What I mean by exist is to be, in some form either physical or spiritual. But not only would that suffice but he would have to reveal himself to mankind not through some so called prophet, or books written long ago, but rather in some physical way that we may know him. My gripe with god and his existence is that to believe you have to suspend the requirement for proof and go solely on faith. Faith is not a valid nor reliable way to ascertain that god exist.
With something so important as eternity in the balance for example, faith falls short. You are gambling your entire life and freedom here on Earth to please a god whose existence is dubious at best. I do believe we only have one life to live and while we are here we should make the most of it and enjoy every minute that we are allowed to "exist" on this planet. That is why I am completely opposed to Pascals wager. If you believe you gain eternity but if there is nothing there you have nothing to lose? In fact you have everything to lose when you give up this life for the hopes of a better life after this one in a place (heaven or New Jerusalem) you cannot possibly be sure even exist.
When Thomas doubted the stories regarding the resurrection of Jesus, He came in person and let him put his fingers in his wounds and his hand in his side. Although Thomas was chastised for requiring proof your lord at least gave it to him. Being omnipresent (everywhere all the time) I don't see this as such a hard task for the lord to fulfill to all those that seek him. Belief in him requires faith and not evidence but this sort of defeats the purpose of acquiring adherents when after seeing the evidence the adherent may acquire faith or not. But if he doesn't even after having seen the evidence then his condemnation will be upon his own head.
Faith is not sufficient enough to satisfy a thinker.
With something so important as eternity in the balance for example, faith falls short. You are gambling your entire life and freedom here on Earth to please a god whose existence is dubious at best. I do believe we only have one life to live and while we are here we should make the most of it and enjoy every minute that we are allowed to "exist" on this planet. That is why I am completely opposed to Pascals wager. If you believe you gain eternity but if there is nothing there you have nothing to lose? In fact you have everything to lose when you give up this life for the hopes of a better life after this one in a place (heaven or New Jerusalem) you cannot possibly be sure even exist.
When Thomas doubted the stories regarding the resurrection of Jesus, He came in person and let him put his fingers in his wounds and his hand in his side. Although Thomas was chastised for requiring proof your lord at least gave it to him. Being omnipresent (everywhere all the time) I don't see this as such a hard task for the lord to fulfill to all those that seek him. Belief in him requires faith and not evidence but this sort of defeats the purpose of acquiring adherents when after seeing the evidence the adherent may acquire faith or not. But if he doesn't even after having seen the evidence then his condemnation will be upon his own head.
Faith is not sufficient enough to satisfy a thinker.
There is nothing people will not maintain when they are slaves to superstition
http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/
http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/
