After the suggestion in one of this site’s comments stating that it required more faith to be an atheist than a theist, because the non-existence of a deity can never be proven, I thought it would be fun to see if we can logically disprove the existence of “God”. I picked the Christian God because I am more familiar with the Christian faith than any other, I’ve read the bible and have previously lived with devout Christians. I feel qualified. So let’s see where this goes…
For this to work, we have to agree on the following two statements, and accept that Christians believe them to the true: -
- God is infallible
- The Bible is the true word of God
These aren’t outrageous statements, and in fact, have been echoed on this very blog numerous times in the comments.
The two statements above are clearly interdependent. The Bible tells Christians that God is infallible, and Christians believe the Bible because they believe it was written by an infallible deity. Almost a self-fulfilling prophecy, almost. So the start of our logical deduction must be the Bible, so let’s concentrate on that.
Let’s take the Christian God’s greatest act, creating the world and all who live on it (indirectly). The start of all this, on God’s own words: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day”. Using genealogy, we can roughly estimate the age of the earth, as stated by the Bible, to be 6500 years. The very top estimate would be close to 10,000 years, but that’s a stretch. Science has proven that the earth is closer to 4.5 billion years old. Radiometric dating has shown us this, and has remained consistent with lunar and terrestrial samples. In other words, we haven’t just tested this once in one situation, it’s been extensively tested. This isn’t a guess, or a hunch, there’s a substantial amount of evidence to back this up.
And that’s the geological age of the earth. What about the creatures on the earth? We, as human beings, were created 6500 years ago, according to the Bible, starting with Adam and then Eve. The oldest discovered human fossil is approximately 1,300,000 (1.3 million) years old. That would have meant that humans lived on earth before God created either humans or the earth. In fact, depending on how much evidence you consider to be acceptable, and how you define us as a species, you could place humans at between 1.8 million and 130,000 years old. No one could sensibly claim that humans are less than 130,000 years old. There is simply too much evidence available for our inspection. Either way, much older than the Bible’s claims.
Let’s take another example. God decided that the earth needed cleansing, so he instructed Noah to gather up two of ever species to save. Everything other than Noah, his family (or part of his family) and the animals he chose to save would be killed. There are around 10 MILLION known species of animal on our planet. Male and female, that would be 20 million animals Noah saved. I’ve never seen a boat that big, even with modern engineering techniques. Noah also would have had to travel to different parts of the earth to collect the various animals. You rarely see a penguin and a scorpion living in the same location (zoos don’t count). He then, after the waters had receded, would have had to return them to their original locations. You also have to question to environment on board Noah’s Ark, an environment that could sustain animals that require intense heat and animals that require intense cold, as well as Noah and his family that required a more moderate climate. Impossible.
Just so we’re clear, I’m establishing that that the Bible is inaccurate. Not just inaccurate, but massively inaccurate. There are more examples of course, some which make it clear that the author of the Bible thinks the world is flat, some which make it clear that the author thought the world did not move and then there are more considered examples, such as the value of pi being unknown at the time (surely God would have known it!?!).
So this is my statement, logically derived from the above.
“The Bible is inaccurate – therefore God is fallible – therefore the definition of God is incorrect – therefore God does not exist.”
To add a touch of justification to this, let’s break it down. We know the Bible is inaccurate, in fact the Bible is contradictory within its own pages. The Bible is the only place that defines God, and God is defined as being infallible. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word (albeit written by man, see below). Seeing as we know the only source that defines the Christian God is inaccurate, and at least part of the definition is inaccurate (infallible), we can not trust the remainder of the definition. Therefore the definition of God in invalid and God does not exist.
There will come arguments from Christians that while God is infallible, and the Bible is the true word of God, the Bible was in fact written by man, who is fallible. This does not hold up when you examine the scale and volume of inaccuracies held within the Bible. I can understand man rounding down the value of pi, for example, but to get the entire creation story wrong is a bit of a stretch. Likewise, given that God is all powerful, he surely would not have left an obviously inaccurate account of his greatest work go to press, or was that just another sign of his fallibility?
I think I’ve made a stronger argument, based on Christian beliefs, for the non existence of God than there ever has been for the existence of such a deity.
Related posts:
I’m an atheist, but I’ve always seen this kind of argument disproven by people who consider that God is gradually revealing the truth, according to our own ever-improving logical abilities. So for example when we read “the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” it means that the base element of organic matter is carbon, which is found in the ground. But we were not advanced enough to understand that, so at the time God told us a simplified version of the story, and the Bible was perfect for us at that time.
(remember I’m just trying to play the devil’s advocate here — I’m strongly materialist and believe that such a thing as God is pure foolishness)
Who ever wrote this is a dumbass because the face of god is everywhere… im keep on searching but everytime i say that this can not be happening i can not say conclusively that this did not happen by the ONE and ALMIGHTY… before today ends you will beg for forgiveness and so will i… i know i deserve all of this… but it will be be entrusted to you to set forth the example for all of us
I love how Brad basically says he’s a follower in some way, but then he calls someone a dumbass, good job asshole. And by the way, it’s said that the word of God has to be preached in the four CORNERS of the Earth, how the fuck is that possible being the Earth is round..That’s what I thought.
One need not prove “god does not exist” which is so much intellectual rubbish. No, one need only demonstrate the lack of accurate observation consistently logical reasoning on the part of those who claim a “god”. Using what can be observed and deduced from nature – which necessarily includes ourselves – one cannot reach supportable conclusions regarding a “god”, thus leaving one where one started – with ourselves and the rest of nature to examine and understand.
