4 Step Proof for God of the Bible

[darwinXIII]

please, be specific. Who were the ones involved in child sacrifices? Every living thing on the face of the Earth (except for Noah)? The Canaanites? The people in the promised land? The Amorites? And even if they were, why does god tell them to kill EVERY SINGLE ONE? This includes the babies who were going to be sacrificed, as well as the babies who had nothing to do with the sacrifices. And, by the way, mass murders aren't the only thing covered in this list of atrocities. You simply skirt the entire issue here by saying "they were committing child sacrifices". This doesn't even cover one tenth of the atrocities God commits in the first 4 books of the bible. What about all the much too severe punishments (almost always death) prescribed for such harmless, victimless things like homosexuality, and working on the sabbath? What about the cruel animal sacrifices he condones? You ignore the entire issue here, and dismiss it with a inane, pointless generalizatio. Stop defending your god in the face of such atrocities. If Jesus was God, and God did half of the things that he was said to have done, than Jesus's death should have been celebrated, not condemned. You continue to completely ignore what I brought up here by saying that I am in favor of child sacrifices. Thanks, now I know that whenever somebody says something that I disagree with, I will come up with an ad hominem attack, just like you. I don't believe that child sacrifices are right. I believe that they are wrong, and should be punished. However, the manner in which your God punishes them, by killing people who weren't even involved in the child sacrifices, is completely unjust. I also believe that the other 95% of this list of atrocities is unjustifiable in any way. You make no attempt to dismiss the vast majority of these statements, so I will assume you agree. Now that we are clear on that, you should really stop worshipping your god. You tell me that I am unsaved. However, you are the one who is worshipping a mass murderer, who loves to watch animals being tortured in bizarre, cruel ways. How many atrocities must you be shown, commited by God and in the name of God, before you realize that your god cannot be Jesus, and if he is, than Jesus cannot possibly be good. If I am going to hell for seeking the truth, then so be it. I would rather be in hell than spend an eternity with your sadistic, cruel, and utterly horrible fairy-tale you call god. When I look at his track record, being seperated from God actually sounds pretty good.
(On a side note, is there a 100% survival rate for Chrsitians who suffer snake bites or accidentally eat poison? Because if there isn't , I am afraid that your holy book is mistaken.)

[Churchwork]

please, be specific. Who were the ones involved in child sacrifices? Every living thing on the face of the Earth (except for Noah)? The Canaanites? The people in the promised land? The Amorites? And even if they were, why does god tell them to kill EVERY SINGLE ONE? This includes the babies who were going to be sacrificed, as well as the babies who had nothing to do with the sacrifices. And, by the way, mass murders aren't the only thing covered in this list of atrocities. You simply skirt the entire issue here by saying "they were committing child sacrifices". This doesn't even cover one tenth of the atrocities God commits in the first 4 books of the bible. What about all the much too severe punishments (almost always death) prescribed for such harmless, victimless things like homosexuality, and working on the sabbath? What about the cruel animal sacrifices he condones? You ignore the entire issue here, and dismiss it with a inane, pointless generalizatio. Stop defending your god in the face of such atrocities. If Jesus was God, and God did half of the things that he was said to have done, than Jesus's death should have been celebrated, not condemned.

One item at a time you may specify and we can deal with it, then the next and the next. I am not going to write out a long response to each item, because you won't read it anyway. One at a time. The just punishment for generational child sacrificing is the ceasing to exist as a people. As those people continued to war on that basis and try to annihilate Israel, Israel had the full right to defend itself and stop their atrocities. However much you dislike the punishment fitting the crime, the punishment for such sin is the natural consequence to that sin. Defending those sins as being punished too severely is only a reflection of your own conscience that is seared and your darkened mind. Be specific. Which specific verse would you like to talk about first. One item at a time. Perhaps start with the one that comes off the top of your head and we can address that item next.

You continue to completely ignore what I brought up here by saying that I am in favor of child sacrifices. Thanks, now I know that whenever somebody says something that I disagree with, I will come up with an ad hominem attack, just like you. I don't believe that child sacrifices are right. I believe that they are wrong, and should be punished. However, the manner in which your God punishes them, by killing people who weren't even involved in the child sacrifices, is completely unjust. I also believe that the other 95% of this list of atrocities is unjustifiable in any way. You make no attempt to dismiss the vast majority of these statements, so I will assume you agree.

