My God Is an Awesome God

My God Is An Awesome God (designs by God)
I spotted this picture on Facebook being shared among my friends. The "My God Is An Awesome God" sentiment is the typical Christian-cliché; what makes the image is the "Designs by God" tagline. Evidently, God is a crappy graphic designer. Also, if i were to make an observation, i'd say that God is awesome at one thing: not leaving any evidence of his existence in our universe. That's something for which we all can be thankful.

10 thoughts on “My God Is an Awesome God”

  1. Rick….from your comments above….I sense you resent a God that you claim doesn’t exist ?? You should seriously ask yourself “why you are so driven to discount the existance of God”? Yet you miraculously left the UFO and Star Trek people be ?? You should ask yourself why people believing in God has you so excited?

    I looked so far at the titles of some of your posts and really sense your antagonism toward a God that you claim “doesn’t exist”….. you need to ask yourself why you are angry at God.

    I will pray for you.

    God Bless you Rick.

  2. “Evi¬≠dently, God is a crappy graphic designer.”

    LOL!

    It would be awesome, if – for once – apologists like dawners would actually come up with something original, vs. recycling tired stereotypes about atheists being “angry” with god. I could no more be angry with god than I could be angry with Winnie the Pooh, Frodo, the Keebler Elves, Homer Simpson or other fictional characters.

    It’s the god-botherers who make me angry, particularly those who work to deprive others of civil rights, subvert science education and restrict women’s reproductive health care and right to control their own bodies.

  3. I am a Christian and feel angry at Christianity being used to deny people freedom to choose but I am concerned about those who use their freedom to deny other people life or a rigt to opinions they din’t agree with. There is clear empirical evidence that God exists and that Jesus died for our sins to give us freedom. Count this that believe this. Of course there is also clear empirial evidence for reincarnation too etc. whilst people’s beliefs are not reliable they should be valued. And surely if quantum theory teaches us anything it is that measurable physical quantities are not what yet seem at first so let’s not put all our eggs in one basket eh?

    1. There isn’t any empirical evidence for God, Jesus “dying for sins,” or for reincarnation. Any group able to present such evidence whilst surviving peer review would be the subject of worldwide fame, endless awards, and funding beyond their wildest dreams.

      Also, if there was any empirical evidence, faith would be completely unnecessary. There is no reason for faith to be “the evidence of things unseen” if there is actual evidence for such things. As it is, faith is canonical proof that there is no evidence. At all.

      1. Apologies for previous typos. Faith in what is unseen – a creator, everlasting life and a saviour to get us there is different to the empirical evidence of the numbers of people who have and have had that faith. ‘Peer’ review has found that there is no evidence to disprove Christian faith in the essentials of that faith. Meanwhile the essentials of physics seem to be challenged the deeper scientists dig. Why are their scientists involved in the search for knowledge who have faith in Christ? Surely they have found nothing in science to refute their faith yet even some have found faith through what science is revealing.

  4. I suggest you do some research into the peer-reviewed and nearly universally accepted theories pertaining to evolution and the big band theory. The “essentials of Christianity” fall flat within a few sentences of the beginning of the Bible.

    It gets worse the further into the book you read, especially when you get to the parts about Jesus, a mythological figure who most likely never existed.

    There are Christian scientists for the same reason that there are Hindu, Buddhist, and Islamic scientists. It doesn’t provide any veracity to their faith, and so long as they are willing to explore the universe with curiosity unhindered by religious faith, they are beneficial. The moment, however, that a scientist stops searching, stops asking, stops digging in because they believe their religion already has the answers… At that point, they become basically useless in the scientific community.

  5. Further, you said, and I quote: “There is clear empirical evidence that God exists and that Jesus died for our sins to give us freedom.”

    What evidence? Claiming there is actual evidence is exactly what is needed to expect rational people to accept that God/Jesus/Allah/Superman exists. But rather than mentioning any “clear empirical evidence,” you take the complete opposite route, claiming that there is “no evidence to disprove Christian faith in the essentials of that faith.”

