The Reasons For God

[bijane]

Quick note: I'm not actually a believer, but equally, I've heard to be able to argue for something, you must first be able to argue against it, so I thought I'd play devil's advocate for a bit. A little brain exercise.
Also, I'm going to start off with semi-simple arguments, but I'm hoping the continuation of this debate will allow them to expand.

Why God (reportedly) exists
First, a note. For this, I'll be arguing for the Christian God, as it's the system I have the most familiarity with: and I'm going to be taking a more liberal stance, so an Old-Earth ideal, and evolution: albeit an evolution run by God. Ditto for the Big Bang. Also, I'm taking on the beliefs that the Bible was written by divinely inspired men; but men nonetheless, hence inconsistencies, otherwise we could argue all day...
(I do know at least one Christian with that belief).


Morality. I'm not talking 'we have morals, therefore...', as I understand that isn't a great argument: I'm talking more, the fact we are born with such morals. Where else could they come from, how can the same set of values be programmed into the genes of every human? Children are known to be 'innocent': they do not steal, kill etc, as such, they are born with morality. How else could it get there?

Evolution itself. There are two points to make here.
Firstly: where could such a complex series of mutations come from? Why would nature randomly gain this attribute, and how could it come to such a conclusion as man only once?
Secondly, the fact of worship. Why is it just mankind has evolved to this level, and why is it only we are capable of worship? If it was a natural occurrence, we would expect to see such homage in natural animals: yet only man is able to worship God.

Finally, to make one last discussion starter, I'll fall back on the old First Cause. Whence cometh the universe?
God is eternal: by definition, omnipotent, omniscient... To God, all times must be one (also explaining the long periods of time for man/Earth to evolve/appear), so it is understandably possible. the universe however cannot be eternal: all scientists agree that it had a distinct starting point.

That's all! Please respond, I'll try to reply. This could be fun.

[dobbie]

Bijane wrote:

I'm taking on the beliefs that the Bible was written by divinely inspired men; but men nonetheless, hence inconsistencies, otherwise we could argue all day

Well, for the sake of discussion, let's say that the Christian God did have a hand in writing the Bible. So my question is, How far was the Bible written by divinely inspired men? Like, for instance, 1% of it ... 10% of it ... more percent than that? To put it another way, which parts are divinely inspired without their having inconsistencies or human error in them?

Thus, what becomes the means by which to make an informed estimate about it?

[bijane]

Bijane wrote:

I'm taking on the beliefs that the Bible was written by divinely inspired men; but men nonetheless, hence inconsistencies, otherwise we could argue all day

Well, for the sake of discussion, let's say that the Christian God did have a hand in writing the Bible. So my question is, How far was the Bible written by divinely inspired men? Like, for instance, 1% of it ... 10% of it ... more percent than that? To put it another way, which parts are divinely inspired without their having inconsistencies or human error in them?

Thus, what becomes the means by which to make an informed estimate about it?

I was going for the basic framework being decided upon by God, so a set few people (the writers) were given the story, and tasked with transcribing it. So, essentially, they were given the story of Jesus, the Apostles, Old Testament etc, and they wrote it in their own chosen way: and as such, being human, may have made mistakes, and added in their own prejudices.
We can tell the divine from the manufactured text from the morality bestowed by God: blatant cruelty is a sign of the cults of the time, and goes against our morality: showing it was added by man. Things like that. God did not influence the writers (free will), but has given us the means to see that which he meant, and that which he did not.

[dobbie]

byBijane:

I'm talking more, the fact we are born with such morals. Where else could they come from, how can the same set of values be programmed into the genes of every human? Children are known to be 'innocent': they do not steal, kill etc, as such, they are born with morality. How else could it get there?

Well, to answer a question with a question, How is a new born baby supposed to be able to “steal, kill, etc.â€

[bijane]

[quote="dobbie"]byBijane:
Well, to answer a question with a question, How is a new born baby supposed to be able to “steal, kill, etc.â€

[dobbie]

byBijane

I was going for the basic framework being decided upon by God, so a set few people (the writers) were given the story, and tasked with transcribing it.

