God and the human mind

I believed in Christ when I was 3 years old. I went to sunday school and gained knowledge, but something clicked in me when I was about 12. Suddenly everything my pastor was saying made sense, and I realized how much the things of the Bible applied to my life. I began to "love the Word and meditate on it day and night." My faith and application of Bible doctrine got me through a lot of difficulties, and consequently I didn't know how anyone could deny God. I never really questioned the existence of God until about six months ago. I thought the idea of "belief" was such a cop out... I mean, I couldn't comprehend how anyone could NOT know that God exists. It was just so obvious to me. However, participating in this debate site, put all those things I had relied on to the test.Eventually, I came to the point where I thought: either there is a reason and purpose for reality, existence, and the universe, or there is not. I'm not sure cause and effect can "prove" that a supreme being must be the cause of reality, but I sure as heck can't see why anything should exist unless God wanted it to.So I decided that there had to be a reason for everything. And this seems to fit reality to me. Basically, I can't imagine a kernal popping into a universe settling into galaxies and elements in just the right proportion to create life (by whatever means) and create us to be here and experience all the things of life and God. Even if there are an infinite number of universes (which there is no evidence for, but a common explanation for existence without God)... why should there be an infinite number of universes?If you start with the premise that God exists as the creator, and then decide that you want to know him, everything else falls into place. Everything makes sense. Everything has a reason and purpose. Without God, things just don't click with reality as they should.I had a really good conversation with the freshman that just moved in next door to me. He's been an athiest/agnostic his whole life. He participated in a debate site similar to this one and was always on the other side using the same arguments that all athiests and agnostics on here use. He had a drug problem and eventually he went to rehab, and something (he hasn't told me yet) changed his mind about God completely. 6 months ago he accepted Christ, now he's here at a nerdy Christian university, and he agrees with that previous statement: once you humble yourself, choose to believe that God exists, and want to know God, everything just sorta falls into place. He's a totally different person now, inside and out.Whatever arguments exist do not bother me because my faith does not rest on arguments. It is just that: faith. And with it, my eyes are opened to a whole new dimension of reality, that those who eliminate faith from their minds miss out on. Wishful thinking? You can choose to believe so; since I believe God exists, this extra dimension to reality makes perfect sense and I see it everywhere. Without it my heart is cold and dead.I've also had many experiences and heard stories from others that greatly strengthen my faith. Confirmation bias? It doesn't matter. Because God is always working no matter whether he's hidden his will in chance or brought it out in defiance of the laws He holds in place.I believe that the God who created me loves me enough to speak to me. So I've look for his words and found them; and more than that I see evidence of his character and personality in everything. I have read many prophecies of the Messiah and they all fit with the stories of Christ. Could they have been messed with? Sure. But I think the God of the universe is capable of protecting the inspired words of his Holy Spirit as written by men. And it is very much consistent with God's actions to do things discretely.Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling now, still a little tired...

Thank you for your reply. I cannot fathom another reason why we exist. Therefore, I strongly believe that God exists. I'm sure that is some kind of logical fallacy: assuming (A) to be true because no other explanation is offered. When I look at life and reality, everything about it teaches me something about God because I believe he has created it and sustains it with a purpose in mind. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Since God is not bound by time, no. This is the argument that some creationists are afraid of. God is the most interesting person imaginable. He does things in every kind of way you can imagine. It seems like the ONLY time he wants to do something the boring old instantaneous miraculous way is to impress his power upon us or to bless us. Even so, he never does the same miracle in the same way twice. When someone puts a puzzle together it makes a recognizable picture. I see a picture that you do not, because you assume there is no picture and never bother to fit the pieces together. Or maybe you tried once but didn't use the picture on the box as a guide to go by, so you put pieces in the wrong places. Seeing no picture forming, you decided there was no picture, no reason, no purpose.On top of seeing a big picture of life and the universe (which you explain away as confirmation bias) I consider the Biblical prophecies, the tesimonies about Christ, and personal encounters with God and angels (and demons) to be evidence in support of my beliefs.

Thank you for your reply.I said: you said: My basis for this statement lies in the fact that time is a property of this physical universe. God, the supreme being who created the universe, cannot be bound by what he has instantiated. If this were the case, God was created when the universe was created, and God could not have been the creator because there would be no capability for God to choose until afterwards.God transcends time and space. It is incorrect to think of God as an old man with a lot of time on his hands, and it is also incorrect to think of God as mundanely rushing through all reality in an instant. He is fully experiencing and fully transcending everything because everything exists in his mind so to speak. If you really want to make an attempt to understand God, I think one of the first things you have to wrap your mind around is a being that transcends all dimensions.Not only does this make sense to me logically, but it is supported by scripture. As far as physical evidence? Well that would be equivalent to proving God exists, which can only be done by God when he so chooses.