It is unfortunate that today’s theists are indoctrinated with the incorrect belief that there is a very long line of apologetics which conclusively proves the existence of their alleged “deity”. Surely, there is a very long line of attempts to provide such, however, all such offerings continue to fail against the standard of accurate observation and consistently logical deduction from the behaviors of nature.
The “atheist” need not address the alleged existence of a “god” directly. One need only illustrate where theist observations and logic are faulty. What they tend to ignore is the fact there is a very long line of such illustration. Unfortunately, accurate observation and consistently logical deduction are not primary values among theists.
we need not prove there is God, because we can’t prove there is no God. Athiests like to hide behind “science” because people hate a God of love and forgiveness in this world of hatred and violence. This so called “science” actually takes more faith than believing there is a God. Not only to you have to rely on this chance that matter spontaneously combusted, but you must believe in the matter that came from well… nothing. I give atheists and scientists credit for tricking the world into thinking that evolutionism is a science, rather than a religion of its own kind. I really think its rather logical to believe in something glorius and forgiving, than believe we all rot in the ground for eternity. There is still a chance for athiests, but the way the world is going, apparently we are all going to rot in the ground for eternity very soon.
Actually, a fairy that lives in my underwear created the universe and all that we know 20 seconds ago. He implanted all of our memories to think we actually had lives before then. amazing huh. I have faith so that is right. My belief has no afterlife, am i wrong for thinking this? Will i be sent to hell for all eternity?
I love how you put science in quotation marks, like it’s not responsible for everything you own. You can disrespect scince if you’re living in a cave, but not while you’re sitting in you’re computer, reading articles, and commenting, probably sitting in your nice home with central heating. All the work of ’science’.
i see now that you are angry because you think christians are condemning you to hell for all eternity. Well, i believe you will be in hell for all eternity, but im not condemning you. You have all of your life to change your mind and that is of course up to you. Secondly i apparently am wrong for believing the world came from something and am an evil person for thinking about an afterlife. Am i to rot in the ground for all eternity? Am i wrong to believe matter did not appear and then spontaneously combust/evolve into what we are today? I believe in a world where money appears right in front of my eyes and i don’t have to work for it. Ahh if only. I would also like to confirm that you guys realize it is still the “theory of evolution” hence the “quotations” (none of this was sarcastic)
i am not atheist i am agnostic, not too much of a difference. I have been born into the catholic-Christian faith, and opened my mind and now i have, well i consider it as freeing myself from followers of the status quo. We live in america a dominant Christian nation, if you believe other you are different. We are not choosing to believe in the Christian faith, we are either born into, have some sort of miracle happen, believe the bullshit stories of other Christians or we believe it because of fear. Now i do not believe in the Christian faith because i am not afraid of “god”, and besides he forgives everyone who chooses to accept he is real, right? Now i dont know if he is real but i do know the Christian faith isn’t. What makes this articles argument more compelling is that there are not only faults in the bible but also in the beliefs. They say that god is perfect, he is completely divine. well not only in the bible but in ideology of the Christan faith is this faulty. In the bible many times it portray’s god as being angry and jealous. Now correct me if im wrong but those are human feelings right? But he is all divine? What is also the point of prayer, i mean its always said that god will help you if you help yourself. So prayer really does nothing because your helping yourself in the first place. Also in the bible it talks about god telling prophets to send armies to rape the virgins of the village and kill the children. Now whats said most is thats from the old testament, but its still the same god correct. Now in my conclusion its all crap, not because im trying to disprove the faith but because of the obvious lies in the faith. It all is just a religious pattern, horus,dionysus,attis etc then jesus. Its all the same one thing especially is there is really no historical evidence of jesus, its all people wanting to believe in a higher power, blame their sins on evil and their happiness on good. all these religions are based on the sun the literal sun, the symbols, the names, the words, the passages,all relate to the sun. Jesus was never real, therefore the Christian faith is shot. I believe something made us, i dont believe it does the world any good, nor bad, that is our own faults. I’ve spent my whole life in the christian faith and never felt any connection, not because i didn’t try i did, its just my intellectual side and my free thinking brain caught the best of me and showed me to not follow and pursue the truth.
Thomas – I’ve heard similar arguments, but they are ultimately self-defeating. If they accept that the Bible was a cut-down version of events, that their chosen deity decided to hide facts from them to aid understanding, then they have to question every single verse of the Bible in a similar manner. Perhaps their deity was actually an extraterrestrial being, from another planet, but shielded the truth from the authors of the Bible because he feared they would not understand it. If they accept that the Bible is full of mistranslations, inaccuracies and approximations, then the entire foundation of their religion must be brought into question also.
Naumadd – Of course you’re right and I completely agree with you (I have a draft article waiting to be finished on this very subject). However, we must live within the confines of our society which, unfortunately, has been raised on a foundation of lies which have become so ingrained in their consciousness that it is difficult for them to assess such points logically and without prejudice. I thought that by making the argument I did, I would call into question the Christian God, and thought it appropriate as it is inevitably the Christians who spout the “cannot prove non-existence” line. And while yes, it is true that we cannot prove the non-existence of any deity, I think I can logically disprove (not that we need to) the established definition of the Christian deity using their own teachings. A bit of fun for a Sunday, if you’ll indulge me.
