle, how do you know it was God, and not, say, a demon? It probably is in her records! As for the five year old story, I should have clarified. I _heard_ the story from someone who was there mere months after it happened. I didn’t _meet_ the person in question until 5 years later. In fact it didn’t hit me until a few months after meeting her that she was the one I’d heard about! I asked her all about it and she confirmed it. As for the bone not being broken, the doctor said it was. As for it being a demon, all I can say is this – it’s all in who you’re asking. They weren’t _asking_ a demon to do it, they were asking God to do it. The Bible says if you ask God for bread, He’s not going to give you a stone. Regarding changing from bad habits to good, you said: > [@](#): > > Yeah, but _non christans_ do make these kind of choices as well. And _christians_ do not ALWAYS do this. So what is you’re point here? Are you saying that christains are more LIKELY to do this? If so, that should be statistally displayable. Or are you just using “true christian” as a synonym for “good?” First, I am not using “true Christian” as a synonym for good. If anything, a “true Christian” is someone who realizes that _no_ one is good, including themselves, and that their only hope of Godliness comes from closeness to God. As for what I _am_ saying, it’s simply this: every person I’ve ever seen come to Christ is _changed_ by Christ in amazing ways. It’s _different_ for different people. For example, you might have someone who’s smoked all their life who is also into pornography. They get saved and God _immediately_ delivers them from smoking, but the porn gets weeded out of their life over time. Then take another person with the same two vices. For them, God delivers them _immediately_ from porn, but the smoking takes time. All I am testifying to is the life-changing power of God. > [@](#): > > But the fact that people belive something dosn’t make it true. True, true, true, perhaps it wasn’t the _best_ argument to make, ie pointing out that if so many people believe it, it must be at least possible. As for my statement that Jesus is the only way, you said: > [@](#): > > This seems to be the crux of the debate. Frankly, this statement IS pretty arrogant, no doubt about it. > > You have offered your own personal experience in your faith as evidence. You have NOT explained why we should accept this, while dening the _exact same claim_ made by a muslim or a hindu. I can understand how it can sound arrogant, believe me. I might even think the same thing in your shoes. All I can say in response is this: examine the logic of the religions you consider. See how they handle the inherent goodness of God and the imperfection of man. How do these two get reconciled? Okay, that’s it for now folks. I’ll once again try to catch up sometime later this week. I’m 1/4 of the way through page 4. G’night :). ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/213 "2000-08-17T10:18:38Z")
Just go ahead and jump forward to [**this one**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=662112#post662112). ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/214 "2000-08-17T14:05:39Z")
**FriendofGod** : Regarding miracles happening overseas regularly, and why nobody seems to hear about them, > [@](#): > > Truthfully, because the media could care less, apparently. I’m saying this based on numerous reports over the past few decades, scattered in various magazines and newspapers from various sources. But I’ll see if I can find any Internet links that might have some of the specific examples. I will even bet there’s a website or two dedicated to reporting this kind of stuff. Oh, fuck me twice! The old evil-secular-humanist-atheist media bit is not only tiresome, it’s also nonsense. “numerous reports over the past few decades, scattered in magazines & newspapers”? Where are these reports? In what publication were they reported? What are the sources that you’re referring to? Here is an opportunity for you to actually accomplish something you say that you will do. Hell, I won’t even insist on links. Just tell me where you find examples of miracles happening. Anywhere. I seriously doubt, though, that you will. And yes, there are numerous websites dedicated to reporting this sort of thing, the problem is that they are equally as full of crap as your claim that such has happened. > [@](#): > > The only reason I know about it is twofold: God showed me my _own_ sinfulness, and – (the atheist’s _favorite_ reason of _ALL TIME_!) – the Bible says in rather stark terms that we are all inherently sinful. Huh? So, you’re saying that you were sinful but didn’t know it. Fortunately, your deity was hanging about to demonstrate to you your sinfulness, and this is the atheist’s favorite reason, how? Maybe you oughta lie down there, Jasper, you’re starting to speak gibberish. And as far as God changing different people different ways: I would like to think that if I was going to have faith in something, that it would at least be consistent. Waste Flick Lives! ---
**Author:** ![Modian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Modian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Modian)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/215 "2000-08-17T16:25:32Z")
I think thats kinda sad actually. When he gets stuck on something, and then has a burst of inspiration, he figures God did it, and thanks him, and takes no credit himself. Where’s the sense of pride or self worth? I know when I get stuck on some code, and then figure out a way to do it, I’m all excited and on cloud 9. And I congratulate myself, not some god. Everything he does, he thinks God did for him, not that he did it himself. My mom is the same way. She recently moved to another state, and when I asked her about her work (She’s a self employeed accountant), she said God would provide some for her. I said why don’t you find some yourself? Relying on some mysterious being to provide you your livelyhood is just beyond me. But not believing in God was beyond her too. She kept insisting there was a “void inside me”. :rolleyes: Now that I think about it, I find that totally arrogant and totally Christian. Since I don’t believe in God, there must be something wrong with me, ie, a void. And as a disclaimer, I was raised the Christian way obviously, but totally rejected it. If something goes wrong in my life, then it’s my responsibility. It’s not God testing me, it’s not God’s will, it’s the way the world works. Laying the blame of problems in your life on some mysterious being is nothing but a cop out and shows your to weak to deal with problems yourself. I agree with Ventura completely that “Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded” My 2¢ ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/216 "2000-08-17T16:57:10Z")