Well, okay, but the same two questions: 1) By what means can anybody determine which parts of the Bible are divinely inspired texts? 2) And how far have the prejudices of the writers contaminated those parts of the Bible?

the basic framework being decided upon by God

The catch is that, necessarily, the basic framework would be one as described by the Christian belief system. The question arises how reliable that basic framework can be. That is, the atheist says that "the basic framework as being decided upon by Godâ€

[dobbie]

byBijane:

God is eternal: by definition, omnipotent, omniscient...

Well, since word definitions can be arbitrary or in other words conceptual standards, then of course just to religiously define something (such as God is omniscient) doesn’t make it a reality.

Besides, who can really comprehend a word such as omnipotent? Or eternal? If the basic apprehension of those qualities is that “God just is that way,â€

[bijane]

byBijane
Yes, but (here i go again) the deal is, it involves a process of cherry picking biblical passages, and dismissing others according to our contemporary sense of morality.

In fact some Christians simply dismiss the bad things that God does in the Bible, by saying that they are simply none of our business. Even in the Bible, such as in the Book of Job, it teaches that it’s really none of Job’s business whether the Bible God does bad things.

I also wonder how many Bible pages would be left in tact if those Christians were to divorce the divine things added by God from the stories of cruelty added by man. For example, some Christians tell us that the devil must have sent the star of Bethlehem: it led the wise men to Jerusalem, who went and talked with the evil King Herod about it; eventually he sent and killed young boys in Bethlehem. All the tragedy thanks to the appearance of the star, so the star wasn’t such a good thing.

Editorial opinions, like that one, could be applied to many Bible pages. By dividing the things that God really did from the things that God didn't do, I imagine half of the Old Testament and New Testament would wind up "torn" from Bible.

This was meant to just be a detail. Hee, oh well.
Some parts of the Bible are clearly written by man: take the iron chariots section, it would seem clearly that God was not with them, and they simply lost a battle due to the improved technology of the other side; yet man wrote it as if God were there, even though he was not.
As for how we can tell which is man's creation, and which is God's, I'll admit, there is no certain method: we shall find out after death. But you can find, the majority of humans all share the same, basic morality: one laid out in the Bible. god-given. And we can also tell that the factual events laid out biblically are divinely inspired, as it was this God told humanity: and so we can trust the lessons laid out in these.

[quote]Well, since word definitions can be arbitrary or in other words conceptual standards, then of course just to religiously define something (such as God is omniscient) doesn’t make it a reality.

Besides, who can really comprehend a word such as omnipotent? Or eternal? If the basic apprehension of those qualities is that “God just is that way,â€

[dobbie]

byBijane:

As for how we can tell which is man's creation, and which is God's, I'll admit, there is no certain method: we shall find out after death.

If I may say so, it’s not a very convincing argument to say “we shall find out after death.â€

[dobbie]

byBijane:

And we can also tell that the factual events laid out biblically are divinely inspired, as it was this God told humanity: and so we can trust the lessons laid out in these.

Which factual events?

[bijane]

[quote="dobbie"]byBijane:
If I may say so, it’s not a very convincing argument to say “we shall find out after death.â€

[dobbie]

byBijane:

can the same [ambiguity] not also be said for scientific argument? You yourself have stated 'I don't know', at least I've given some point at which the truth will be discovered.

One, I don’t present a scientific argument.

Two, I don’t see where saying “I don’t knowâ€

[bijane]

[quote="dobbie"]byBijane:
One, I don’t present a scientific argument.

Two, I don’t see where saying “I don’t knowâ€

[dobbie]

byBijane:
[quote][color=green]2. [On “I don’t knowâ€

[bijane]

[quote]
I can’t recall making such a claim of a weakness. In fact, if you were to say “I don’t knowâ€