Your interpretation is twisted. In some cases it was God's will just to kill those in favor of child sacrifices while not harm say the women and children, while in other cases the whole lot had to be killed because generationally it was proven that they would grow up and reenact the same practices. There is precedence for why what was done was needed. Your problem is overlooking the obvious because you are hostile to God so through that hostility you shut your mind down to the obvious to accuse Him falsely.

Now that we are clear on that, you should really stop worshipping your god. You tell me that I am unsaved. However, you are the one who is worshipping a mass murderer, who loves to watch animals being tortured in bizarre, cruel ways. How many atrocities must you be shown, commited by God and in the name of God, before you realize that your god cannot be Jesus, and if he is, than Jesus cannot possibly be good. If I am going to hell for seeking the truth, then so be it. I would rather be in hell than spend an eternity with your sadistic, cruel, and utterly horrible fairy-tale you call god. When I look at his track record, being seperated from God actually sounds pretty good.
(On a side note, is there a 100% survival rate for Chrsitians who suffer snake bites or accidentally eat poison? Because if there isn't , I am afraid that your holy book is mistaken.)

Once saved always saved as not only the Bible teaches, but all believers know experientially and intuitively by the Holy Spirit indwelling our spirits. Since God has proven Himself time and time again, and you still can't find fault with Him, then you are presented still the choice to come to the cross as a helpless sinner and receive the perfect sacrifice to atone for your sins.

While you defend child sacrifices by not dealing with this problem effectively by keeping alive those who continue to engage in that activity and whom will not stop to the day they die, praise God those nations no longer exist in part because Israel listened to God in defending themselves against their atrocities. In the Bible, Israel even suffered for not finishing off some nations. Consequently, they grew up again and attacked Israel the next generation. So you accuse God and Israel of mass murder, but if Israel did not do what was required of it, it would no longer exist as a nation. Suffice it to say Israel remains and your nations you favor engaging in child sacrifices no longer exist. A reasoned person would say since Israel is still around and those evil nations no longer exist perhaps it is God's will, since those nations will no longer return. They are gone for good. You might want to resurrect them but I don't think you will succeed in reviving their waring attempts to preserve their child sacrifices and mass murdering its own enemies.

Animals were not tortured by Israel, but killed cleanly. Why bear false witness? Your evil imagination is just manifesting your own corrupted conscience.

Since God is not sadistic or cruel (Gnostics believe God is evil), and your bearing false witness of Him does not change His nature, then you should repent. Since the uncreated must exist whom is God of the Bible, and you cannot disprove the proof for God and could find nothing wrong with the verses you gave, then realize your hostility will send you to hell which you admit you want to go to hell, and I am sure you belong there if that is what you truly want.

The Bible does not say there needs be 100% survival rate for snake bites suffered by just Christians. You read it legalistically. Reading it with an open mind, you could say Christians have a higher rate of survival than non-Christians who are bitten by snakes.

Homosexuality is not a harmless thing but propagates aids and is abusive to children that grow up without a mother to corrupt further the next generation. Working on the Sabbath was a violation of God's covenant with Israel as His chosen people. If you did not keep this covenant you break your relationship with God in the first nation He revealed Himself to and whom God planned to use mightily which is to become the center of all nations. If you desecrated it and mocked it in the sight of Jews valuing it, you were to die for pretentiously being Jewish yet not valuing that which was Jewish (which creates strife and dissension); otherwise, you would be just banished and cut off from the people. Depending on your response to the Sabbath, the appropriate response was administered. Let's say the Sabbath was being honored and on that day you came and turned over tables, smashed the temple, and broke the altar. Your death was at hand. If it was not for the preservation of the Jewish law, Jesus could never have come to die a once-for-all death and show that no man could keep the law except Jesus.

Still you are not responding the explanation given for why those evil nations needed to be destroyed, but just keep repeating yourself. This is an infraction of Board Etiquette #6. Don't be a clanging bell.

The fairy tale you have of no uncreated creator and a universe that just happens all by itself is a puff the magic dragon evil idea which is simply expressing your disobedience and hostility to your creator. You're a bad guy and you know it, and as long as you continue your belligerency of not responding to the explanation given by just repeating yourself, your infractions accumulate (in other words, your mindless unsupported and misrepresenting repetition is too dull for these forums).

Temporary sacrifices point to the once for all sacrifice of Jesus. While you take glory in murdering another human being which makes you a murderer at heart, Christians view His death as bearing the sins of the world upon Himself because He was sinless and yet was put to death by sinners.