I realize my first post was rambling, but...I notice you totally ignored the rest of my post(s).My faith rests on the fact that life does not make sense to me without God, the fact that we exist doesn't make sense to me without God, the fact that the prophets predicted Christ and his ministry, the fact that many people including two friends of mine have had "supernatural" experiences, the fact that everyone who believes and changes their life experience a happiness psychology can't imitate, and a myriad of other personal things have convinced me of the veracity of my belief in God.Sidelined asked if I had investigated the possibilities of self-deception, confirmation bias, wishful thinking, selective thinking, post hoc reasoning ect.1) Unless I could prove to you that God exists, I cannot not prove that I am not decieving myself.
2) If God is sovereign, confirmation bias is meaningless as far as answered prayer goes.
3) If God exists, I'm being realistic in my thinking; If he doesn't I am wishfully thinking.
4) If God is the cause of reality, I am not selectively thinking; If there is no God, there is no reason for reality.
5) If God created us, I am correct in believing He is the cause; If He doesn't exist my post-hoc reasoning that we must be the result of a cause does not make sense. Don't you think if we could give you proof that God exists, that would settle the question? But we can't give you anything that would satisfy you. Therefore it is impossible to prove to another person that our beliefs in God are true. And there is a reason: so you can continue scoffing.So there is no way to PROVE which one of us is deluding ourself in our beliefs about the existence of God. All I can say is that given the list of reasons above, belief in God seems like the only way to go for me. That is why I said my belief rests on faith, not on whatever argument can be made.Perhaps you would tell us how you have made sure to avoid those logical fallacies listed above in your belief that there is no God? (This entails proving God does not exist) Can you do that?

Thank you for your reply. But the logic is the thrust of my argument because I realize people like yourself do not consider scripture a valid means of learning about God.If you could point out logical flaws in my argument, that would be great.As far as scripture, I don't have the time right now to look up all the verses that indicate God transcends time and space... Some off the top of my head:2Pe 3:5 "They are deliberately ignoring one fact: Because of God's word, heaven and earth existed a long time ago."2Pe 3:8 "But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (Psalm 90:4)Psalm 8:3 "When I look upon Your heavens, the work of Your fingers: the moon and the stars which You have fixed;"John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being."Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."Job 38:33 "He stretches out the heavens by himself and walks on the waves of the sea. He made the constellations Ursa Major, Orion, and the Pleiades, and the clusters of stars in the south. He does great things that are unsearchable and miracles that cannot be numbered."There are others that I can't think of right now that point to his immanence and transcendence.

Thank you for your reply. I said that God was not BOUND by space-time. I did not say he could not manipulate space-time. Obviously He can manipulate it without being subjected to it if He created it. I knew this is where you were trying to lead me. But since you were so polite I did as you asked. Like I said before, you do not consider any scripture valid, so I wonder, did you ask me to provide scripture to discount my argument on the fact that I am using scripture, which is done at your request?If you are going to do this, what is the point of having a debate? I'm very disappointed. Haha... sorry, I just thought that was funny. So why did you ignore my arguments which are not based on the Bible, but instead asked me to quote some scripture?Please go back and re-read my posts if you need to and maybe we can have a productive debate instead of this little production.

Thank you for your reply. I can't put it into words, but there's a debate going on in my mind about this and other related things... just be patient with me.

Hi Sidelined. Thanks for your reply. Sorry for getting back to you so late. In that statement you're still assuming that He MUST exist solely within bounds of space-time. IOW, you're saying my premise is false because your premise is true. But you will at least admit that this is a valid possiblity? Good. In which case, perhaps it is not good to use the premise that God must be bound by His creation when arguing against his existence. If He decided to abandon the function of the laws of the universe at one point anywhere, whatever existed there would cease to exist. Therefore he must be intimately involved in holding everything together. In Him all things consist. How can he not experience what is existing and alive through Him? You are not using "transcend" as I am using it. From Dictionary.com : Just because his experience passes beyond ours doesn't mean that he is "limited" to the "outside". I believe there is more to experience than what the physical mind can give us... even while the physical mind is still active. ...But this is getting beyond the logical arguments, and into personal experience, which is not considered valid. You are again using the unproven premise that God must be bound by his creation (solely physical) in order to argue against him. Saying God has a mind is an anthropomorphism: ascribing a human characteristic to God in order to better understand.If you were trying to describe an F-22 Raptor to an ancient civilization, how would you do it? You might say, it is a huge metal bird in which people ride and throw "smart" spears that seek out their enemy from above. It is a hopelessly insufficient explanation, but it helps to convey the idea. That is how we are forced to talk about God.

