God

[Zeh Crazy]

I don't believe in God. Maybe there is some sort of "Higher Power". I don't know. But I have no religion and I don't really care for religion anyway.

But I have a question. In the Bible it refers to us as all God's children. I believe this to be an error, since God is said to be a man, and men cannot have children. How do we know God isn't, in fact, a woman?

[Apparitions]

I don't believe in God. Maybe there is some sort of "Higher Power". I don't know. But I have no religion and I don't really care for religion anyway.

But I have a question. In the Bible it refers to us as all God's children. I believe this to be an error, since God is said to be a man, and men cannot have children. How do we know God isn't, in fact, a woman?
How do we know God isn't, in fact, a flying monkey on steroids? Irrelevant I know, much like God being a woman. For God to be a woman, it would need genes from somewhere. This brings up the question: who/what created God and why (if one even exists, which of course is extremely unlikely)?

[INFERNO]

But I have a question. In the Bible it refers to us as all God's children. I believe this to be an error, since God is said to be a man, and men cannot have children. How do we know God isn't, in fact, a woman?

Because when the bible was written, women were considered inferior so it was impossible for a woman to be greater than any and all men. It would defy all the social and cultural norms of that time. It is not meant to mean that god has an unusual anatomy that allows him to give birth as a woman does. Another reason, although weaker is that the term "god" itself denotes masculinity whereas "goddess" denotes femininity. For example, in Greek mythology, when a being is a goddess, it is a female being, such as the female goddess Aphrodite.

[Dog Desab]

Because when the bible was written, women were considered inferior so it was impossible for a woman to be greater than any and all men. It would defy all the social and cultural norms of that time. It is not meant to mean that god has an unusual anatomy that allows him to give birth as a woman does. Another reason, although weaker is that the term "god" itself denotes masculinity whereas "goddess" denotes femininity. For example, in Greek mythology, when a being is a goddess, it is a female being, such as the female goddess Aphrodite.

but we are talking about the metaphysical not the elements or reasons behind water and such...

[TheFame]

I dont believe in God.
If someones going to give me scientific legit facts of how the earth was created, and another person says to believe with your heart that god is real..then im going to choose the first one.

I do believe in praying, but not praying to god. More of choosing your thoughts to be in line with the Law of Attraction.

[INFERNO]

but we are talking about the metaphysical not the elements or reasons behind water and such...

The example of the second part was just a simple example, if that is what you're referring to.

[tpzy94]

DUDE the big bang theory never happened if every thing scientist sed were right then how come other scientist always debunk there is alot of stuff we cant prove and idc if im juss single minded i kno GOD is real with out a doubt in my mind and its not because somebody told me try going to this thing called church ull find what ur looking for and if adam and eve werent the first people thne who were and how did they get their it makes no sense

[Perseus]

DUDE the big bang theory never happened if every thing scientist sed were right then how come other scientist always debunk there is alot of stuff we cant prove and idc if im juss single minded i kno GOD is real with out a doubt in my mind and its not because somebody told me try going to this thing called church ull find what ur looking for and if adam and eve werent the first people thne who were and how did they get their it makes no sense

Read my post about Adam and Eve.

Adam and Eve are actually symbolic. Adam means "man" and Eve means "life", in the old language of the Semites, who are related to the Hebrews. See, man was tempted by life during the agricultural revolution; the temptation was to go on and make their own food and not use what God "provided" for them. The Semites stuck to their old life of herding animals and didn't farm, and they looked down upon this farming discovery. There's more to this, but I can't remember it all.

And your post, overall, makes no sense.

[INFERNO]

DUDE the big bang theory never happened

Why do you believe this?


if every thing scientist sed were right then how come other scientist always debunk

If everything the bible says is right, then how come it contradicts itself so much?

There is a different method used by science than used by Christianity. In Christianity, it's centered around God being the answer to whatever yet he is too complex to understand so the answer cannot really be given. Alternatively, Satan is the answer but if you sit down and think, that leads back to God. Yet again, the same answer of why he did something cannot be explained because he's too complex, the bible is too confusing for anyone to reasonably understand and humans are just too stupid.