Always remember the Minimal Facts Approach which says if you were to hypothetically find a mistake in the Bible it would not do damage to the proof Jesus is God, because Jesus said the proof of His being God is in His resurrection which is proven in Gal. 1 & 2 and 1 Cor. 15 where over 95% of scholars in the past half century agree Paul was being genuine. Therein he writes he met with the apostles, including John, Peter and James (brother of Jesus) who testified together in seeing Jesus' resurrected in various multiple groups and martyred for their unchanging eyewitness testimony. Since hallucinating the same exact thing is not possible in groups, we are left with the only rational explanation: they actually did touch, talked, walked and ate with the risen Lord. What is beautiful about the MFA is there is no thought in the entire world able to counter it. The reason we have faith is because it proven whereas the unsaved have faith in what they belief without proof.

Hallelujah!

[darwinXIII]

First, please stop the infractions. This is a response to step 3, proving that the God of the Bible cannot be Jesus, or that Jesus was really a homocidal maniac. I Think that the reason that you don't write out a response to every article mentioned is because you know that most of them are not justifiable. If you do, I will rebut you point-by-point on each of them. Again, you give no (valid) response to why these nations had to be destroyed entirely. Every nation that was mentioned in the aforementioned list of atrocities was "utterly destroyed" or "no thing that breatheth was left alive". Why did god command the deaths of the innocents? Generational child ssacrifices (which you give no evidence of, historical or Biblical), would not have gone on forever if only the people who were condoning them were put to death. Had God said "Kill the sinners, and save the young and the innocent, that you may teach them the way of the lord," then maybe that would be a just punishment. Killing everybody for what their culture does, before they even have a comprehension of what the crimes that they haven't committed yet are, is something that you cannot equate with any just god. So, if we are going to start with the first item off the top of my head, how about that whole "kill everybody of all other religions." Never in my life have I seen a more belligerent (since you are so fond of that word), intolerant, and xenophobic command. In other words, what this means is that, if you were ACTUALLY FAITHFUL to the (alleged) word of god, then you would kill all Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, Pagans, Wiccans (although you would do that anyway, Ex. 22:18), agnostics, and atheists. Justify that for me, and you will have defended 1 of the dozens of loopy, insane, and dangerous laws made by God.

The petty few justifications you make for the intolerant laws of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers are close-minded at best, and genocidal at worst. Never mind that if gays spread HIV, then it should only affect the gay community, because it is an STD, not a contagious disease. You basically are hurting somebody for doing something to themselves, in other words, something that isnt a crime. Gays could not get married or adopt in those days, so your next point is irrelevant, and doesn't justify putting them to death. Next you go on to justify the death penalty for working on the sabbath. I am ostensibly a Jew, and yet I work on sunday. Are you saying, by justifying this law, that I should be put to death? What kind of a punishment is that? Your only other justification is an example of defiling a temple. But that is completly irrelevant. The only just response to blasphemy is shunning from the community, and maybe you could be fined for property damage. But what you are describing is in no way related to working on the sabbath. How do you justify the law that anyone who even gathers up sticks on sunday should be killed? The bible does not say that anyone who works on the sabbath is to be cut off from his people. Rather, it says that anyone who works on the sabbath is to die. SO if you truly believe that the Bible is the word of God, then I would like to see you kill all those who it commands you to. I will be at the front row at your trial. But, in the meantime, I would like to see that list of justifications. That is, if you have it.

And seriously, stop with the infractions. You issued this challenge to me in step 3 of your proof, and I am just responding to it.

[Churchwork]

darwin,

We can summarize all your mistaken thinking by saying you have no appreciation for your sin nature that there must be consequences for sin. Sin leads to not only death but the second death which is hell.

You asked, "Why did god command the deaths of the innocents?" They aren't innocent.

"Now the Lord observed the extent of the people's wickedness, and he saw that all their thoughts were consistently and totally evil" (Gen. 6.5).

By God's infinite foreknowledge, He knows everyone and what they will become when they come of age. And everyone is born into sin.

Step 3 identifies God of the Bible we are speaking about and simply states to argue against a quality that is not His own is not a rebuttal against God of the Bible but something else. For example, His quality is to punish sin. Whether you like this or not is irrelevant. As they say, the punishment fits the crime. Criminals often don't think they did something wrong, yet they are in jail as those who are unsaved will be in hell.

In Gen. 15.32-36 a man is put to death for working on the Sabbath. Is this justified? Yes, because the covenant with God Israel has as the chosen nation is to usher in the Messiah, and the sign of that covenant is keeping the Sabbath. It's very serious business to eradicate sin.