If god was a alien and people excepted this then there most be more than one all trying to influence us for thousands of years perhaps without them we might be still living in caves and the good and evil which I see means I have been telling the truth.And perhaps this planet has memory both past/present/future and they chose me and others that we psychics are the chosen ones how would we police the evil ones.Perhaps the powerful bankers Politicians top scientist are all involved science as moved at an alarming rate conspiracy theory could be true and my guardian angel is a Alien and his encouraging me to wright this.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the literals of the bible. Not only do you have to account for human error in the original writings of the bible, but also translational inaccuracies. To believe that the earth is only 6-10 thousand is kind of absurd, figuring that even though humans reproduce at a rather large rate, it would take more time than that to get to our current population.
In the original Hebrew, the word day is yôm, which can be translated as “a time”, much like “age” or “era” in English. Replacing the word day with era makes much more sense. Alternatively, the original Genesis was written by Moses. Being that he was a human living in those days, such long times may have been incomprehensible to him. Therefore, when God related these events to him, it may have seemed like only days for creation. Think about it, if you were to have the entire history of creation up to that point beamed into your brain, what would it seem like in the terms of an ancient Israelite?
As for the Noah’s Ark argument, the animals came to Noah, not the other way around. Taking in to account tectonic activity, micro evolution for different species (i.e. crocodiles and alligators, basically the same, but small differences based on their locations), it’s entirely plausible for the required number of animals to have been saved. It’s even evidenced by the number of species of aquatic vs. terrestrial and avian animals.
Please let me know of any other specific proofs you have for the non-existence of God, I will be happy to discuss them with you.
You sir, are a fool. For what reason do we need to account for human error? The writers were taking direct guidance from Jesus himself. How is it possible to get 6500 hundred years mixed up with anything else anyway? It’s a number. Not a sentence.
How do we know the Bible is truly the Word of God?? There are over 25,000 archeological finds that verify the Bible, there has never been one, I repeat there has never been one archeological find that disproves the Bible!! That is a pretty good track record. Many secularist and other non-believers in the Bible will say that the N.T was not complete until the end of the 2nd, the beginning of the 3rd century A.D. This is another lie that the evolutionist and non believers conjure up to discredit what God has said. The fact is, if you go to the writings of the early church leaders (who wrote from 90 to 127 A.D.) you can from their quotes and their sermons compile the N.T. in its entirety!! So that says the N.T. was complete and was in good circulation before the end of the 1st century. Another indisputable proof t the validity of the Word of God.
Yet the strongest argument for the authenticity of the Scriptures is the fact of fulfilled prophecy. This is truly the nail in the coffin when it comes to whether or not the Bible is truly the Word of God. Isaiah 46:9-10 says “I am God and there is no other, I am God and there is noone like Me, I declare the end from the beginning.” So God says He declares what is to come, the future. Do we see this in the Bible. Isaiah 45 names King Cyrus by name 200 years before he was even born. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that Isaiah wrote that before and not after Cyrus came to power. Ezekiel 26 God says that the city of Tyre would never again be rebuilt and the only thing it would be used for is to dry fishing nets, the very purpose it is used today!! Psalm 22 is a Messianic Psalm, it mentions some of the last words Jesus spoke from the cross “My God My God why have Thou forsaken Me?” It says they divide My clothes and cast lots for them, this Psalm says dogs have surrounded Me (speaking of Gentiles), it says they have pierced My hands and My feet. This was written 1100 years before Christ came to this earth. It was written 800 years before crucifixion was even practiced and yet it says they have pierced My hands and My feet. Micah 5:2 says Christ would be born in Bethlehem, Zecheriah 12:10 says they will look on Me whom they have pierced. All written before Christ came into the earth.
Jesus fulfilled hundreds of prophecies when He lived here on the earth. The mathematical odds for Jesus to fulfill 7, (keep in mind He fulfilled 100’s) would be the same odds as you someone covering the entire earth in 4×4 white tiles. Hiding a gold star under one of them, and you walking up on the very 1st try and finding that gold star. By the way, you are blindfolded!! This would absolutely be impossible, think about the mathematical odds of Jesus fulfilling all the prophecies that He did!! It would be impossible yet with God all things are possible. Matthew 19:26
A little light reading for you, Chris. You seem to have a pretty faith based idea that a man named Jesus Christ was a real person. The historical record pretty conclusively argues against that. http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm
“… there has never been one, I repeat there has never been one archeological find that disproves the Bible!!”
But, of course, although there are some disputes regarding the historical significance of the Jewish old testament and Christian new testament of the bible, there is ample reason to believe much of it is generally accurate historically. No doubt, more will be found to verify this event or that event as mentioned in this book. But that is of little matter because the real issue is the existence or non-existence of a “god” of which there has never been one, I repeat, there has never been one archaeological find to confirm the existence of such an alleged deity.
The christian bible is somewhat of a mixed bag of historical accuracy, however, it is of no assistance at all in proving the existence of a “god”.
If you know of an archaeological find that can be examined today to prove the existence of this alleged deity, please share.
sir your completely right. But the thing scientists or thinkers tend to overlook, is the faith aspect of religion. If everyone knew there was and is a God for sure, this discussion would not be happening and everyone would be a follower. Instead I believe God conceals himself to find out which people are his true believers.
