"I want to be an astrophysicist to prove God is real using science."

[HisGrace]

If god wanted people to know he was real he'd reveal himself. The Christian god obviously doesn't want to be proven real if he exists since people are supposed to have faith. Pretty futile endeavour there kid. But good for him for his education, I guess. 

[HisGrace]

If god wanted people to know he was real he'd reveal himself. The Christian god obviously doesn't want to be proven real if he exists since people are supposed to have faith. Pretty futile endeavour there kid. But good for him for his education, I guess. 

If god wanted people to know he was real he'd reveal himself. The Christian god obviously doesn't want to be proven real if he exists since people are supposed to have faith. Pretty futile endeavour there kid. But good for him for his education, I guess. 

That's a good point.

 I may be accused of making a strawman argument for pointing out that some Christians would argue this point with two points. 1) That God did reveal himself 2000 years ago and 2) If God were to reveal himself it would take away our free will.

Yes these two points may be oversimplifications, but I have indeed heard these two arguments.

God has never revealed himself to me. =Fact. Why should I believe in him or be attacked for not believing in him?

I wasn't making any comment on whether god exists or the merits of Christianity. Just pointing out that if god wanted to be proven real he could do it on his own. And that the Christian god specifically wouldn't want that. Christianity's emphasis on apologetics in the past however many years doesn't make an awful lot of sense in the context of their religion.

[HisGrace]

I do not see why or how an astrophysicist would be better or more qualified to show that an imaginary God can  or does exist.

The only way to prove God exists is for him to show his vile and immoral face around here.

I would not expect him to live long if he can be killed as someone, if not I, would be sure to try to kill him for his crimes against humanity.

Reconcile with your father as soon as possible. You can't allow this madness to continue.

I mean, if I sat and watched children get raped and people get murdered all day and sat there and did nothing I think everyone would agree I was a terrible person. If an omnipotent god exists, then that's what he does. One of the reasons I find the descriptions of a benevolent god in major religions a bit hard to believe.

[HisGrace]

I do not see why or how an astrophysicist would be better or more qualified to show that an imaginary God can  or does exist.

The only way to prove God exists is for him to show his vile and immoral face around here.

I would not expect him to live long if he can be killed as someone, if not I, would be sure to try to kill him for his crimes against humanity.

Reconcile with your father as soon as possible. You can't allow this madness to continue.

I mean, if I sat and watched children get raped and people get murdered all day and sat there and did nothing I think everyone would agree I was a terrible person. If an omnipotent god exists, then that's what he does. One of the reasons I find the descriptions of a benevolent god in major religions a bit hard to believe.

Do you also malign the Sun for shedding its light on evil?

The sun isn't an intelligent being, so no. There's no ethics to anything it does, it just is.

If you want to say god is just a force of nature, what I said wouldn't be a valid objection. I'm open to that, I'd identify somewhere between an atheist and agnostic, the Dawkins/Hitchens types who say that they are 100% sure god doesn't exist are being silly.

But the argument that an omnipotent, intelligent god would be morally complicit in everything that has ever happened and that it would thus be hard to call him "good" is a perfectly valid one. I wouldn't just write that off as "daddy issues".

I'm normally not one to get in arguments about that. If someone just wants to say "I have faith" and trust that everything about their beliefs will make sense in the end, fine. I'm not going to do that, but I'm not going to bully someone who does either.

[HisGrace]

If you want to say god is just a force of nature, what I said wouldn't be a valid objection. I'm open to that, I'd identify somewhere between an atheist and agnostic, the Dawkins/Hitchens types who say that they are 100% sure god doesn't exist are being silly.

But the argument that an omnipotent, intelligent god would be morally complicit in everything that has ever happened and that it would thus be hard to call him "good" is a perfectly valid one. I wouldn't just write that off as "daddy issues".

The reason I accuse people of having daddy issues is that they want a god to come into the world as a strong-armed savior and fix all our problems, and then act bitter when that doesn't happen. To me, it speaks to an emotional and psychological immaturity.

If god existed I wouldn't expect him to fix things like broken marriages or economic issues. But things like wars, murder, and rape, if anyone can stop it then you should. If I could snap my fingers and stop the war in Syria right now, there's no question I'd do it. Any decent person would.

[HisGrace]

If god existed I wouldn't expect him to fix things like broken marriages or economic issues. But things like wars, murder, and rape, if anyone can stop it then you should. If I could snap my fingers and stop the war in Syria right now, there's no question I'd do it. Any decent person would.