Of course, we are no longer under the law because we have died to the law having died on the cross with Christ. We live by the spirit of the law. Today's response in the new covenant is not the same as the response under the old covenant. Different times require a different response.

I gave you an infraction for continually repeating that you don't like God's response when you haven't given a valid reason for your intolerance to Him. If you don't have a valid reason and still accuse Him, what sense is there in that? All you are doing is violating Step 3 of the 4 Step Proof for God by misrepresenting Him. These forums are for discussion and evidence, not repetitively self-declaring something without anything to support your idea. Once the answer is given accept it, especially since you can't find fault with it. If you still don't like the answer given, just remember the support for it outweighs your dislike. And since you are the accuser, the burden of the proof remains on you.

For example, you repeated, "you give no (valid) response to why these nations had to be destroyed entirely" even though I already had when I said, "generationally it was proven [in the Bible] that they would grow up and reenact the same practices". They continued to war on this basis, but praise God they no longer exist. Israel remains, you lose. The fact that the evil nations you favor no longer exist is proof enough going forward. Christians remain and those particular evil nations don't exist.

Human sacrifices in antiquity were quite common. Here are some cases recorded in the Bible and in other records.

[Apoche]

I'll have a go at this as well. I am quoting from this article: http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/perfectproof.htm.

My Refutation

You fail to present an actual argument. Your perfect proof can be summed up as: 'God is uncreated, because if he were created, then his creator would have a creator, and we'd have an infinite regress, but that's not possible, since we're still sinning.' This is nonsense and hand-waving (you do that a lot, together with special pleading). There is no logical connection between your assertations, really. It's like you've got two arguments going: one to prove that the Universe cannot be infinitely old (and no cosmologists or 'evolutionists' believe it is), and one to prove God exists. The latter is an example of the Kalam Argument for the Existence of God, and as such, it is not very strong. I will refute both your claims.

Exponential Increase in Global Conscience

You state:

If there had been an eternity of the past of cause and effects, we would have had an eternity to be perfected without sin, but since we still sin, we know there was not an eternity of the past of cause and effect.

Your argument rests on this idea, that the net amount of sin in the world must decrease over time. First and foremost, I have strong reasons to doubt that such a thing as sin exists, but even if it did, I find the notion that there is less sin in the world now than there was two thousand years ago absurd. You cite a number of examples of 'sinful' and 'evil' cultures that have gone extinct (the Mayans, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Persians, etc.), and claim that this is a reflection of a natural tendency towards a more moral life. I think this is nonsense. Look at recent history, and read about Auschwitz, about Rwanda and the Killing Fields of Cambodia, or the Rape of Nanjing and the Gulag -- not only are those atrocities 'sinful,' but they are even more 'sinful' than the measly human sacrifices practiced by the Mayans. Surely the death of a few upon the altars of Huitzilopochtli does not amount to the same level of 'sinfulness' as the death of millions in the Holocaust.

Furthermore, I am disturbed by you calling the Philistines and all those other peoples 'evil.' I fail to see what makes Romans evil, and why the Amorites deserved to be killed off. While I do not suggest anything, I find such thinking to be quite close to the mindset exhibited by some racists. You cannot judge non-westerners after western moral standards; and while the thought of being sacrificed in the fires of Huehueteotl is horrible to us, it was a great honour to the Aztecs. Those ancient peoples were humans, just like we are, with their own personalities and hopes and desires, and not mindless puppets serving evil and sacrificing children. Also, who were the 'Talismanics' and the 'TaoTuoKungs'?

Anyway, you continue by saying:

There are lots of data points for other examples, e.g. the murder rate and crime rate per capita have continued to go down millennia after millennia and usually, century after century.

As pointed out above, this is unproven; it's a raw assertion without any data whatsoever to back it up. I mentioned numerous examples of a 'sinful' nature that have occured in the twentieth century. And if the amount of 'sin' is decreasing, then tell me why homosexuality is becoming more accepted? I believe homosexuality is a 'sin' according to the Bible.

Your claims about Islam are misguided and insulting towards those of that faith.

Causality

You continue by saying that everything that happens has a cause, except for God. First off, the position of causality as a law is threatened by some findings in modern physics, and no amount of hand-waving from your side is going to change that fact. Second, saying that God is uncreated because he is God is special pleading, and, as FSTDT correctly identifies in her (their?) post, ad hoc. If everything has a cause, then of course God should also have a cause; but you say no, and give no proper reason for why God is uncaused.

