There seems to be the widespread notion on this forum that because we cant see, touch or directly observe God that we can dismiss God's existence. In fact I have never seen, touched or observed the person who designed and made my car or this computer, or anything else I have brought. None of us ever need to. We know they exist and that they are creative and intelligent because of the "very nature" of the devices they have created. These devices in and of themselves are indisputable evidence that "affirms" their existence. And no sane person would suggest otherwise. So,it is with God! We know God exists because the vary nature of everything in existence leaves us no other option: The reality of cosmic existence and unity. the existence of natural laws; inherent natural patterns; cosmic fine tuning; precisely balance of sub-atomic particles; life; consciousness; the breathtaking complexity of genetic coding and the DNA double helix, and the immense complexity of the eye and human brain. All of which necessitate and intelligent creative cause. None of which can be scientifically explained by undirected chance events and natural processes. Aware of these realities, atheists such as Richard Dawkins naively argue that God would be much more complex than everything in the universe, and therefore more difficult to explain. So, we should just conclude that the universe made itself. Of course, we could apply this same flawed logic to our car and laptop. The creator of this computer would be much more complex than the car, and therefore much more difficult to explain. So, we should all just conclude that our car and computer designed and made themselves. Which is irrational nonsense. Moreover, one of the most established fact of science is that an "effect" can never be greater than the "cause". Thus, we know that that every human attribute must of necessity be prevalent to a greater extent in the creative cosmic cause - God.

As previously stated, one of the most established fact of science is that an "effect" can never be greater than the "cause". Thus, we know that that every human attribute must of necessity be prevalent to a greater extent in the creative cosmic cause - God. This is precisely how we know that the creative source of the universe is also a "personal" conscious creative entity that brought the cosmos, life and all else into existence. And that this transcendent creative entity must of necessity likewise possess personal attributes,including the ability to relate and communicate with humanity. Particularly when around 60 per cent of the human brain is geared towards communication. And that with humans at the very apex of the communication triangle. So, it would be humanity that would be the recipients of such communication. The million dollar question is "Has God ever directly communicated to humanity in an intelligent propositional way." And the answer is a decisive yes. The reality of God's existence firstly communicated in terms of the existence and intelligible nature of the world that surrounds us. And secondly in the immense probability that the Biblical manuscripts are indeed the source of divine revelation, having no equal or competitor in terms of historical, archeological, and legal validity. Here: http://thegodreality.org/manuscripts.htm

johnheininger,: And secondly in the immense probability that the Biblical manuscripts are indeed the source of divine revelation, having no equal or competitor in terms of historical, archeological, and legal validity. Here: http://thegodreality.org/manuscripts.htm

Which Biblical Manuscripts. There have been many, many Biblical Scripts. Many sources of divine revelation, over the past 7000 years that their have been written scripts. Is Gilgamesh true, are the Egyptian, Sumerian, Greek, Roman, Viking, & the Indian Vedas equally as true as the Jewish Torah & the Christian Bible. I won't include the Koran as it is just a load of Misogynistic Crap.

Dear davidf,

Oh I have little doubt we will manage to get pretty close before our consciousnesses get snuffed out, although I'm not positive about our form. Perhaps it will be some human AI hybrid, who knows, but we are becoming more God like every day. Our interconnectedness for better or worse is astounding and as mind and machines become more thoroughly intertwined it is opening up possible futures that serve to both inspire and terrify.

The ancients would of course seen our technological abilities as magic if not divine. It is diverting to thing of Jesus paving the way as a human God. His powers to heal are now replicated in even the smallest hospitals (thinking of Fred Hollows restoring sight), our vaccines are now giving protections that were the subject of much prayer, and his ascension to the heavens has become commonplace since Yuri first stepped forth.

Naturally there is a fear of knowing everything, perhaps even a tragedy in waiting, since we humans often seem to find more meaning in the journey. But the thirst for knowledge has certainly been a great driver for our species.

.

Dear johnheininger,

.

Wikipedia has this to say on the historicity of the gospels :

« Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels

The problem is that there are only three elements in the gospels subject to "almost universal assent" among scholars: (1) that Jesus probably existed (2) was baptized by John the Baptist and (3) was crucified on the order of the Roman Prefect, Pontius Pilate – all the rest being a matter of pure conjecture.

As for the historicity of the Old Testament (the Hebrew bible), according to archaeologist William G. Dever :

« Archaeology certainly doesn't prove literal readings of the Bible...It calls them into question, and that's what bothers some people. Most people really think that archaeology is out there to prove the Bible. No archaeologist thinks so." From the beginnings of what we call biblical archaeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archaeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. William Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archaeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archaeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people. »

In addition, it seems that the Exodus, inter alia, never happened …

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_archaeology#Expert_commentaries

I’m afraid only a very tiny percentage of what you probably call « scriptures » is the subject of consensus among reputable scholars of antiquity.

.

Dear John,

Has the possibility occurred to you that this world could have a creator who is not God?

Maybe some mad scientist in some other dimension?
Could that scientist not even be good?
Why should one worship that scientist?
Only because he happens to have that much more knowledge and capabilities than us? that attitude is called "might is right"!
Only because he can advance your worldly desires? that's materialistic!
Only because he could reward you with heaven and punish you with hell? that's a fear-born selfish motive!

If you reduce God to a material function, then others could just as well take His place - this is not religion: this is opportunism.
It matters not whether that person created heaven and earth - nowhere but in God will you find rest and peace.