I know athiests have a hard time with understanding the bible. Evolution is outrageous, if humans evolved then there would still be humans evolving from something. So that makes evolution a bunch of bull. If the big bang is correct then there would still be worlds exploding into existance, the only logical explanation is that there is a more powerful higher being, space did not evolve itself, you cannot get something from nothing, that is a scientific fact. So, if you beleive in evolution, why do we not see humans still evolving from other species? Because it is impossible, we may share some of the same dna makeups as other species of animals, but we cannot evolve into anything other than a human being, and an ape cannot evolve into anything other than an ape. T he reason i say the bible holds true is because people in bible times did not write untrue information, just to pass the time, writing in those days took skill, time, and was a way to preserve the truth. It took so much time and effort to get the materials to even write with, they did not have modern materials, these things were hard to come by, so anything written was definately worth writing. I hope that all atheists keep an open mind, and do not let themselves fall into these rediculous attempts to disprove that there is indeed a creator, some power of a magnitude that we could never caculate, an alpha and omega, created all that is known, and all that is unknown to humans, like I said, outer space is too massive and did not poof itself into existence. think about it!
Our genetic coding from NEANDERTHALS FOUND is rougly 2-3.5 percent off. There is evidence of slowing developing species from chimpanzees to humans. HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING TODAY. EVOLUTION ISN’T A F***ING 100 YEAR PROCESS YOU BRAINWASHED CLOSE-MINDED F***. WE WONT LIVE TO WITNESS IT F***FACE.
id like to interupt this ignorant conversation with some peaceful words. One, both of you are wrong, neither has been proven. Im a christian, and it is very possible that evolution is occuring right now. The problem is, “scientists” can’t form a scientific theory that matches an all powerful creator. Cosmic evoution (the big bang) and other theories rely solely on matter coming from nothing, which is impossible, then then little spec of matter suddenly exploding into billions of galaxies, which im not sure if i have ever made a house out of exploding a grain of sand. Where did God come from?, well thats why it is religion. Where did this matter come from…thats why it is science? Woa Woa Woa i think were getting the two mixed up. And there is no reason to sware to prove your point, when the angrier you get, the more ignorant and quick to conclusions you become.
Kevin – Yes, of course you’re right about the original wording potentially having more than one meaning. But it is obvious from the Bible that it is meant in the literal “24″ hours sense. I also can’t buy into this theory that there are subtle inaccuracies in the Bible and it shouldn’t be taken literally. If that’s the case, then why do you believe any of it? With regards to the age of the earth, and the Bible’s view of it, I’ll leave it to some Christians to answer for me:
Source: Christian Answers
Chris Sanford – I hope you realize the absurdity of your argument. Do you believe Harry Potter is real because it gives an accurate representation of an English housing estate? There are, of course, historically accurate parts of the Bible, but they aren’t the contentious parts. There’s absolutely no proof for any of the so-called miracles, any proof of Jesus as a person ever existing (the first record comes a few hundred years after his supposed death, which leaves plenty of time for the fable to spread into common culture. If he was a real person, you’d expect some record of his existence at the time he was alive, there is none) nor any proof of any Gods. Ever. Anywhere. As for the references to Jesus being made before he was supposedly alive, perhaps they came from the numerous other prophets and deities in the region that shared the same basic story as the Christian Jesus (born of a virgin, resurrected, performed miracles etc.). The stories had been circulated for centuries before the period in which Jesus was supposedly born, except they were used by different religions. The Christian story is far from original.
godinus – There are two important points you don’t understand regarding evolution. Major changes take massive amounts of time, and given the typical length of a human generation, they would be near as imperceptible to us. If you take species with shorter life spans, we can see evolution in action. In fact, it’s been shown to take as little as 44,000 generations to show significant changes (a large enough change that a species lost one of its defining characteristics) to a species in a reproducible laboratory environment (44,000 generations for humans, with an average life span of 70 years, would take approximately 3 million years). Evolution is now scientific fact and has been proven. The second thing to remember is that evolution is happening to humans at the moment. Even though the threat of natural selection is diminished due to modern healthcare and our more cultured society, you can still observe generational evolutionary changes. Take the palmaris longus muscle for example. It’s clearly left over from a time we required more flexibility and strength in our arms (say, for example, if we were climbing trees regularly). Yet this muscle remains underdeveloped and unused in humans, and because of that, less people are born with that muscle every generation. There are similar muscles in the legs and feet. Actually, the foot is very interesting from an evolutionary point of view as there are muscles similar to the palmaris longus that remain from a time when our feet were far more dexterous than today (look at a primate’s foot and what it can do with it). Yet these muscles remain in out feet, albeit undeveloped and, like the palmaris longus, appears in fewer humans each generation. But, of course it’s all bull despite there being a boat load of evidence for it, while there’s ZERO evidence for creationism.
The interesting thing about everything I’ve said above is that you can go out and verify it all. I wouldn’t expect nor want you to just believe me blindly, so go out and do some research with an open mind, a truly open mind, and I hope your eyes will be opened.
You say that you hope atheists keep an open mind, which has never been an issue. Atheists want proof, we don’t believe in fairy tales we believe in science and truth. Your argument for the existence of a creator falls short when you say in one breath that “you cannot get something from nothing, that is a scientific fact” without offering the source of your creator, which presumably is a “something”. And of course, the experiments currently being undertaken at CERN to discover the Higgs Boson particle may very well prove that you can indeed get “something” (matter) out of “nothing” (energy). And I’m sure you can guess by now that your point that the Bible must be true because it was difficult to write books at the time doesn’t hold water round these parts.
I sincerely aprreciate the logic of your argument. You took the words right out of my mouth.
Ironically, what most in the so-called “Evolution vs. Creationism” debate seem to miss, creationists being the worst offenders, is the fact evolution did not stop. All forms of life here on Earth continue to evolve – yes, including human beings. This lack of understanding is most evident in the creationist argument regarding “transitional forms”. The fact of the matter, because evolution cannot be said to be complete for any form, ALL organisms, living and deceased, have been transitional forms. Neither the species nor any individual human being is fully evolved. All are evolving from moment to moment.