The Nature of God

Lastly, you fail to demonstrate why the cause of the Universe has to be the God of the Bible. You seem to have anticipated this objection, and you state thusly

I know the atheist/agnostic question is if God is uncreated why can't something else, anything else, be uncreated? But, if you ask this, then you have to be intellectually honest with yourself, and do a comparison to this "anything else" with Jesus Christ. There is no comparison. Christ wins hands down every time given His nature and conduct.

However, this amounts to nothing more than hand-waving. Why would the creator have to compare to Jesus?

Summary

Your argument is not valid, and consists of numerous fallacies, false premises, and unproven assertions. Do I get mmy ten thousand dollars now?

[Churchwork]

I have had all these discussions before so many times. The problem always is you don't look at what you are assuming if it is indeed proven or not, so by not looking at what you are assuming, you engender false ideas that flow from those mistaken assumptions. That's all that's going on. It should be noted it takes pride to assume something without the need for evidence to support it. As the Bible says, PROVE ALL THINGS.

You couldn't prove any hand waving or special pleading or that the argument is not strong, so just saying so doesn't mean it's true.

Step 2 of the proof still remains, since there is just one argument, that is, nothing in nature happens all by itself. Therefore, nature can't cause itself. If nature can't cause itself and is not always existing, then we are left with only one possibility. The uncreated created who is God of the Bible, since none can compare to Christ. You haven't been able to disprove this solid proof.

Notice your only to Step 2 is essentially is self-declaring your disagreement, but not providing anything to back up your disagreement.

You're confusing net sin with sin per capita. You misread Step 1 and Step 4 of the proof.

No comment was made on the general extinction of those cultures. What was pointed out is their practice of child sacrifices has ceased. That is the point I wanted to get across. As many people that died on the 20th century due to war and attempts at extermination, on a per capita basis it is still less than those previous centuries, primarily because the population exploded from the 19th to the 20th century.

You can see how dead your conscience is, because you are defending child sacrifices of those nations that now cease to exist for their evil ways. Whereas Isaac who was to be sacrificed was stopped at the altar by God to say stop the sacrifices. It is wrong. Israel stood among so many nations to stand up against this. God will choose out a people for Himself such as Israel because they were willing to listen to Him. They had been in slavery for 430 years.

Even homosexuality is dropping on a per capita basis.

Those in Islam are insulted by being show their false beliefs. I understand that, because they are being judged. Nobody likes to be judged whether they are being true or false. Ultimately the reason they do what they do is because the Koran says Jesus did not die on the cross. Six centuries later they (actually one guy in a cave all by himself, named Mohamed) just decided to make it up that Jesus did not die on the cross. If you can assume that without evidence, you can assume other things like the need to blow yourself up in the name of Allah.

Nothing in modern science even suggests something happens all by itself. You can't prove it here or anywhere. Talk to scientists, they will help you out to get your thinking straight. It's always disingenuous to try to pick the most complicated subjects to make a proof that something happens all by itself. There as many different papers written on quantum mechanics as there are theories about quantum mechanics.

Christians don't say because God exists therefore God is true; nor do we say since God is uncreated God must be true and not have a creator. Rather, we say, because nothing in nature happens all by itself, nature can't cause itself and must therefore be cause by the only known possibility which is the uncreated created.

It doesn't stand to reason if everything has a cause that God should have a cause because God is not nature. You got confused before thinking God is nature.

Since Jesus said He is God the Creator, the minimum standard of comparison would be for another person on earth claiming He is the Creator. Do you have any challengers?

Since you could find no fault with the proof for God and God being Jesus, then you should give your life to Christ. He is the best answer for all your concerns.

Actually all your posts have assumptions which you don't want to defend. This violates Board Etiquette #6. But I am trying to show you as much mercy as I can, but when it gets inordinately egregious, I will have no choice to add on infractions, because repeating myself and your not responding to that evidence supplied, shows your disingenuousness.

[Apoche]

It should be noted it takes pride to assume something without the need for evidence to support it.

Yeah, you ought to heed your own words. Show me where I have not backed up my arguments, and I will tell you why you are wrong.

nothing in nature happens all by itself.

There are numerous fields within physics that throw doubts on concepts such as causality, and you can easily propose philosophical models that deny it altogether. Nevertheless, let us assume you are right for the sake of the argument.

Therefore, nature can't cause itself. If nature can't cause itself and is not always existing, then we are left with only one possibility.