Science uses a different method of someone posing an idea and testing it. Sometimes a result occurs due to random chances or to an error. Other scientists test again and again to review what others say because unlike Christianity where there is only one person dictating (God), science looks over what everyone says and debunks certain things.


there is alot of stuff we cant prove

So? You can actually prove less by God as the common answer of he is too complex prevents any answer from being given.


if adam and eve werent the first people thne who were and how did they get their it makes no sense

It makes no sense to you because you refuse to think about it, you simply accept it as being true, so anything else seems absolutely ridiculous, hence wrong. One thing my professors in sociology and law have said was in order to understand a certain view or concept, think of arguments against them. Try to understand both sides of the picture and this does not need you to abandon your belief in God.

The first people who got here emerged as a result of evolution. If you want to ask "how did they get there?", then this requires you to have some understanding of evolution, specifically vertebrate evolution. They did not exist only in pairs like Adam and Eve did, they existed as populations of organisms. One of the oldest (if not the oldest) fossil of humans is A. ramidus from the Tribe Hominini.

[Dog Desab]

The example of the second part was just a simple example, if that is what you're referring to.

im not really sure what i was referring? Also if this is on topic i prayed the other day but not to god but the whole law of attraction thing does anyone think that the law of attraction is god? i was praying to get a job btw....

[Death]

DUDE the big bang theory never happened

*Yawn*, I'm getting some deja vu here. tpzy94, why are you saying that a theory never happened? Saying that there is no big bang theory is as stupid as saying that there is no religion called Christianity. If you didn't mean that, then you should say what you mean.

if every thing scientist sed were right then how come other scientist always debunk

They don't always debunk. But what scientists say are based upon facts, evidence, and intelligent research. The same cannot be said for religion. So religion is not exactly what I'd call reliable. Also, science is updated when scientists find out more about what they knew little about whereas that will never happen with religion.

there is alot of stuff we cant prove

Religion hasn't proven anything. Like someone here said before, science is proof without certainty. Religion is certainty without proof. It doesn't take a genius to work out which is more reliable if you want to know about the universe.

and idc if im juss single minded i kno GOD is real with out a doubt in my mind

If you are saying that you "know it", then you must be single minded. I've never said that I know there isn't one.

and its not because somebody told me try going to this thing called church ull find what ur looking for

Now you're just being childish. I've been to church before, and funnily enough, it bored me to death.

and if adam and eve werent the first people thne who were and how did they get their it makes no sense

What you're saying makes no sense. The notion that life evolved over thousands to millions of years (from matter which is eternal so it always exists without the need of a creator) to adapt to their surroundings is no more stupid than the notion that some being in the sky that just happened to always exist clicked his fingers and two people suddenly appeared out of nowhere and nothing. Also, how did God get there? Why are you ignoring that? You do also realise that the majority of Christians I know don't even believe in that story, right? You have no idea what the hell you're talking about, do you?

Also, it would probably help if you actually typed coherantly because I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're trying to say.

[lil emo boy]

Dnt belive in god. {Maybe becuz I'm bi} . God does'nt like gay'z or bi'z. He'z gay him self. He lead to another gay wich soon became a group......... lol'z not sure if it make'z sence

[Insanity Fair]

Dnt belive in god. {Maybe becuz I'm bi} . God does'nt like gay'z or bi'z. He'z gay him self. He lead to another gay wich soon became a group......... lol'z not sure if it make'z sence

Your sexuality has nothing to do with your religion. Your too gullible if you think that you can't be christian and homosexual.

[Apparitions]

Your sexuality has nothing to do with your religion. Your too gullible if you think that you can't be christian and homosexual.
Now, how does the phrase go? Oh, that's it: No Smoke Without Fire. I think that you can work that one out. I will say that he made his point very badly there and could have talked about more than sexuality.

