Use a small g and you might have a defensible point. As it is, you are just plain wrong.The Ultimate Reality is what God means.
The problem is that if anyone gives a reason why they believe God is good, all you will do is ask for proof of his existence.From the arguments that I have seen from past I concluded that. I am willing to hear a God argument if you have one since that is part of the topic. The love part should have been a question can we talk about God's existence then we talk. I much rather it be formed as a question to talk about a specific aspect of the topic then something else entirely which you hope I understand but if you read my responses from Mopac I didn't.
I should have said that for this topic I'll assume God's existence but not the any specific Religion to be true instead simply God and now you would have to give me an argument or you can speak about how God does existence. Your choice.
Maybe you haven't told me.
If we don't know how it is done how do we know how it is done? Circular yes but that is the very question you are asking. Well I like the stances to be from information gained through professionals in fields so that it is isn't based on my belief more so someone's academic background and researching which led to those answers.
The paper has been peer-reviewed. Make sure it as close to the current.
Praying to the UR makes no more sense than praying to the Higgs field. If you like, why not call the Higgs field God? Mopac thinks that if he calls reality 'God' then atheists are duty bound to deny it exists!
So is the UR God? No. The UR has some of the features people have traditionally associated with gods, but it is not the God Mopac worships. That God does not exist.
Not really. I assumed God existed but wanted to see how people can come to God being good but I didn't see it. This can also be God's existence topic if you want.In other words, it appears you're using this question as another way of demanding proof of God's existence.
I already gave you a Biblical argument. Love also exists as well, so mostly likely a creator would have something to do with it's existence. I would say both are logical reasons to conclude God is good.
Science only answers questions within our dimension, but a number of scientists acknowledge the possibility of other dimensions (even if they don't want to). Do you agree that other dimensions may exist?
Sounds sort of like relying on a computer to make the ultimate choice for a spouse.
The paper has been peer-reviewed. Make sure it as close to the current.
Not really. I assumed God existed but wanted to see how people can come to God being good but I didn't see it. This can also be God's existence topic if you want.
Where is your reasons?
there are numerous texts in the Bible that indicate that God is love, which would make him good, likeJeremiah 31:3 (NLT) - Long ago the Lord said to Israel: “I have loved you, my people, with an everlasting love. With unfailing love I have drawn you tomyself."Romans 5:8 (NIV) - But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.Also, combining this avenue of consideration with day to day living, experiencing loving, being loved, us being made in God's image (per the Bible consideration), it's logical to conclude God is love, thus God is good.
If we don't have a framework that gives us facts that can be tested then I ain't going to make claims about it. I ain't no professional nor are Theologians because they have yet to test any of their claims. I'll stick to God's existence as the claim.
Sounds sort of like relying on a computer to make the ultimate choice for a spouse.I'll just say it again to receive a more serious response. Do you even know what peer-review is? I would say how bad ideas lead to lack of knowledge in other topics but I'll save it for later if I can think of it then.
This is under the assumption God is good, God exists by the Bible being a trusted source?Can you tell me why I should trust what the Bible says?
Again, this is an avenue for some to conclude God is good. You're not looking for proof of God's existence, but asking why some consider (or assume) God is good, right?
Again, this is an avenue for some to conclude God is good. You're not looking for proof of God's existence, but asking why some consider (or assume) God is good, right?If I assume God exists. I am not assuming the Biblical God exists which means you still need to tell me how the Bible is a trusted source.
If a qualifed scientist submitted an article for peer review that gave evidence of not just God's existence, but specifically the Biblical God, would you become a Christian?
So, if you can add assuming the God of the Bible communicates to individuals, then hopefully you can see why the Bible is strongly considered.
If a qualifed scientist submitted an article for peer review that gave evidence of not just God's existence, but specifically the Biblical God, would you become a Christian?Okay. Lets see what you come up with.
That can't be assumed. It has to be proven.
So even if I say yes you don't have it?I wasn't offering anything. I was asking you a yes or no question.
So now we moved from prove the existence of God to prove the Bible is trustworthy.If you can assume God exists, why can't you assume the God of the Bible?Unless the subject of this thread is now prove the Bible is trustworthy.
I wasn't offering anything. I was asking you a yes or no question.So even if I say yes you don't have it?
Since you are speaking about the Biblical God it would require the Bible to be factual.
But what other standard do you have in giving consistent results on what is going on outside our realm?As I said, science doesn't deal outside of our natural realm. So I wouldn't expect it to reveal who or which creator it is.
What I mean is, why are you, for the sake of the topic of this thread, able to assume a creator, which you stated doesn't exist, but not the creator referred to in the Bible?
As I said, science doesn't deal outside of our natural realm. So I wouldn't expect it to reveal who or which creator it is.But what other standard do you have in giving consistent results on what is going on outside our realm?
Alright fine. God exists how is it the Biblical one?
Alright fine. God exists how is it the Biblical one?
And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Sam 15:1‑3)
And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Sam 15:1‑3)