Some a bit slower than others.
Atheist, I’ve been really keen to see an argument proving the non-existence of God, but was immediately disappointed to see that the scope was reduced to Christianity. The question of existence and essence are necessarily separate from our perspective (even if they are identical in God).
Nevertheless I liked the fact that logic dominated the discourse (as opposed to the more usual sneer). OK so I accept your two premises (ie God is infallible; and the Bible is the true word of God). But they are not necessarily “interdependent”. I don’t need a Bible to know that God is infallible, but it is also too fast to say that I believe the Bible because it was written by an infallible deity. In fact the Bible is clearly written by humans. It is quite unlike the Qu’ran which is supposed to be a direct dictation to Mohammed. In fact the Bible is ‘inspired’ which is rather different. It means that God is the author through inspiration, and various human writers are the true author (using their own linguistic style etc..).
OK, onto your example: the creation myth. This has always been accepted as pre-historical. There is so much in the first three chapters of Genesis that it is truly the most remarkable piece of writing apart from the Gospels, but it is not intended to be a scientific portrait. It is clearly not written that way. Long before any atheists roamed the earth, Origen and others pointed out that the sun and moon are created after light. Additionally, anyone who tried using Genesis to date the earth would be barking up the wrong tree. God has no interest in informing us that the earth is 4.5 billion years old or otherwise. These are mere facts, and as such, are not very interesting except in trivial pursuit games or if you are involved in archeology or something.
Myths, however, are not the same as pure fiction. They provide a message in a deeper way than prose can. Genesis does teach us that God is creator (ie from nothing), that his creation is good (not malevolent – in fact this is the reason why science developed out of a Christian cosmology and not, say an Hindu one). It teaches that the apex of creation is man, created as male and female, with free will and endowed with personal dignity. This freedom also explains how sin and evil are possible in a world created by a good God, and so on… These are not simple ‘facts’ to stow away for a rainy day, but vital, important realities that effect our lives, unlike the value of ‘pi’ (which is not rounded at all – it’s not stated).
Some other inaccuracies:
1. The Bible is the only place that defines God,
2. and God is defined [in the Bible] as being infallible.
3. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word [another claim not found directly in the Bible, nor even which books the Bible contains]
So I think you have only established that your understanding of the Bible is massively inaccurate.
Hello,
I have studied intensely Atheism & Theism. And I’m proud to inform everyblogger that, I a disciple of Christ.
Now it’s true, science has served as a valuable tool for mankind. Through science alot has be learned. But science best answer to the question, “Is God real?” science says, “I doubt it”. Science provides enough facts to cause doubt but doesn’t prove there is no Almighty Being. And it’s true, no one (including believers in God) can prove there is a GOD because what’s real to mankind is known by our five (5) senses (sight, hearing, smell, taste, & touch). And speaking for myself, my senses testifies like an atheist because I have not witness the existence of GOD.
But, Thanks to Christianity!!! I now understand and want to share, like atheism, I overlooked the truth about….. L-O-V-E!!! LOVE is real and is known only by faith: LOVE can’t be seen naturally, but by faith there are visions of Love that can be brought to plain sight; Love can’t be heard, but by faith Love utters it’s voice and is heard like a natural voice; Love has no smell – taste – or touch, but by faith Love smells like a rose to many – love taste better than honey to many – and love can be felt within. Love has created the world: it was love that created a husband and a wife; it is love that brings children into the world, by being intimate; it was love that made the trees, water, sun, and all the things needed to live, Love acted as a provider (I’m convince). I believe God is LOVE and I pray faithfully everyday hoping I find his eternal Love before his temporal love in this world runs out & death ends my chances of living in God’s Love.
from a disciple of Christ, Phair W
Jonathan – I always thought the Bible was God’s word.
2 Timothy 3:16
As for the infallibility of God, are you then saying that God makes mistakes? Are you saying that he is fallible and therefore should be questioned, doubted even? While not explicitly stated in the bible, the implication is obvious. Your statement flies in the face of the “God has a plan, don’t question God’s plan” line that I always hear from people of religion who are having a tough time.
I don’t understand why you think that estimating the age of the earth from the old testament is “barking up the wrong tree”? Are you saying it’s inaccurate? Incomplete? Fictional? If not, then why can we not use it as a basis for these estimations? And for what it’s worth, I agree with you on the value of pi, which while not directly stated can be derived from the dimensions given of circular objects. I don’t think this is a valid (or fair) argument to make, and unlike some other atheists, I don’t partake in it.
Phairw – I honestly can’t tell whether you are being sarcastic or not!?! Obviously love is an emotion, and like other emotions is caused by electro-chemical reactions within our bodies that occur under certain conditions. Love, or what we now perceive to be love, is clearly a method that has evolved in order to allow us to more easily sustain the species through breeding. That, of course, is the sort of love you feel for a partner, whereas you may also have love for family members, friends, children – the sort of people you would want to keep alive if you lived in a difficult and dangerous environment. Animals exhibit similar behaviour when protecting their “packs”. Much like fear – an emotion which has the purpose of alerting us to dangerous situations and preserving our safety.
The Atheist – No, I’m not being sarcastic, and your right, Love is an emotion, and thanks for your scientific knowledge as to what causes our emotions. But, your statement has not proven anything. I still believe God is Love. Love is REAL!!! Love is Alive!!! If you remove this emotion from our being, the human race couldn’t survive. We wouldn’t reproduce; we won’t care about people; we wouldn’t create life and have friends & family without Love. Remove Love and I’m convince the world would simply die. Now I don’t believe Love has evolved. Maybe peoples idea of what is Love evolved but pure Love has not changed. Love for family, friends, children, caring feeling for the poor and helpless, and love in a marriage: Where’s the evolution of Love??? Has not everything we understand about Love been the same in the past, present, and shall be the same in the future. If not, please explain!!! I need examples.