[tpzy94]

ok well big bang theory how can u say they even existed where u there um no and prayer doesnt work maybe cuz u dnt want it 2 work dumbass um n dnt u ever say God is evil.....how is he evil if he doesnt exist 2 yuu dumbass yuu make no sense n hw can yuu talk about the bible if you never even opened it cuz if you did which u never even touched you would see that we live by the New testament and not the old 1 sooo yeah

[Perseus]

ok well big bang theory how can u say they even existed where u there um no and prayer doesnt work maybe cuz u dnt want it 2 work dumbass um n dnt u ever say God is evil.....how is he evil if he doesnt exist 2 yuu dumbass yuu make no sense n hw can yuu talk about the bible if you never even opened it cuz if you did which u never even touched you would see that we live by the New testament and not the old 1 sooo yeah

Thanks for not reading my post, and go work on your English. Five year olds have better sentence structure than you and better spelling.

[Apparitions]

This should be fun...
ok well big bang theory how can u say they even existed where u there
No, were (correct spelling btw, take note as your spelling is awful) you there when God apparently created the world and shit?
um no and prayer doesnt work maybe cuz u dnt want it 2 work dumbassPrayer is a sign of delusion. You're fucking speaking to yourself. I know what you'll say: God knows what you are thinking. Oh look, that's your illusion of 'free will' gone. Oh, the contradictions...
um n dnt u ever say God is evil.....how is he evil if he doesnt exist 2 yuu dumbass Ooh, he's getting angry! Hmm, God, evil. Let's see: No free will, hates the gays, kills shitloads of people cause they won't pray to him cause he won't show himself (WTF does he expect, the fucking retard?!), ordered a church to be started that is as corrupt and repressive as he is (see the Crusades and Salem witch hunts etc). Oh, dude, I'll call your imaginary God whatever I want to. It's like calling the tooth fairy a greedy prick; it means nothing. uu make no sense n hw can yuu talk about the bible if you never even opened it cuz if you did which u never even touched you would see that we live by the New testament and not the old 1 sooo yeah
Erm, I was Catholic for 13 years of my life and still go to a Catholic school. I read the Bible sometimes. I should have seen it for the lie it is. Where do you think the New Testament starts from, 'dumbass'? I think you're the one who needs to read the Bible. I do not live by the New or Old Testaments, I have my own morals and things. Word of advice: Atheists probably have read the Bible. They know what they are talking about a lot of the time.

I HAZ A CUPLE OV QUESTUUNZSX 4 YUUU!!!11!1 (I thought you might be able to read that instead of how I normally speak...) What evidence have you seen to suggest, wait not suggest, I mean undoubtedly prove that there is a Higher Being of any kind? The other question is: Who/what made your God? This should be interesting...

[tpzy94]

ok who the fuck cares about spelling its a fucking blog spot dipshits i shorten it b/c i wnt 2 ok so who cares n oh yeah perseus or whatever hop off ok thnx

[Apparitions]

ok who the fuck cares about spelling its a fucking blog spot dipshits i shorten it b/c i wnt 2 ok so who cares n oh yeah perseus or whatever hop off ok thnx
Point proven. Now go away until you want to talk to us sensibly and legibly. Spelling doe matter, typing like you do just makes what you say look irrelevant and makes you look stupid, no matter how good the post. I did say that Atheists arguments are better than others, and you proved my point.

[tpzy94]

bitch suck it o wait u wuld like that ive provin my point way more than once u just reverse wut i say dumbass fuckin retard

[Perseus]

ok who the fuck cares about spelling its a fucking blog spot dipshits i shorten it b/c i wnt 2 ok so who cares n oh yeah perseus or whatever hop off ok thnx

Wow, way to be immature, dude.

[Dog Desab]

can we get back to the topic not spelling errors or sentence structure? also stop the abuse of words, even if this is the internet some people could still be sensitive to such harsh language and no one wants to be reported...

on topic, i like all the theories on god not being real and him existing, i wanna here more things on how god exists though... Is anyone out there willing to step up to give reasons on his existence?