Hi Gilgamesh, sorry for the late reply. I've examined the arguments and determined that they do not discount my beliefs or experiences. You assume there are only two alternatives: logic and emotion. Maybe there's a third? That is bad logic. You cannot prove A is false because B may or may not be false when A is independent of B and may or may not be mutually exclusive to B. All I can do is pray that God will prove himself to you. Are you sure he does? What does materialism have to do with the purpose and product of our lives? The difference in the effects of our beliefs is betrayed by your emphasis on the material and the bitter tone of your reply. I have to disagree. I think it is you who has made strawman arguments against him. And what would be evidence of this transcendent creator of the universe? If you start out with the usual premises about God's character you can have a very nice sounding strawman argument here. But if you have misunderestimated this infinite supreme being, perhaps you shouldn't be so sure of your position?God does prove himself physically to various people at various times. He proves himself to those who believe in Him. Faith is important for reasons you do not and cannot understand right now. Would reality exist if God didn't exist? If so, why? Can you back that up with proof or a decent logical argument? You haven't shown any assumptions or premises of mine to be false. Don't put words in my mouth. Do Pretty Pink Pixies have all the same qualities as God? Are they the creator of the universe? Then they must be the Supreme Being. In which case, you have only changed God's name. You cannot disprove God by giving him a silly name. God is "I am who I am." When you look back on the last few days or weeks or months or years, are you glad you're where you are, or do you wish things had happened differently? When you look back do you see a random sequence or a purposed sequence so that you feel like what you are doing is what you are supposed to be doing? (This is not an argument yet, just a question out of curiosity) This topic is about God, the human mind, and whether or not believers are believers because of logical fallacies. You can't prove God does not exist just because I have known him first by faith. If you are going to charge that I have deceived myself, you must prove that what I believe is false. If you are going to assert that I am using confirmation bias you have to prove that nothing happens by God's will. etc... As I said above I applied all these things and found that they cannot possibly resolve the issue one way or another. I believe because I trust something other than myself. Heh... no wonder. Notice the terms you use: "religious conversion processes". You've completely missed the boat. So why are you so sure your beliefs are right? You’re not? Well, you state dogmatically that mine are wrong. So why do you so readily discount mine? As you said: It also takes blind faith to believe there is no God.But you say: How do you know you've not settled into the atheistic position because it is too difficult to entertain the notion of God without believing in Him? Do you even know what that means about your life if He does exist?

Thank you for your reply. Unless you can logically prove to me that God's existence must be defined by time, I reject yours. Time is just one of many dimensions of this universe. You might as well say, "God does not exist because he doesn't have a body." There is no difference between limiting him to the spacial dimensions and limiting him to the time dimension. Now if you choose to believe that the reality that we can perceive through our five senses is the only reality that can exist, that is your choice. But you have to prove that the reality we can sense physically is the only reality that can exist.Again, all you are doing is saying my assertion that God is not bound by the universe he created is false because your assertion -- existence is solely defined by the physical universe -- is true. Then you are essentially saying you do not consider God a possibility. Which I already knew.But what I am trying to show is that you cannot argue that the existence of God is not a possibility because you don't believe it is a possibility. Any argumentation against the possibility of an infinite God with the premise that God must be bound by his creation is a strawman argument. You said, "does not exist in". What can contain an infinite God? Again, I said he is not bound by space-time. In no way does this translate into your assertion that he cannot be "in" if he is "outside". My assertion is that both the "in" and the "out" are within Him. Your assertion again stems from your strawman about God's nature. Neither do you have a reason for your own existence. So are we to conclude that you do not exist? If everything exists "within" him, how can he not experience? Like I said before, it is incorrect to think of an infinite unbound God as a distant white-bearded man sitting in a throne somewhere with lots of time on his hands. It's also incorrect to think of an infinite unbound God as unable to know what is going on in the creation which exists within himself. Kinda reminds me of QM theory. ...I know, I know, everyone sees what they want to see in QM theory, but still... There is contradiction and confusion there that no one would have ever imagined could exist in the universe. First of all that is not true. Independence and mutual exclusivity are two different things. If I can ride a bike without training wheels that doesn't mean I can't ride a bike with training wheels. My ability to ride a bike is independent of but not mutually exclusive to the existence of training wheels.Just because God's existence is "independent" of space-time does not mean He is "excluded" from space-time.Second of all, why are you only taking the third definition from the three definitions I gave? So you cannot believe in anything unless you know the "how"? In that case you can't believe in anything until we find the "ultimate unifying theory of everything".This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 09-18-2004 09:21 PMThis message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 09-18-2004 09:23 PM