Atheist – the Bible is God’s word, but not in the same sense as “The Lord of the Rings” is Tolkein’s word, though actually by chosing a work of literature I come closer to explaining what I mean. I referred to inspiration, and that is exactly what “God-breathed” means in 2 Tim 3:16.
God doesn’t make mistakes, but then he is not writing a text book, and he is writing from within the context of a truly human author.
Trying to estimate the age of the earth from the Bible is a little like asking how historical Shakespeare’s portrayal of Henry IV really is. The dramatic truth is something independent from that. Now of course there are times when the Bible means to be historical (just as in Shakespeare), but the context must be taken into account. The Bible may be God’s word, but it is not God. Phairw is much more along the right lines in that it is more of a kind of love-letter, and not meant to teach science at all.
Which leads me to an interesting point about love. It is certainly true that love is an emotion, but love is also more than an emotion. Love can be in the will as well. Greek and Latin have several words for love that express its various nuances well, where English must make do with one. So I think it is much more than merely “electro-chemical reactions”, even if I don’t deny that that is partly true. Human emotion is much richer than animal emotion because it also has a rational component.
Sorry, I can’t help going back to the point on emotions. One way to see that it is more than just a chemical reaction is that it is felt. Chemical reactions don’t feel anything. Nor do electrical ones. This also implies that the mind can not be reduced to just the brain, even if it is necessary for human thought.
The other non-emotive aspect of love I didn’t mention is that it is always unitive: the beloved object/person is intentionally present inside the lover. This is another way of seeing that it goes beyond biophysics. In Latin, this is expressed by “caritas” (from “carus” = dear), while the purely emotive aspect of love is called “amor concupiscentiae” (roughly: desire).
Phairw, this actually has an important consequence for your argument. If God is love, do you want to say that God is an emotion? The Latin text reads “Deus caritas est”; the relevant verb is, of course, agape in the original Greek.
Jonathan – I saw your second response before I went to Church today. I’ve been thinking about how I would reply intensely…,
Is God an emotion……??? YES indeed, God is an emotion and more!! God has to be an emotion because an emotion is something you feel. And in order for GOD TO BE REAL YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FEEL HIM. But, God is not limited to just being called an emotion.
Now, we were talking about LOVE, Love is something you can feel.
The Atheist, explain that Love is an emotion and he explained scientifically how we feel Love or any other emotions. So we all should agree that Love and the rest of our emotions are something we feel (regardless to the explanation), and if we can feel Love than it’s REAL.
Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life. Every human being today is a form of love. (Love takes on the shape of a husband, a wife; Love also takes on the form of a family) Many people in jail today, are there because of hatred that took on a form of life (Murderers, thieves, rapists, and gangs).
So now Love and all the rest of our emotions, comes from within us. They are the expressions of the Heart. Love is unseen, invisible to the natural eye unless it takes form or has a body to express itself and be seen. All emotions have a force of nature classified as spirits. LOVE reign supreme over all emotions and the Spirit controlling it is called HOLY (holy meaning, set apart and above all).
Everyone who can logically disprove my statement, I’m waiting to hear from you. Also I hope we are still having a logical blog because I’m sure I won’t stay long if this blog leaves the realm of common sense, logical, and well thought out/Rational statements, which may prove or disprove the Christian God.
Jonathan – To me, someone who can read the text of the bible and take it at face value, “breathed-on” sounds like “spoken”. And as for the estimated age of the earth, please remember that it is not I who has done the calculation, but rather John Lightfoot, an Anglican clergyman (his calculation was later roughly confirmed by Bishop James Ussher. He obviously thought it was valid to estimate the earth’s age based on Genesis, perhaps because there was no scientific evidence around at the time to prove him wrong? So these clearly aren’t atheists out to prove a point, members of the church, senior members in the case of Bishop Ussher, believe the Bible, and in particular Genesis, should be literally interpreted. I’d also be interested in knowing, and I know I’ve posed this question to you before, in a different comment thread, how do you select which parts of the bible you believe literally, and which you decide to treat as the author using poetic or dramatic licence? I don’t see markers in the bible surronding genesis stating it shouldn’t be interpreted literally, nor do I see markers around the new testament stating it should be. So how do you decide, and how do you resolve, within yourself, the fact that different readers of the bible interpret it in different ways?
As for “feeling” love, do we not feel fear? Would you argue that God created fear so we should be afraid of crossing him? Or would you logically deduce that in the early days of man, natural selection would dictate those who possessed the ability to feel fear would be more likely to survive?
Phairw – “Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life. Every human being today is a form of love. ” I’m confused by this. Clearly not every human being alive today is an act of love, as you yourself said, babies have been born after the mother has been raped, teenagers have gotten drunk at parties and become pregnant, women have used sperm from sperm donors, prostitutes have conceived after taking a “customer”. Breeding is very different from love. I’d also question whether emotion is driven spiritually. We can, of course, trigger and suppress emotions using drugs and manipulation of the brain. Feeling an emotion is very much a scientific process, we can witness it through monitoring the electro-chemical reactions in the brain, we can even control it. I don’t need to logically disprove your statement, it’s been scientifically disproved.