    There is empirical evidence to the contrary, as I already mentioned, but even if there wasn’t, saying there is no evidence to the contrary is not the same as saying that there is proof in favor.

    As an example, there is absolutely nothing in peer reviewed science that disproves there being an invisible, pink, noncorporeal unicorn breakdancing in your bathroom.

  6. The word empirical denotes information acquired by means of observation or experimentation. Empirical data are data produced by an observation OR experiment.

    There are well validated accounts in historical literature of the claims of Christianity in terms of people who saw And talked with Jesus, saw his miracles and witnessed the resurrection. Jesus may have been mad or evil or who he said he was but there is better historical evidence of his life and works than most other. On temporaries of his time. So hundreds of thousands if not millions alive today who have experienced him guiding even now. Now you can interpret this empirical observation in another way but it is empirical. And regarding creation. No-one was present at creation do the evidence is simply interpreted observations of present day phenomena. The depth of assumption and arrogance of scientists who claim this as proof the bible is wrong astounds me. The fact most people have. Ever done the science themselves yet still accept the latest theories as absolute truth astounds me more.
    I was a scientist ‘Carl Saganite’ Jesus revealed himself to me and I know in my heart and mind he exists. Everyday I speak with him in my mind and through interpretation of the bible, circumstances, events and occasionally I have even heard his voice and felt his hands. I could be mad but I don’t think so obviously. Have you ever asked him to reveal himself to you? If so what happened?

  7. There are well validated accounts in historical literature of the claims of Christianity in terms of people who saw And talked with Jesus, saw his miracles and witnessed the resurrection.

    No, there aren’t. If there are, I’d love to hear about them. Even the Bible’s four gospels, accounts believed to be eye-witnessed accounts, can only be dated to several decades after Jesus is said to have died, long after the majority of the eye witnesses would have been dead and gone (given that the expected lifespan back then was pretty paltry). As for non-biblical accounts? There aren’t none, at least none which prove that Jesus existed, let alone did anything Christians believe him to.

    Jesus may have been mad or evil or who he said he was but there is better historical evidence of his life and works than most other.

    Such as?

    So hundreds of thousands if not millions alive today who have experienced him guiding even now.

    Just as many, if not more, have experienced nature spirits’ guiding or Allah’s guiding. Personal experience is not evidence. A visit to any asylum will clear that up for you.

    Now you can interpret this empirical observation in another way but it is empirical.

    No, it isn’t. You taking somebody else’s word for Jesus’ existence isn’t empirical at all. It’s hearsay.

    And regarding creation. No-one was present at creation do the evidence is simply interpreted observations of present day phenomena. The depth of assumption and arrogance of scientists who claim this as proof the bible is wrong astounds me. The fact most people have. Ever done the science themselves yet still accept the latest theories as absolute truth astounds me more.

    If you take antibiotics, you are trusting theories as absolute truth — germ theory, particularly. If you get annual flu shots, you are trusting two theories — germ theory AND evolutionary theory.

    Theories are theory because they are true. There isn’t faith involved in that. Theories have withstood the hammering of countless scientists over millions of hours of research time.

    If the big bang theory or creation theory were wrong, endless funds and countless accolades would be thrown at the research team faster than the speed of light.

    Have you ever asked him to reveal himself to you? If so what happened?

    Yes. I spent ten years in church. But again, personal experience isn’t evidence. “The heart is deceitful above all,” after all. Your own Bible says that. ;)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Use your Gravatar-enabled email address while commenting to automatically enhance your comment with some of Gravatar's open profile data.

Comments must be made in accordance with the comment policy. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam; learn how your comment data is processed.

You may use Markdown to format your comments; additionally, these HTML tags and attributes may be used: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

the Rick Beckman archive
Scroll to Top