[CaptainObvious]

can we get back to the topic not spelling errors or sentence structure? also stop the abuse of words, even if these is the internet some people could still be sensitive to such harsh language and no one wants to be reported...

Like he says, back on topic please.

[Death]

ok well big bang theory how can u say they even existed where u there

Were you there when Adam and Eve supposedly existed? No. So that's a pretty pointless thing to say.

um no and prayer doesnt work maybe cuz u dnt want it 2 work dumbass

I've always thought that you were a troll; now you've proven it. I've prayed before several times when I used to believe in God and wanted it to work and yet it never did. If you can't debate properly without posting pointless attacks, why do you bother?

um n dnt u ever say God is evil

Read the Old Testament.

.....how is he evil if he doesnt exist 2 yuu dumbass

Again, you are just showing your immaturity. You don't have to believe in God to debate his morality as described in the Old Testament.

yuu make no sense

That's because you refuse to understand anything that goes against your religion. I have made more sense than you, and I'm sure many people here would agree. If you can't debate without ignoring the other side, then what's the point?

n hw can yuu talk about the bible if you never even opened it

How can you say that when me and other atheists used quotes in the past and have referred to things that happened in the Bible? In fact, it's obvious that you haven't read any of the Old Testament so you are being hypocritical here.

cuz if you did which u never even touched you would see that we live by the New testament and not the old 1 sooo yeah

That doesn't mean that you can ignore the Old Testament in a debate which includes it. And yet again, I'm finding it difficult to understand you when you type incoherantly.

on topic, i like all the theories on god not being real and him existing, i wanna here more things on how god exists though... Is anyone out there willing to step up to give reasons on his existence?

I'm afraid I can't do the latter (I know it might be inconvinient, since no-one (including tpzy94) has actually done it for a while), but I can do the former and be glad if someone were to try to refute me (even if they stump me).

I don't think God exists because the main argument is that the world needs a creater (God). However, that argument fails to explain why God needs a creator, and that would have to keep going on and on meaning that there can never be a true first creator no matter how far down the line of creators that you go. Coupled with the fact that matter is eternal meaning that it is neither created nor destroyed (meaning that the matter and energy from which the universe is made will always have existed and will continue to do so), that means that you do not need to include a creator in the explaination of the origins of the universe.

The big bang is merely this matter being sucked in like a singularity by gravatational forces. Whether or not there was a universe before this one which was destroyed through the big crunch (when the universe becomes too large and unstable to support itself be it a shortage of energy or whatever) and then allowed the big bang once the matter was collected, I'm still open about.

[Apparitions]

Like he says, back on topic please.
EDIT: Oops, I didn't see this. Anyway, answer my questions please, person with bad spelling. What proof have you seen that without a doubt proves there is a God? Who/what made your God?

[Sage]

how is he evil if he doesnt exist 2 yuu dumbass

That's not a very Christ-like thing to say.

[Dorsum Oppel]

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/058/737/original/1278914714637.jpg?1278915242

[Apparitions]

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/058/737/original/1278914714637.jpg?1278915242
Why is there no proof in God?
Atheists 1 - 0 Bible bashers

[Dog Desab]

DEATH: The big bang is merely this matter being sucked in like a singularity by gravatational forces. Whether or not there was a universe before this one which was destroyed through the big crunch (when the universe becomes too large and unstable to support itself be it a shortage of energy or whatever) and then allowed the big bang once the matter was collected, I'm still open about.

Explain the big crunch theory again, ive read about it before but i cant remember it, i think its something about a universe before ours and somehow everything started imploding (cant think of another word :P) then boom and our universe was created.... correct me if im wrong, please...

[Death]

That's not a very Christ-like thing to say.

I don't think tpzy94 even knows anything about the Bible, so that I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't understand why.

@Coyote: The sad fact that you are incapable of fathoming the fact that you do not need a God to have morals (since the thoughts and personality of your brain is more than sufficent) does not show that atheists are bad, but rather that you are ignorant.