The Atheist – Breeding is a physical act contolled by Love or Lust(Lust is a bad copycat of Love). So yes, someone gets raped or will get raped; yes teenaged pegrancies happens (young people confusing Lust for Love); Yes, mankind developed the ability for women to have sperm donors. So what’s your point. All I see is a woman finding Love in the form of a child thru sperm donations (similiar to adoption); and prostitutes is making money using Lust. Does this end your confusion???
Also, your scientific answer for feelings and emotions is okay and helpful BUT, why does science check for truth about our emotions in our head and not our HEART???
Shouldn’t the HEART be the best study for answers??? hmmm….. Let me know!!!
Jonathan – To me, someone who can read the text of the bible and take it at face value, “breathed-on” sounds like “spoken”.
Atheist – in what way does “breathed-on” sound like “spoken”? An analogy would be an artist who is inspired to create a certain art work. There are certain ideas that come into their mind. God inspired such ideas into the authors of the Bible, who then wrote them down in their own language and cultural milieu. In the process, we do believe that God also ensured that the message that he wanted to impart was faithfully received in the process. So it is a kind of joint work, just like the work of having and raising a child is meant to be. Perhaps the closest image I can provide of Biblical inspiration, is the way in which we educate children. God uses our language and expresses things in a way that they mean something to us even though it is rather banal to him.
Indeed it is impossible to interpret it outside the mentality of the family of God. If I read a series of letters that your parents wrote to each other, say, there would be many things that only someone from within the family could understand because of the family traditions and experience that may be contained therein. It is not being obtuse to say that you should not expect more from the Bible than what is intended, and that you should look to those for whom it was written to understand it.
So now the estimated age of the earth. I would have to respectfully disagree with the Rev. John Lightfood and the Most Rev. James ussher. I don’t think that our relationship with God has any relation to the age of the earth. This is my opinion, and I am happy to let the good clergymen have theirs. I am persuaded by scientific arguments that the earth is much older than their calculations allow. As Cardinal Beronio once said in connection with the Galileo issue: “the Bible teaches us how to get our heads into heavean, not the heavens into our heads.”
Have you had any experience with textual analysis? There are all kinds of non-Biblical texts that experts examine to ask these very questions: is the author being literal, telling a story, quoting someone, cracking a joke, etc…? There are tools for discerning these. In fact they are quite scientific: it involves studying the culture, history, comparative texts etc… I have no expertise in any of these fields, and to an extent, have to rely on their guidance in these matters. In addition, as a Catholic, I belong to a Church which believes that it has a divine mandate to give clarity on some disputed points like this. I do accept that there will still be disputed areas, and indeed there are passages that theologians love arguing about. I don’t see how that matters – theologians gradually resolve them in much the same way that scientists gradually resolve difficulties to be explained. My Church teaches nothing at all about the age of the earth, so Catholics are free to come to their own conclusions as best as their intelligence permits. I don’t see why faith and science should be seen as incompatible in this regard. On the contrary, they can be mutually beneficial, especially if their respective provinces are respected.
The emotion question really requires more space. All emotion is based on love as its foundation, ie attraction towards a good. Fear is the emotion that directly opposes this, ie repulsion from an evil (or something we dislike). It is therefore consequent upon love since you can’t have a negation before an affirmation – this is true of atheism too by the way.
By the way the other emotions except one are also in positive/negative pairings: desire/aversion; pleasure/sadness; hope/despair; fear/courage; and finally anger which has no opposite. But this all needs to be unpacked in a great deal more space than is available here.
Phairw – I also have difficulty understanding many of your comments. I suppose my point to you was simply to ask whether you thought God was an electro-chemical reaction if that is all that love is. I agree with you that God is love, but dispute that love can be reduced purely to the emotional level. I also dispute that God (at least the Father and the Holy Spirit) have emotions, since that requires having a body, as you rightly say. Being a man, though, Jesus does have them. Maybe you can clarify your ideas if I have misunderstood them.
Okay- Let me rephrase – (Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life.)
Rephrased: Now every emotions which is spiritually controlled or influenced; these emotions take form (or expressed in a body) which confirms its Reality of Life or Living. is this better understood???
Jonathan – An electro-chemical reaction is the best answer the brain can give (if it’s true) and if it’s not true, still I expect the brain to give a similar answer because the brain can’t explain better than the heart what the body is feeling (I believe). Now if you look carefully I said God is an emotion and more. I thought I showed how Love can develop into more than just an emotion. And the Bible teaches Man was made in the image of God and Jesus is the image of the invisible God, so how do you say the Father and the Holy Ghost have no emotions and body??? Doesn’t the Bible say God was greived and the Holy Ghost can be greived??? Check these scriptures and let me know [Genesis 6:6; Ephesians 4:30]
Jonathan – Perhaps I chose the wrong word when I said spoken, as a common definition of “breathed” is to “utter without voice”. I have the suspicion that we are actually in agreement on this point, we just differ on how closely the Bible would represent God’s word. I just wanted to briefly explain why I find your point of view difficult to resolve.
One of the biggest hurdles is the vastly differing accuracy and level of information within the bible. I find it difficult to believe that a God would leave the origin of the universe, surely one of the most important parts of any teaching, so badly defined yet go into so much detail in other parts of the work. It seems, at best, to be a misstep. I also find it difficult to believe that a God would allow such inaccuracies to be published in a holy book that effectively has been written in his name. There seems to be this acceptance that the Bible was written either under the influence of God or taking dictation of his word, either way I would have thought that such a being would have the power of influence such that the descriptions within the book were less open to interpretation. With regard to that, I don’t buy in to the “language is ambiguous” argument, given that we seem to be able to ably describe such concepts now, with a language that isn’t significantly more complex. And surely a God could make the most of whatever language was available at the time, or inspire new ways of describing his magnificent acts so that we could all accept them.