The same human nature that leads to broken marriages and economic issues, also leads to war, murder, and rape. If you want to stop those things, start changing your own nature. Draw God into the world yourself.

If you want to say god is just a force of nature, what I said wouldn't be a valid objection. I'm open to that, I'd identify somewhere between an atheist and agnostic, the Dawkins/Hitchens types who say that they are 100% sure god doesn't exist are being silly.

But the argument that an omnipotent, intelligent god would be morally complicit in everything that has ever happened and that it would thus be hard to call him "good" is a perfectly valid one. I wouldn't just write that off as "daddy issues".

The reason I accuse people of having daddy issues is that they want a god to come into the world as a strong-armed savior and fix all our problems, and then act bitter when that doesn't happen. To me, it speaks to an emotional and psychological immaturity.

If god existed I wouldn't expect him to fix things like broken marriages or economic issues. But things like wars, murder, and rape, if anyone can stop it then you should. If I could snap my fingers and stop the war in Syria right now, there's no question I'd do it. Any decent person would.

You have no idea what the consequences of just "snapping your fingers and ending the war in Syria" might be.  You could be setting the region up for a much deadlier war down the line.  You could be creating a power vacuum for an organization like ISIS to re-fill.

As MOP said, the changes have to come from within each and every one of us.  So far we've not done a real good job with that.  But you can do it for yourself.

If you want to say god is just a force of nature, what I said wouldn't be a valid objection. I'm open to that, I'd identify somewhere between an atheist and agnostic, the Dawkins/Hitchens types who say that they are 100% sure god doesn't exist are being silly.

But the argument that an omnipotent, intelligent god would be morally complicit in everything that has ever happened and that it would thus be hard to call him "good" is a perfectly valid one. I wouldn't just write that off as "daddy issues".

The reason I accuse people of having daddy issues is that they want a god to come into the world as a strong-armed savior and fix all our problems, and then act bitter when that doesn't happen. To me, it speaks to an emotional and psychological immaturity.

If god existed I wouldn't expect him to fix things like broken marriages or economic issues. But things like wars, murder, and rape, if anyone can stop it then you should. If I could snap my fingers and stop the war in Syria right now, there's no question I'd do it. Any decent person would.

Have you considered that an omnipotent, omniscient God would have information you are not privy to that would alter your moral assessment of the situation?  This is why ethical arguments against Christianity such as the argument from evil, argument from hell, etc. can only take you so far because we are ultimately finite human beings, not exactly a suitable place from which to judge the creator of the universe.

My post appeared to garner significant reaction in my absence.

Maybe the Syrian War example wasn't the best example, given potential unintended consequences of suddenly stopping a war, but if an omnipotent god existed I'm sure he could figure it out. Add to that most the people getting killed are cannon fodder and collateral damage, not the ones who caused the conflict, it wouldn't be someone else swooping in to solve "their" problem.

But right now this same forum is full of people denouncing leaders in the Catholic Church for their lack of action in regards to the sexual abuse within the church. If the god they believe in existed, he'd be just as guilty. The "you shouldn't expect other people to swoop in and fix your problems" defense isn't really valid when you're talking about helpless children.

[HisGrace]

My post appeared to garner significant reaction in my absence.

Maybe the Syrian War example wasn't the best example, given potential unintended consequences of suddenly stopping a war, but if an omnipotent god existed I'm sure he could figure it out. Add to that most the people getting killed are cannon fodder and collateral damage, not the ones who caused the conflict, it wouldn't be someone else swooping in to solve "their" problem.

But right now this same forum is full of people denouncing leaders in the Catholic Church for their lack of action in regards to the sexual abuse within the church. If the god they believe in existed, he'd be just as guilty. The "you shouldn't expect other people to swoop in and fix your problems" defense isn't really valid when you're talking about helpless children.

How is God guilty for what human beings do on their own free will?

You could make that same argument about a person, but no one would. If I sat and watched someone get raped or murdered and could have stopped it, but didn't, no one would view "people have free will" as an excuse for my inaction. Most every religious person would agree it would be a sin for a person to not intervene in a situation like that if they were able. People don't/shouldn't have the free will to murder and rape other people. That's the whole reason we have governments and laws. Then of course why doesn't anyone care about the free will of the people having their lives taken from them or being violated?

If an omnipotent god did exist and didn't intervene, that wouldn't make people any less responsible for their own actions. It would just mean that he also bore responsibility for allowing things to happen when he could have stopped it, just as a person in the same circumstance would be held responsible.