Sorry for another delayed reply... I'll try to reply to the main points. I know! And I'm not trying to prove God to you. All I'm trying to do is show that you cannot argue against God's existence by defining him in terms of the physical universe which he created. Again, if you choose to believe that the only reality is bound in the physical, that is your choice. But since you cannot prove this is true, your arguments based on the premise -- that if such a being should exist, he must be bound by the physical -- are invalid. Well, obviously, being a creature of physical nature I have no vocabulary or ability to accurately describe this. But I like how John puts it, "In the beginning, which was not a beginning, was the Word." [Just a note: To correctly represent my position, you should say beyond the BOUNDS of the physical because just saying "beyond" the physical implies he is outside and not able to come in]Like I said before, I cannot explain how or why God exists anymore than you can explain how or why you exist. Again, I have no answer for "how". Can you give me an answer for "how" time exists? haha... You're not damned for requiring evidence. David asks many times: God where are you? Why don't you show your face?How I arrive at this reality is through my search for meaning and purpose in life. There is no reason, means, or purpose for existence apart from God. If you open your "heart" (to use a mushy undefined term) to the realities of life and existence from the purpose/meaning perspective rather than looking at everything as the result of a formula that works for no predetermined reason, you begin to see God. When you open your mind or "heart" to this purpose/meaning dimension of reality, God will show himself to you -- sometimes even physically.I understand your need for evidence to believe in God, and that's ok. I wish God would physically knock on everyone's door and provide physical proof of himself, but that is not his plan for this age. This life is a test, a war, a training ground so to speak to see who can stay focused on the things of real worth and meaning; the things of real worth and meaning are immaterial. All I can say is that this part of our lives is not about the material expressions of power; its about service and love and war and contrasts in life. And if you have shut your mind to an overall meaning of these things in life, you have shut your mind to God....I know... Sorry for preachin again. No, you don't. No atheist can provide a reason for their existence (I should say "external" reason; because now that you're here you can find reasons for being here, but you have no reason to exist in the first place). And I don't know. Do you know how you can experience? Sure, neurons fire at the synapses in your brain. And electrons which are made of quasi-particles which are made of a quantum soup of energy which comes from -- God knows where. Where does it come from? How and why are you here experiencing? And this was my point in bringing up QM theory. There you have all kinds of things that seem to contradict reason. Before the mathematical proofs were derived all of it would be hogwash... Nature tells us things aren't always what they seem like they should be.

To continue... You keep asking "how" as if my lack of an answer makes my assertion false or unprofitable for gaining understanding. I could assert that the sun exists and know nothing about atomic fusion and be correct in my assertion. We don't always have to know "how" something exists to know that it exists. And, yes, I realize we can "see" the sun, but we cannot "see" God.You are married right? Surely, you must abandon your scientific "how" approach to at least your relationships? We can't have relationships if we are always testing and probing and hypothesizing about people. Instead we have to understand them and get to know them and love them and think about their needs. This is another approximation or illustration for our benefit to understand how we relate to God....But there I go preachin again. Saying God has a mind, is only an approximation as is everything. It's written somewhere, "For since the creation of the world, God's invisible qualities have been made known through what is seen." To quote again from the Bible (note I'm not using the Bible as proof, just as a better explanation, since it says it better than I can):"God said, "Go out and stand in front of the LORD on the mountain." As the LORD was passing by, a fierce wind tore mountains and shattered rocks ahead of the LORD. But the LORD was not in the wind. After the wind came an earthquake. But the LORD wasn't in the earthquake. After the earthquake there was a fire. But the LORD wasn't in the fire. And after the fire there was a quiet, whispering voice."If you are expecting a scientific explanation for God's existence, I'm sorry. If God created the laws of science, he is not defined by them. Saying God is here or not there is only an approximation to understand him. He has "non-locality" in the physical sense. You could say the probability he is anywhere is always 1.Thanks for your replies. I'm so busy I'm not sure I'll get back to reply again.