Phairw – I’m afraid I’m becoming awfully confused by some of your points. You state that you want a logical debate but then go on to discuss emotions felt within the heart. The heart is but an organ, made mostly of muscle, that pumps blood around the body. It is effected by emotion, for example when you sense fear, the heart rate quickens in preparation for a “fight or flight” response. Of course it is not just the heart that is impacted by these emotions, the adrenal gland also kicks up a notch. All physical, real, observable reactions, and easily explained by science. I fail to see how fear of an alligator is “spiritually controlled or influenced”, and as stated earlier, animals aren’t considered complex enough to understand the idea of a deity, yet they feel fear of alligators, and experience many of the same physical reactions as us.
I would also question your assertion that breeding is controlled by love. Breeding is driven by our need to continue the species, not by love. To say lust is a bad copycat of love (I’d prefer ugly bedfellow, but that’s the dramatic writer in me) is to undermine one of the primal urges that has allowed out species to thrive.
And if God is an emotion, and you accept that emotions can be observed as electro-chemical reactions in our brains, why can God not be observed in our brains as an emotion?
The Atheist – I knew you would define the heart in a scientific manner… And that’s the problem with science! For example: If my wife ask me, “What’s in my heart”, I would say “Love”. I wouldn’t say blood that’s being pumped thru my body! She would think I’m crazy but blood is in my heart, RIGHT??? What if, someone said to you, I Love You; I can feel it in my heart!!! Would it be better said this way, I Love You; I can feel this electro-chemical reaction in my body effecting my heart organ at a certain rate which causes me to response with a kiss…, Would that be better, and the first one wrong??? I think not though it’s true! The Heart, our emotions,and life in general has far more meaning than what’s explained and providing thru science. Science is good but it can’t answer fully everthing! Somethings shouldn’t be answer by science at all.
Now, Every emotion is caused by someone or something (and remember I said your emotions takes a form to be real). In this case, it’s the alligator causing fear. The gator give off a spirit that causes or influences fear. The fear simply took on the form of the alligator.
Also your right, animals are without knowledge of God and can never fully know LOVE. But, fear is different animal are very knowledgeable of fear. If they wasn’t they wouldn’t survive.
Now, you said, Breeding is driven by our need to continue the species, and not Love??? That’s completely wrong!!! I don’t think while people are breeding they are thinking about continuing the species. I believe Love or Lust is on their minds. What about all the birth contol that exist? What about abortions? What about those who don’t want children? What about those people who believe death is necessary so the world won’t be crowded? Seems to me Love makes more sense!
And Last, science have observed God as an emotion! They said, God is an electro-chemical reaction called Love. And their RIGHT!!! The problem is, their more and it can be scientifically discover. Plus I believe in GOD, and his knowledge of LOVE is far superior than science and only discover by faith.
The Atheist – I’m sorry, I mean “theirs more and it CAN’T be scientifically discover.”
In the last paragraph
Phairw- On “Faith”
Faith was created by man to explain circumstances they could not explain with fact simply because they did not have the means in which to discover reasons.
i.e. “There must be an all powerful creator that created this huge world because how else could it have gotten here.” A deduction made by people without the means to observe the cosmos so they had to have help explaining it using words like “Faith” and “Belief” and “God”.
On the flip side things that people could observe and explain are accepted immediately as fact.
i.e. “If someone sticks a sword through my body I’m going to die.” This explanation needs no help from faith or a god because it is obvious and easy to see.
For you to say science can’t explain everything means that you need to question everything science and fact have proven. (medicine, health care, fossils, weather patterns, planets, stars, anatomy… the list goes on and on)
As for me religion and faith explain nothing other then people’s weakness for understanding (“I can’t explain this so it must be the product of some magical force or being”). Because faith explains nothing; I question every word spoken by someone who skips through life blindly and uses the word “faith” and “belief” to justify it.
Open your mind to knowledge it is a wonderful thing to see! Don’t close your mind and seal it up with the word faith simply because it is easier then seeking fact.
Jana – “Faith was created by man” ??? Are you sure? or is faith apart of human nature? Yesterday at the superbowl, the [Pitt Steelers] believed they would win as well as the [St. Louis Cardinals] before the game. So are you saying, St. Louis was weak for not knowing or understanding the Steelers were 4points better? and how would you explain the Steelers faith? Where was there weakness for believing they would win? — Faith comes for within like our emotions and is a major part of our lives. Even you believe or had faith in someone or something (whether you admit it or not). I don’t believe in magic and there’s nothing magically about faith. Faith is powered by historical knowledge and trust, and that’s real not magically.
Now it’s true some things can be explained very well through science. But, not everything like LOVE! And science will never be able to fully explain what is LOVE! But faith has explained LOVE far more superior than science can ever try.
Now let me share with you my open mind to knowledge for I agree! it is a wonderful thing. It was LOVE that created our world. Not the big bang theory, evolution, and any other scientific explanation. These scientific reasonings maybe right to a degree, and I do believe they played a role in life. But, LOVE is the ultimate reason for life and the creation of it. It’s driven by a unseen force of nature classified as a spirit. God is LOVE and God is a spirit. — So there you have it my mind now seal with the word faith and my heart consume with the word LOVE, because I have been skipping thru life too long not seeing nor hearing anything about life beyond death. And I want to live!!!