[Death]

Explain the big crunch theory again, ive read about it before but i cant remember it, i think its something about a universe before ours and somehow everything started imploding (cant think of another word :P) then boom and our universe was created.... create me if im wrong, please...

I basically know the Big Crunch as being the opposite to the Big Bang (everything imploding in itself due to a lack of stability or something, so I think you're right), although I'm not sure exactly what the scientists' favoured views on them are. Wikipedia will probably be more helpful than me. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch)

[Apparitions]

If 'God' gave us morals then there is no free will, am I right? Oh look, another contradiction to add to the rather long list...

[Sage]

If 'God' gave us morals then there is no free will, am I right? Oh look, another contradiction to add to the rather long list...

Not quite, that doesn't entirely make sense. A better contradiction would be:

If God knows absolutely everything, then he will have foreseen every decision you will make in life, and knows ahead of time who will go to Hell. If these people supposedly do have free will and can choose their own fate, then they can make decisions outside of God's foresight and then God isn't all-knowing. If they can't, then God is evil because he creates people who are bound straight to hell from the moment they're born.

tl;dr: Free will cannot exist if god is all-knowing.

[Death]

If 'God' gave us morals then there is no free will, am I right? Oh look, another contradiction to add to the rather long list...

Yes, a very long list. (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html) Person-who-can't-spell, how can you deny or not mind this?

[Dog Desab]

alright so i was just reading in the religion thread and karl said something about the second coming of jesus christ, which got me thinking about this debate (my favorite debate) and i thought for those against gods existence....

If jesus were to come back (remember if) how would the argument go about?

my first thought would be to prove it through science to finally inter-relate religion and science (at least for christianity)....

any thoughts?

[Amnesiac]

alright so i was just reading in the religion thread and karl said something about the second coming of jesus christ, which got me thinking about this debate (my favorite debate) and i thought for those against gods existence....

If jesus were to come back (remember if) how would the argument go about?

my first thought would be to prove it through science to finally inter-relate religion and science (at least for christianity)....

any thoughts?

Well, all hell would probably break loose if that happened (no pun intended). I don't think science and religion would suddenly integrate, the public would probably hold a worse opinion on science for "doubting" religion in the first place. Christianity would become more powerful than ever, people would be hanging on Jesus' every word. I mean, you can't really prove something like that via science, since religion is so scientifically unfounded that there'd be nothing to base an investigation into the second coming on.

[Dog Desab]

yea but the public would also demand the truth from said jesus'... any wack job that looks like jesus could say he is jesus...

EDIT: how would jesus prove to us he's real is another question?

Well, all hell would probably break loose if that happened (no pun intended). I don't think science and religion would suddenly integrate, the public would probably hold a worse opinion on science for "doubting" religion in the first place. Christianity would become more powerful than ever, people would be hanging on Jesus' every word. I mean, you can't really prove something like that via science, since religion is so scientifically unfounded that there'd be nothing to base an investigation into the second coming on.

i do agree with you though if he can prove he is jesus...

[Death]

I think, as suggested, that the biggest problem will be proving that Jesus is Jesus. Firstly, you'll get those who believe that there is yet another madman trying to show himself off as the Son of God, and you'll get those who will believe he is who he says he is but hate him for all the bad things that have happened in the world. So, it would probably be chaotic. However, since you're not going to be getting any real miracles, coupled witht the fact that religion is a lot less central to peoples' lives now, I find it unlikely that many people will truly believe him to be who he says he is, unless they are blind.

[Sith Lord 13]

However, since you're not going to be getting any real miracles...

Assuming we're making the stipulation that this is the real second coming of Christ, why not?

[Death]

I was more talking about if there was a person who claimed to be Christ during his second visit, in which case I don't think there would be any real miracles. Besides, Christ probably existed, but does that make him the Son of God and capable of doing what Chrtistians believe he could do?

[Dog Desab]

lets just taste his blood and find out... jk

[Dive to Survive]

I think that too many people are trying to define religion with science. It doesn't work that way. People will believe what they want to, and little can change their minds.

