Let us talk about God or Goddess ;-)

[_truth dancer]

I know what the LDS God looks like, (thanks to Joseph Smith...smile), but for the non-LDS folk who believe in a God or Goddess, could you describe what this is? A being? An essence? A spirit? Or, is Jesus up in heaven as a man?

Secondly, I would invite anyone and everyone to share with me, (us), what you believe is evidence for the existence of God.

I'm not looking for the typical statements like, "look at this world, of course there is a God," because I do look at this world but do not, in any way, come to the conclusion that it means there is some sort of being that is directing, intervening, or even creating it.

Also, the idea that is often used in the LDS world, "the spirit told me," doesn't work for me either. My observation is that the world over, the impressions, revelations, inspirations, etc, etc. are all different so the "spirit," doesn't seem reliable at all.

Finally, when I hear people say something about their prayers being answered, I immediately go to a place where I have to ask, "what about all the prayers that are not answered." Again, this, "evidence," doesn't work for me.

So, I would love to hear your thoughts.

For those of you who do not believe in God, feel free to share your opinons on why you do not, or what it was that convinced you God does not exist.

Thanks everyone,

~td~

[_Jason Bourne]

Are you only interested in what you think might work for you or what others really think and feel?

For example you close down the "look at the world" as a reason to believe in a higher power because that does not work for you. Well first of your "look at the world" is a tremendous simplification of why I, or many others may look at the intricacies of the creation we live as potential evidence for a creators hand. And it goes very deep and there are many reasons why I think that may be a very good evidence that speaks at least to me, that there could be a God type entity.


But again, you don't seem interested in talking about such thing if YOU don't find it compelling.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

truthdancer,

It’s interesting to me that in many LDS Churches, Jesus is portrayed in paintings as a handsome man with flowing golden hair and piercing blue eyes. I think in real life, nothing could have been further from the truth. In all likelihood, Jesus was short, stocky and swarthy looking.

A few years ago, a group of forensic anthropologists attempted to recreatewhat Jesus physically looked like based upon primatology, osteology, genetic and anthropological evidence. Also, Matthew's description of the events in Gethsemane offers an obvious clue to the face of Jesus. It is clear that his features were typical of Galilean Semites of his era.

What Jesus actually looked like:

[_zeezrom]

TD,

I don't look at the physical world as proof of God, even though it is amazing and wondrous. I use the world and its beauty to inspire and move me. It's possible that I am moved to envision something more.

Compare this to the creation of the Book of Abraham. The scroll is not proof but... :)

[_Hoops]

The existence of love might be a good start. Then one could go to the fact that human beings seem to have a universal sense of morality. These are two from a philosophical perspective that are compelling to me.

But Jason's point is a good one. The physical universe makes more sense as having a cause. To preempt what I think is the atheist/agnostic response - who/what caused the cause? That/it/he/she is god - that which can operate outside of our existence.

[_Hoops]

I don't look at the physical world as proof of God

Interesting that you say that you do not, not that you can not.

even though it is amazing and wondrous.

That's not evidence of God?

I use the world and its beauty to inspire and move me.

Why? After all, it's just a random happenstance of molecules joined to "be" something. If this is really your response to the world, that's illogical.

It's possible that I am moved to envision something more.

Why?

Compare this to the creation of the Book of Abraham.

What's more compelling to me is the inspiration of the creation of Book of Abraham

[_zeezrom]

Hoops,

Why is that interesting that I make a choice to not look at the world as proof?

No, I don't consider beauty and wonder evidence of God.

I can indeed use beauty and wonder to move and inspire me even though I don't believe God made it appear. God does not need to be the source of all. Why would she need to be such?

Why am I moved? I don't know why. That is the amazing part of it. That is the Godly part, I guess.

I used the Book of Abraham example as sort of a joke but it is interesting that I'm using the same argument for the existence of God that Schryver uses for the Book of Abraham. LOL.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

My physics professor at BYU was asked once in class what is his single most scientific persuasive evidence for the existence of God. He stated that there are three possibilities for existence, and there are strong reasons to reject the first two:

1. The universe has always existed. It has an infinite past.

2.The universe just jumped into existence from nothing.

3.The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.

I'm not sure why he felt that God was the only viable option for number 3, but that is about as good as it gets from a scientific perspective, which tells you that scientifically it is near impossible to prove the existence of God.

The real reason most people on earth belong to a religion is that acceptance of a supernatural claim tends to promote cooperative social relationships.

Whether people are Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, LDS or any other religion depends mainly on where they were born, simply because they were indoctrinated by their parents as very young children. Most of these children will go on to indoctrinate their own children and those will go on to indoctrinate their grandchildren, etc.

A recent phenomenon is that Atheism is becoming more and more socially acceptable which explains the dramatic recent rise in people who now claim that belief.

[_Hoops]

The real reason most people on earth belong to a religion is that acceptance of a supernatural claim tends to promote cooperative social relationships.

Since that kind of societal cooperation is not necessary anymore for survival, then can we assume that you are in favor of discarding all those pesky moral obligations that came with religioun?

[_Hoops]

Hoops,
Why is that interesting that I make a choice to not look at the world as proof?
No, I don't consider beauty and wonder evidence of God.
I can indeed use beauty and wonder to move and inspire me even though I don't believe God made it appear. God does not need to be the source of all. Why would she need to be such?
Why am I moved? I don't know why. That is the amazing part of it. That is the Godly part, I guess.
I used the Book of Abraham example as sort of a joke but it is interesting that I'm using the same argument for the existence of God that Schryver uses for the Book of Abraham. LOL.

Sorry, I was probably not being very clear. No, I'm saying that you can make qualitative judgements about beauty and wonder at all is evidence of "something" larger than yourself. Beauty is generally universal. The sunset, mountains, you get the idea. It moves you. Why? Why does something beautiful move us and something ugly repels us?
True, God does not need to be the source. But a believe has that as evidence that He is, indeed, the source. It's now up to you, as a non-believer, to identify the source. The scales in this argument are tipped in our favor. What do you have to tip them back?
And the next answer is that this is some sort of chemical reaction on our brains, but that still doesn't explain the attending emotions with that reaction.

My Book of Abraham reference was the fact that someone had the urge to create it at all. Why? I think any answer you have - whether it's true or not - is evidence that there is something larger than ourselves.