If you by 'nature' mean 'all that exists,' then it has to, by definition, lack a cause. Any cause of existence also exists, and by the above definition, any cause of nature is thus a part of nature. The only alternative I can see to this is saying that either nature or the universe or everything has always been around, or that it caused itself.

The uncreated created who is God of the Bible, since none can compare to Christ. You haven't been able to disprove this solid proof.

I beg your pardon, but this is one massive non sequitur. The problem is not the existence of causality, but rather that you identify the cause as the God of the Bible. It makes no difference if none can compare to God, since "the cause of nature is the God of the Bible" does not follow from that statement. Ergo, even if what you say is true about causality and none being able to compare to God, you have not proved that the world was by necessity created by God.

Notice your only to Step 2 is essentially is self-declaring your disagreement, but not providing anything to back up your disagreement.

I did: "Second, saying that God is uncreated because he is God is special pleading, and, as FSTDT correctly identifies in her (their?) post, ad hoc. If everything has a cause, then of course God should also have a cause; but you say no, and give no proper reason for why God is uncaused." That's how I backed it up, and I think it's valid. If you disagree, then tell me why rather than simply stating 'you did not back it up.'

You're confusing net sin with sin per capita. You misread Step 1 and Step 4 of the proof.

You fail to see that net 'sin' is related to 'sin' per capita. The more 'sin' in the world, the more 'sinners' we have. Or do you honestly think that the Rwandan genocide was perpetrated by a single 'sinner'? That the guilt of the entire Holocaust is Hitler's? There were many thousands of people involved in both of these, and in all the other atrocities I listed, so I don't get how you can say that fewer people 'sin.' There might not be child sacrifices going on, but way worse things than any of the authors of the Bible could imagine are continually happening all around the globe, and it's the work of men rather than Satan. Even if we accept your conclusion that net 'sin' is separate from 'sin' per capita, you have done nothing to prove that the trend is decreasing. All you cited was a single graph, and that is hardly enough. This is a bare-boned assertion, and you cannot back it up at all.

You can see how dead your conscience is, because you are defending child sacrifices of those nations that now cease to exist for their evil ways.

I am going to defend human sacrifice among the Aztecs and the Mayans and all Mesoamerican peoples from all manners of pompous western-cetrics, be they religious or secular. There was nothing evil about these civilizations.

You can't prove it here or anywhere. Talk to scientists, they will help you out to get your thinking straight.

Since you are the one who said that everything in nature has a cause, please show me how come parts of quantum mechanics do not destroy popular conceptions of causality (such as yours).

It doesn't stand to reason if everything has a cause that God should have a cause because God is not nature. You got confused before thinking God is nature.

This is ad hoc -- you can't show why God is not a part of nature, and you just say so in order to get away with your nonsense. Like FSTDT pointed out, you say everything has a cause, but God doesn't, because, you know, he's God.

Since Jesus said He is God the Creator, the minimum standard of comparison would be for another person on earth claiming He is the Creator. Do you have any challengers?

Yeah. Me. "I am the uncreated Creator."

But I am trying to show you as much mercy as I can, but when it gets inordinately egregious, I will have no choice to add on infractions, because repeating myself and your not responding to that evidence supplied, shows your disingenuousness.

I have told you, multiple times, why you are wrong. And yet you keep on saying that I don't back up my reasoning.

[Churchwork]

Christians don't say God is uncreated because he is God. We say He is uncreated because the uncreated is proven to exist and because none can compare to Jesus.

By nature means the material universe. Nothing in the material universe happens all by itself or can cause itself. It always has a cause. God is not in the material universe, for He is never represented as such, so He qualifies as the necessary uncaused cause.

It does follow that the uncreated Creator would be unique in the claim of being uncreated for there is only one uncreated Creator; hence, none can compare to Christ.

You don't understand sin per capita. Sin per capita is saying there is 100 people taking a test and 3 people were cheating. Next year there is 200 people taking the test and 5 people cheated on the test. The latter is still better than the former on a per capita basis.

Per capita, child sacrifices are down. Per capita, women can vote more. Per capita, crime rate is down. And the list goes on and on.

You're a bad guy because you admit about yourself: "I am going to defend human sacrifice".

The most popular Christian in the entire eastern culture history was Watchman Nee. He is not western. You might want to read him since you have angst against the west.

You said, "please show me how come parts of quantum mechanics do not destroy popular conceptions of causality (such as yours)." Because they agree with the law of cause and effect. It is really is an asinine thing to think something happened all by itself like puff the magic dragon. You can't really even have a conversation with such stiff-lipped people.