[Sith Lord 13]

I was more talking about if there was a person who claimed to be Christ during his second visit, in which case I don't think there would be any real miracles. Besides, Christ probably existed, but does that make him the Son of God and capable of doing what Chrtistians believe he could do?

I believe the idea of the statement was to presuppose Christianity was true. That means real miracles are possible.


I think that too many people are trying to define religion with science. It doesn't work that way. People will believe what they want to, and little can change their minds.

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

[deadpie]

Why is there no proof in God?
Atheists 1 - 0 Bible bashers

I really hope you know he (Coyote and his picture) was being sarcastic/trolling you.

[Dog Desab]

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

awesome quote because it basically describes this whole debate...

[deadpie]

I don't care what scientists say, saying the earth can just randomly happen is stupid and wrong,

I know, some guy just snapped his fingers and shit got made. That makes more sense then the deepened theories of scientists.

The first male was made of dirt and first female was made of the male's rib. That doesn't sound ridiculous at all.

That make's more sense then the big bang or any of the other theories.

blackcomputerguylaughing.jpeg

[Death]

I believe the idea of the statement was to presuppose Christianity was true. That means real miracles are possible.

Then I can't really give a logical answer, since if miracles existed, that in itself would defy logic in my eyes.

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

That is merely subjective however. Although people might think that for their own beliefs, doesn't make it (un)true in reality.

[darkwoon]

Then I can't really give a logical answer, since if miracles existed, that in itself would defy logic in my eyes.
(...)
That is merely subjective however. Although people might think that for their own beliefs, doesn't make it (un)true in reality.
The problem is that you are trying to evaluate religion through a scientifical analysis, relying on facts and proofs.

But that doesn't work - by its own definition, you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, as it is supposed to be a supranatural being, thus not bound by the laws and limitations of our own world. Then, of course, it is not bound by the causality effect, and hence can escape any logical reasoning attempting to find evidences about its existence.

So either God doesn't exist, or it does, but then in a way that is out of reach of any scientifical thinking. That's precisely why religion is based solely on the faith of its fidels: despite any effort one could make in a way or another to (dis)prove the existence of God, what ultimately remains is the subjective conviction that it does/doesn't.

All you can try to prove or disprove is the reality of the potential manifestations of the divinity, like the existence of miracles or the historicity of Jesus; but even if you can demonstrate that none of the known manifestation is genuine, you still wouldn't have proven that God doesn't exist; this is and will always be impossible to achieve.

[Death]

I know that you can never prove or disprove God, just like you can never prove or disprove the theory that there's a teapot in space that's orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot) That is also why I don't see a point in simply accepting that something exists simply because you can't disprove it, because that could apply to anything. I wasn't trying to scientifically analyse it in that post though, and if it looked like I did, then I must have said it wrong.

[Dorsum Oppel]

@Coyote: The sad fact that you are incapable of fathoming the fact that you do not need a God to have morals (since the thoughts and personality of your brain is more than sufficent) does not show that atheists are bad, but rather that you are ignorant.

LOL. You realize I was trolling, aye? It was for lulz, calm down sir.

[biboy96]

I in person do not believe in God.
And Also... Most teens that say thei're christians are really just faking it.
"You shall not let your semen fall to the ground"

Also, I think that the church is getting old... The church is, after all just a house... If God is everywhere, then why not preach in the woods, or even in the bathroom?

[Magus]

I in person do not believe in God.
And Also... Most teens that say thei're christians are really just faking it.
"You shall not let your semen fall to the ground"


They are Christian, but not avid and strong Christian(or the Christian they should be).

They live in a secular society, you know. Even in country, like the one I am living in. You often don't see kids, or teens or even young ones running to the Mosque and praying, no. But they will tell you that they are Muslims and believe in God. The pray the Friday's prayer, at the most.

Belief but no Practice.

Also, I think that the church is getting old... The church is, after all just a house... If God is everywhere, then why not preach in the woods, or even in the bathroom?

Some analogy...

