There is no proof that God exists

[Gregg]

That is an excellent question and I'm not sure I have the answer. BUT if God exists and he want me to believe in him, HE should know how to convince me, right?

If God exists would you want to believe in him?

[Steve 2.0]

If God exists would you want to believe in him?

I'm not sure of your point on this one, Gregg. IF God exists (with proof, mind you) I would not have a problem believing in God. Why would I?

Another question though becomes are you talking about the New or Old Testament Gods, because those are two WAY different entities.

[DMT]

Why would god be a man? Or is that just shorthand?

[Steve 2.0]

Why would god be a man? Or is that just shorthand?

In my case it's shorthand. God could be a he, she or it. Or I guess, if you're God, everyday you could wake up and decide to be something different.

[Gregg]

But it is MOSTLY about controlling people and women.

Maybe B-Fly can help with this one. At the time of Jesus how did Jewish men treat or respect women?

I have been told that they were less than citizens. That when Jesus fed the 5,000 that story only counted the men. If women and children were counted it would be closer to 15,000. I am not asking for anyone to believe the story of the fish. I am asking if that story lines up with how women were viewed at the time.

My position would be women were already under control they did not need scripture to help. They were not seeing evidence of women rising up.

I am not agreeing with this (and neither did Jesus) sentiment, it is just the way it was or so I have been told.

[DMT]

In my case it's shorthand. God could be a he, she or it. Or I guess, if you're God, everyday you could wake up and decide to be something different.

Right, I just find it incredibly silly to assume god would be male and it merely reinforces the argument that certain religions were created to help subjugate women.

[Gregg]

Why would god be a man? Or is that just shorthand?

Short hand.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

[Gregg]

I'm not sure of your point on this one, Gregg. IF God exists (with proof, mind you) I would not have a problem believing in God. Why would I?

Another question though becomes are you talking about the New or Old Testament Gods, because those are two WAY different entities.

You have already stated that there is not proof, only faith. If there was proof would you want to know it. Would you welcome it.

[Steve 2.0]

You have already stated that there is not proof, only faith. If there was proof would you want to know it. Would you welcome it.

Sure.

[DMT]

You have already stated that there is not proof, only faith. If there was proof would you want to know it. Would you welcome it.

Gregg, what if there was proof that a non-Christian god existed. Would you welcome it?

[Gregg]

Gregg, what if there was proof that a non-Christian god existed. Would you welcome it?

I can yes to this.

I did welcome it.

[Fresno Bob]

what I'd want for proof is something verifiable and replicable. For example, I believe that atoms exist, even though I have no first hand knowledge, because of the scientific process.

I'll also take mathematical probability. Right now I've got no physical proof of alien life existing in our galaxy, but off the math, I believe that we are not alone. I have no proof other than the law of big numbers

[DMT]

I can yes to this.

I did welcome it.

Care to share?

[B-Fly]

Maybe B-Fly can help with this one. At the time of Jesus how did Jewish men treat or respect women?

I have been told that they were less than citizens. That when Jesus fed the 5,000 that story only counted the men. If women and children were counted it would be closer to 15,000. I am not asking for anyone to believe the story of the fish. I am asking if that story lines up with how women were viewed at the time.

My position would be women were already under control they did not need scripture to help. They were not seeing evidence of women rising up.

I am not agreeing with this (and neither did Jesus) sentiment, it is just the way it was or so I have been told.

Steve (2.0) said, perhaps somewhat tongue in cheek, that religion (not Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Buddhism, etc) is MOSTLY about controlling people and women. Your response, in which you called for my help, states a position that "women were already under control and did not need scripture to help", which throws me because it sounds almost like you're saying that "religion" and "scripture" began with Jesus and that whatever came before is not also religion or scripture. I'm not sure I can help you there, because I think that avoids the question. Yes, religion has emerged in different forms and passed through various points of update or reformation. Judaism was presumably a necessary antecedent to Christianity and Islam. Christianity was a necessary antecedent to Mormonism. Hinduism or Buddhism each have their own historical and cultural origins/dependencies. But to the extent this thread is focused on "G-d", I'd presume we're mostly talking about Judaism/Christianity/Islam, which at least all purport to be monotheistic faiths premised on the G-d of Abraham, i.e., the same deity, albeit with different twists and names.

All of that said, to assess whether Judaism/Christianity/Islam collectively and individually have been used largely to control people/control women/control sexuality, etc, I don't believe you can pick a point in time (e.g., the life of Jesus of Nazareth or the writing of the core Christian Gospels) and answer that question based on what societal treatment of women immediately preceded it. You have to assess it across the entire human history of these various faiths, including the role of clergy and hierarchical institutions within each faith for interpreting, applying, and/or enforcing faith-based laws/commandments/precepts.

[Gregg]

Steve (2.0) said, perhaps somewhat tongue in cheek, that religion (not Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Buddhism, etc) is MOSTLY about controlling people and women. Your response, in which you called for my help, states a position that "women were already under control and did not need scripture to help", which throws me because it sounds almost like you're saying that "religion" and "scripture" began with Jesus and that whatever came before is not also religion or scripture. I'm not sure I can help you there, because I think that avoids the question. Yes, religion has emerged in different forms and passed through various points of update or reformation. Judaism was presumably a necessary antecedent to Christianity and Islam. Christianity was a necessary antecedent to Mormonism. Hinduism or Buddhism each have their own historical and cultural origins/dependencies. But to the extent this thread is focused on "G-d", I'd presume we're mostly talking about Judaism/Christianity/Islam, which at least all purport to be monotheistic faiths premised on the G-d of Abraham, i.e., the same deity, albeit with different twists and names.

All of that said, to assess whether Judaism/Christianity/Islam collectively and individually have been used largely to control people/control women/control sexuality, etc, I don't believe you can pick a point in time (e.g., the life of Jesus of Nazareth or the writing of the core Christian Gospels) and answer that question based on what societal treatment of women immediately preceded it. You have to assess it across the entire human history of these various faiths, including the role of clergy and hierarchical institutions within each faith for interpreting, applying, and/or enforcing faith-based laws/commandments/precepts.

Thank you for the thoughtful answer.

I am afraid I wasn't thinking about this as deep as you did. I have no doubt all religion has been used in sinful ways including Christianity. I certainly was not trying to give Christianity a pass on this.

I was just trying to verify that the men at the time and place of Jesus had a much lower opinion of women than we can even imagine today. When I was told that the 5000 was actually more like 15,000 I took this as logical truth. I did not dig deep into this. Given the nature of these conversations I did not want to get tagged with that if it was not a thing. This next part is a piece of evidence (not proof) that made me pause in my early journey.

If John was going to fabricate the resurrection story, why would he use a lowly woman to discover (be the first) the empty tomb? That would not fit in with or advance the lie. In fact it would hurt the cause and make it less believable.

If the resurrection is true this simple detail would be God honoring women. If John stating the truth he would not care about what others thought in the telling of what he witnessed. I do not believe Jesus was starting a ministry with the idea of subjugating women. It is the empty tomb that is the start of Christianity.