Who is behind the evil things? Satan. Who gives into them. Man.

It was already shown why God is not part of nature, for since nothing in nature happens all by itself, the cause must be uncreated. The Bible is showing you who the uncreated is: Father, Son, Spirit (Triune God) for none can compare to Christ, for only the uncreated can enter into creation and resurrect of His own volition by the Spirit. The natural realm can't do this itself.

You said you are the uncreated creator, then you should know what you were doing 350 years ago. What were you doing on the first Wednesday in the month of June back then? Funny. Do you see how absurd things get? Now you are claiming to be God. You will argue to the cows come home with such mindlessness. It only shows there are some folks who will never repent of their sins to come to the cross to receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior even though they have no reason to remain hostile to Him.

One more infraction, then you go into temporary moderation. Just trying to give you a heads up if you want to discuss without being in moderation.

[Apoche]

One more infraction, then you go into temporary moderation. Just trying to give you a heads up if you want to discuss without being in moderation.

Would you please stop handing out these infractions? All you accomplish is stifling the debate, and it's annoying anyway.

Anyway.

Christians don't say God is uncreated because he is God. We say He is uncreated because the uncreated is proven to exist and because none can compare to Jesus.

So, in other words, you say God is uncreated because he is God. Before you send another of those silly infractions of yours, let's go through this once again. You state that God has the quality of being uncreated, and that in order to avoid an infinite regress, this means God is the creator of the world. I could just as well say "I believe in a floating, amorphous pile of citrus pie named Sauron that is uncreated, and that none can in any way compare to this entity, because it is very benevolent and wise and never does anything wrong." Does this mean Sauron is the cause of the universe? You would say no. Yet your argument in favour of God is of the same sort--you define 'being uncreated' as a part of God, and then you say that only that which is uncreated can be the cause of the universe.

It does follow that the uncreated Creator would be unique in the claim of being uncreated for there is only one uncreated Creator; hence, none can compare to Christ.

Anyone can claim to be uncreated. The only evidence you have that Jesus was uncreated is his own word for it--and using Jesus' words to prove that Jesus is uncreated is not even circular, it's just inane and stupid.

Per capita, child sacrifices are down. Per capita, women can vote more. Per capita, crime rate is down. And the list goes on and on.

Isn't this an example of lying with statistics? Even though the percentage of cheaters goes down, the amount of cheaters is on the rise. The problem has not been dealt with, and the net 'sin' is actually increasing. Why would God employ such a dishonest means of measuring 'sin' as this 'sin' per capita concept?

You're a bad guy because you admit about yourself: "I am going to defend human sacrifice".

I am not a bad guy, that's just your subjective opinion. I said I defend the people who sacrificed children who operated within their own moral framework from those who accuse them of being evil.

The most popular Christian in the entire eastern culture history was Watchman Nee. He is not western. You might want to read him since you have angst against the west.

I have no 'angst' against the west. I am a proud westerner, and nothing is going to change that. I won't read Watchman Nee's book, since it doesn't interest me in the slightest.

It is really is an asinine thing to think something happened all by itself like puff the magic dragon. You can't really even have a conversation with such stiff-lipped people.

This is an asinine thing to say. We're having an actual debate, and we express different opinions. Every single person who has challenged you has told you that quantum mechanics refute your view of causality, and yet you merely hand-wave it away, saying "no it doesn't." How about you give yourself an infraction for mindless and boring repetition? Please provide some evidence. Tell me why quantum mechanics do not refute your view of causality, and if you convince me, then I'll admit I was wrong. Until then, I won't change my mind regarding this issue.

It was already shown why God is not part of nature, for since nothing in nature happens all by itself, the cause must be uncreated.

This is nonsense. Your argument goes like this:

A: Nature is created.
B: That which created it has to be uncreated.
C: God is uncreated because he said so.
D: God is the creator of nature.

You said you are the uncreated creator, then you should know what you were doing 350 years ago.

My point was that anyone can say "I am the uncreated creator!"

[Churchwork]

The infractions are for the purpose of preventing you from stifling the discussion because it gets boring when you just self-declare yourself or repeat yourself mindlessly and misread so profusely after the answer was already given.

This is a clear violation of Board Etiquette #6 (which now you go into moderation temporarily with infractions at 15 points or higher), for you are not to repeat yourself mindlessly after it was already show otherwise. You said, "So, in other words, you say God is uncreated because he is God". No! Never said that. God is uncreated because nothing in nature happens all by itself, so the only possibility is there is an uncreated Creator who is God of the Bible since none can compare to Christ. It's really not that hard to understand.