Why not take a shower in the office, or even in your parent's room?

[Death]

LOL. You realize I was trolling, aye? It was for lulz, calm down sir.

So was I; I wasn't being entirely serious either. But then again, stuff like that doesn't really show through in posts anyway.

I in person do not believe in God.
And Also... Most teens that say thei're christians are really just faking it.
"You shall not let your semen fall to the ground"

Faking it? Why would someone who didn't believe in God want to pretend that they did?

Also, I think that the church is getting old... The church is, after all just a house... If God is everywhere, then why not preach in the woods, or even in the bathroom?

I fully agree. If you think it through, whether or not you believe in God, churches are just a waste of space and resources. An omnipotent and/or omniscient God wouldn't require prayer to be done in a Church.

They are Christian, but not avid and strong Christian(or the Christian they should be).

Christian they should be? Are you suggesting that everyone should be Christians? Are Christians supposed to be superior or something? Why say such a thing?

Why not take a shower in the office, or even in your parent's room?

Not being funny, but I find that question to be irrelevant. The location in which you take your shower obviously matters as you need to be where showing is actually possible and you won't want to expose yourself or make a mess where it isn't necessary. With praying, it is completely different, and therefore, the above analogy is meaningless when it relates to prayer.

[Sith Lord 13]

Christian they should be? Are you suggesting that everyone should be Christians? Are Christians supposed to be superior or something? Why say such a thing?

I believe he meant that while people were claiming to be Christian, they weren't living in a Christian manner, hence the reference to the prohibition against masturbation.

[Death]

They may claim to be Christian, but should they really follow all the Christian morals? Because if they did, they'd be psychotic mass murderers. So not following all the morals would make sense in my eyes.

[Sith Lord 13]

They may claim to be Christian, but should they really follow all the Christian morals? Because if they did, they'd be psychotic mass murderers. So not following all the morals would make sense in my eyes.

That depends on your interpretation of the morals. Following the morals, from certain points of view, requires no bloodshed.

[Death]

Just out of curiocity, how could you interpret "They must all be put to death: their blood shall be upon them." (part of Leviticus 20:13 as requiring no bloodshed?

[biboy96]

They may claim to be Christian, but should they really follow all the Christian morals? Because if they did, they'd be psychotic mass murderers. So not following all the morals would make sense in my eyes.

These issues: they're all part of the religion.. I mean the bible itself contradicts itself many times.. So how will christians find out the "right" way to live?

[Sith Lord 13]

Just out of curiocity, how could you interpret "They must all be put to death: their blood shall be upon them." (part of Leviticus 20:13 as requiring no bloodshed?

I would see it as being overwritten by Mark 12:31 "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"

[ray8806]

I will say ONE things and one thing only. Period.

Those who do not believe in God: You need to read the book titled God and the Athiest by Paul Feruson. Here is a link: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/God-and-the-Atheist/Paul-Ferguson/e/9781932307726

If you can read that whole book with at least considering what the man is saying, and you STILL say there isn't a God, then I can be satisfied with your belief.

The book is about a lawyer, who has a bachelor's in Law and something else involving science. My memory fails me. He assesses the evidence for a God, through purely science and legal points-of-view.

[Death]

These issues: they're all part of the religion.. I mean the bible itself contradicts itself many times.. So how will christians find out the "right" way to live?

Using their conscience? Because the Bible isn't exactly a good way of going about it.

I would see it as being overwritten by Mark 12:31 "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"

Thing is though, that just shows that the Bible had many contradictions in it.

I will say ONE things and one thing only. Period.

Those who do not believe in God: You need to read the book titled God and the Athiest by Paul Feruson. Here is a link: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/God-and-the-Atheist/Paul-Ferguson/e/9781932307726

If you can read that whole book with at least considering what the man is saying, and you STILL say there isn't a God, then I can be satisfied with your belief.

The book is about a lawyer, who has a bachelor's in Law and something else involving science. My memory fails me. He assesses the evidence for a God, through purely science and legal points-of-view.