I did a little online research this morning at one source to find just a sampling of recent articles on miracles happening around the world. GLWasteful said: > [@](#): > > Where are these reports? In what publication were they reported? What are the sources that you’re referring to? Despite the rude tone of your post and despite my decision to generally not respond to those posts, I’m responding to this one because I _do_ want to at least post a few links to articles so you can read and judge for yourself. I sincerely doubt GL or most on this board will be _convinced_ by these articles, but for those with an open mind it might at least make you take a second look at things. As for _where_ I’ve read stories, two sources leap to mind: Charisma magazine (from which all 3 of these links come from) and a church bulletin insert I saw for years called “The Church Around the World”. Both sources not only report on miracles happening around the world, but also persecution against Christians in China and other countries, as well as testimonies of God’s life changing power. Here are the links. One thing that might surprise you is the _casual_ way in which miracles are reported. That’s because it truly is fairly commonplace overseas and this kind of reporting has been going on for decades. Again, this is just a small sampling. > **[Charisma Magazine](https://www.charismamag.com/articledisplay.pl/?d=cm19828&MonthID=cm198)** > > The official site of Charisma magazine provides news, analysis, prophetic commentary and teachings for charismatic and Pentecostal Christians. > **[Charisma Magazine](https://www.charismamag.com/articledisplay.pl/?d=cm10029&MonthID=cm100)** > > The official site of Charisma magazine provides news, analysis, prophetic commentary and teachings for charismatic and Pentecostal Christians. > **[Charisma Magazine](https://www.charismamag.com/articledisplay.pl/?d=cm99827&MonthID=cm998)** > > The official site of Charisma magazine provides news, analysis, prophetic commentary and teachings for charismatic and Pentecostal Christians. Depending on how these links come out, you might have to copy and paste them into your address bar to get to them. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/217 "2000-08-17T17:03:45Z")
> [@](#): > > Since I don’t believe in God, there must be something wrong with me, ie, a void. Well… > [@](#): > > And as a disclaimer, I was raised the Christian way obviously, but totally rejected it. There’s the void. ---
**Author:** ![SeatTime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9bcb4/32.png) [@SeatTime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SeatTime)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/218 "2000-08-17T18:00:59Z")
**Libertarian** , thanks for the kind words. I respect the views of you and **Tris** (even though we disagree), but FoG is just irritating to _everyone_. Maybe, someday I’ll be able to “see” things the way you do, but, alas, it isn’t today. I’m outta here…peace. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/219 "2000-08-17T18:38:35Z")
Thank _you_, SeatTime. God go with you always. “You never know what’s around the corner.” — my sainted mother. ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2000, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498/220 "2000-08-17T19:13:55Z")
**FriendofGod** : > [@](#): > > Despite the rude tone of your post and despite my decision to generally not respond to those posts, I’m responding to this one because I _do_ want to at least post a few links to articles so you can read and judge for yourself. I sincerely doubt GL or most on this board will be _convinced_ by these articles, but for those with an open mind it might at least make you take a second look at things. So, I’ve made your list of people to ignore? Pity! And referring to me as “close-minded” especially in a back-handed way is something that I assumed you would try to be above. Ah, well. Live and learn. Now, the only instances I could find in English were reprints of the same article that you linked to. So, it looks like I will have to let you continue to believe that these wondrous miracles are happening, and the only media with the stones to report on it is _Charisma_ magazine. Unless, that is, someone else is able to access a translation program, and put them in English. I tried, and where I work won’t let me do so. > [@](#): > > One thing that might surprise you is the _casual_ way in which miracles are reported. That’s because it truly is fairly commonplace overseas and this kind of reporting has been going on for decades. Well, there was nothing casual at all in regards the articles. As a matter of fact, they used that breathless prose style that I have come to associate with evangelical publications. And while you claim that it is commonplace, only one of these articles offers names and places that can be independently researched. The one that deals with Malaysia simply states that miracles have happened, and leaves it at that. If you really want people to pay attention to what you have to say, you might look into giving more complete information than that. The one that deals with Almolonga, well, again I only found reprints of the article that you linked when I searched. However, there was this: [http://www.cephasministry.com/joels\_army\_transformation.html](http://www.cephasministry.com/joels_army_transformation.html) Lemme know what you think. I found it interesting. And once more, just because you say that miraculous happenings are commonplace, and that they have been reported on for decades does not make it so. Thus far, you have given three instances of reporting, all of which come from the same source. Not the most objective source, either. As I stated in another thread, it’s not that I think Christian websites are untrustworthy, just terribly biased. Waste Flick Lives! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-it-take-to-prove-gods-existence-to-you/28498.md?page=12)