I am giving you an infraction for calling infractions silly which is not in keeping with BE #3. It is silly to overlook the consequences of your actions.

Jesus' own words He is uncreated is not the evidence used in the Minimal Facts Approach for Jesus being uncreated. It is that which most scholars agree Paul was being genuine about in the earliest recorded Christian documents of Gal. 1 & 2, 1 Cor. 15. And martyrs don't go to their death on what they believe to be a lie. Hallucinations can't explain their eyewitness accounts because group hallucinations are impossible according to modern psychology.

You keep arguing about things that are not the what is being applied in the proof, so that is why Step 3 of the proof indicates don't argue against a quality of God that is not His own, for you would be arguing against something else and makes this conversation pointless.

Sin per capita is valid, just as many statistics are kept on a per capita basis whether they go up, net wise or not. What matters is exponentially sin per capita is going down which disproves there is an eternity of the past of cause and effects, for you would still not be sinning by now.

You are still a bad guy for defending child sacrifices under any conditions. That's your sin nature speaking loud and clear; you want to remain in your sin nature, for you will not repent. Hell exists for your types.

That's funny that you said, you "have no 'angst' against the west" when previously you said, "pompous western-cetrics, be they religious or secular".

You have no interest in reading Christian writings because you don't care for the truth after it was shown you. You won't be saved then for God said if you don't search Him out with all your heart and soul, you won't find Him. That is a spiritual law. You can bank on it! You don't realize you are hear because you are trying to rationalize a lie. It is eating away at your conscience, because you don't listen to your own spirit of God-consciousness.

I would have liked to continue our discussion without you having to go into moderation, but you are hellbent on making the same mistakes which you get the infractions for. That is just plain old obstinacy and belligerency.

You can't just hand-wave quantum mechanics claims something happens all by itself without any substantial evidence, for there are trillions of things with causes and nothing we can find with certainty that is without a cause in nature. The odds are so stacked against you, that you have a better chance of winning the lottery. Remember, for you to make a bizarre claim as this, the burden of the proof is clearly on you, because it is way out of standard observation. Just because atheists self-declare something happens all by itself in the minute world of quantum mechanics does not make it true. It is also disingenuous to have no backing for such a claim in the most complex area of science as an appeal for puff the magic dragon. Really you should select something more common like the earth happened all by itself or raindrops fall all by themselves, but we both know they do have a cause.

This is a very very boring conversation and you are an extreme dullard. So the infractions also fulfill the role of encouraging you not to be so mindless as you experience temporary moderation that may turn into temporary ban then permanent ban and removal if you continue these mistakes. I wouldn't want you to waste your time or my time.

You're bearing false witness of the proof. Rather, it goes like this:
A. Nothing in nature happens all by itself since all the evidence points to causes in trillions of them.
B. Therefore, nature can't cause itself, because it being nature has a cause.
C. Nature can't cause itself then it must be caused by that which is uncaused since no other possibility is fathomed by anyone in the history of the human race.
D. God proves He is the One uncaused through Jesus Christ in multiple group attestation of His resurrection recorded in documents most scholars agree Paul was being genuine about and were early to the date of His death as current as anything in antiquity.
E. If no alternative explanation can be fathomed, then it is likely true. You would be a gambler if you did not give your life to Christ.
F. To date, nobody has been able to find an alternative explanation worth considering.

Actually the lawyer in the Guinness Book of Records who won the most court cases in a row which was 245 said the case for the death, deity and resurrection is the best case he has ever seen. We can be certain it is true then since nothing is more well proven.

It is only important that one say He is the creator if He is the Creator, but He still has to prove it and Jesus does in His Word.

Your comments are riff with bearing false witness, for I did say "in order to avoid an infinite regress, this means God is the creator of the world". We are not avoiding infinite regress, but showed why there is not an eternity of the past of cause and effects because of the exponential progression of conscience as you would not still be sinning by now. Hence, the only possibility is that the uncreated created.

Your Sauron example fails because it has no evidential backing, just your self-declaring it. That is the nature of Satan and his pawns to mindlessly self-declare. It's boring. Whereas Christianity has the multiple attestation in various group settings of Jesus' resurrected and most scholars agree Paul was being genuine in Gal. 1 & 2, 1 Cor. 15 testifying to this in his meeting with the Apostles.

Amen.