You can't prove/disprove God with science. Don't bother trying to mash the two together, because you will fail everytime, like you've failed now.

[Dive to Survive]

I know, some guy just snapped his fingers and shit got made. That makes more sense then the deepened theories of scientists.

I don't think anyone "just snapped his fingers" and created everything. And it makes more sense than "deepened" theories of scientists.

The first male was made of dirt That doesn't sound ridiculous at all.

According to some Atheists, we "evolved from dirt" so even to them its not ridiculous.

[Perseus]

I don't think anyone "just snapped his fingers" and created everything. And it makes more sense than "deepened" theories of scientists.
How so?


According to some Atheists, we "evolved from dirt" so even to them its not ridiculous.

Herp derp, we know who failed ninth grade biology, or who hasn't taken it. Here's the rundown for you, buddyroo. A long time ago, when the world was young and many things were happening, a chemical reaction sparked that created very primitive, single celled life. As time goes on, mutations occur in their DNA, and the process of natural selection occurs. What is the theory of natural selection, you may ask. The most fit survive and their genes are passed on. Such as a certain color in butterflies that help them survive. I haven't researched that much on speciation(?) from the single ancestor because I haven't felt like it, but it makes as much sense as a single deity creating everything. And just to be an ass, there's more evidence of creatures evolving than there is of a god.

[Dive to Survive]

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

[deadpie]

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

By so called proof I think you mean theories. And I'd rather believe in a theory that is being backed up then some crazy ass book about never ending violence and sadism with no proof at all.

[Magus]

Christian they should be? Are you suggesting that everyone should be Christians? Are Christians supposed to be superior or something? Why say such a thing?

You see, this is the problem when you are trying to interlace something with something else.

You have missed the point. By "the Christian they should be" was the "Avid" and "strong" Christian. Don't you think Christian must think they should be pious or something on that line? Yes. I hope you got me there.


Not being funny, but I find that question to be irrelevant. The location in which you take your shower obviously matters as you need to be where showing is actually possible and you won't want to expose yourself or make a mess where it isn't necessary. With praying, it is completely different, and therefore, the above analogy is meaningless when it relates to prayer.

Ah, I just love the way you use the word "irrelevant". By the way, that analogy was sarcasm. But I bet you have noticed that.

People built Churches, Temples, Mosques. Those are built for what purposes?

To answer to that. The reason that these places built because in these places will provide you with some certain atmosphere, condition, and air to it.Sense of unity; you will also find the sense of holiness as well, yes :yes: .

My sarcastic analogy, is that there is always the specific places where you should do your things. For Prayer, it is those places.

[Death]

I don't think anyone "just snapped his fingers" and created everything. And it makes more sense than "deepened" theories of scientists.

Kaname, I think he was being sarcastic. It's quite obvious that committed research based on facts and evidence makes more sense than someone being able to create something out of nothing for no apparent reason (despite the creator not having a creator themselves).

According to some Atheists, we "evolved from dirt" so even to them its not ridiculous.

Not a single one I know believes that. I don't know what sort of crowd you've been in. Or if you even know what the scientific theories are.

How so?
Herp derp, we know who failed ninth grade biology, or who hasn't taken it. Here's the rundown for you, buddyroo. A long time ago, when the world was young and many things were happening, a chemical reaction sparked that created very primitive, single celled life. As time goes on, mutations occur in their DNA, and the process of natural selection occurs. What is the theory of natural selection, you may ask. The most fit survive and their genes are passed on. Such as a certain color in butterflies that help them survive. I haven't researched that much on speciation(?) from the single ancestor because I haven't felt like it, but it makes as much sense as a single deity creating everything. And just to be an ass, there's more evidence of creatures evolving than there is of a god.

Well put. Certainly better than saying that we came to become us by someone just magically making it happen anyhow.

You see, this is the problem when you are trying to interlace something with something else.

You have missed the point. By "the Christian they should be" was the "Avid" and "strong" Christian. Don't you think Christian must think they should be pious or something on that line? Yes. I hope you got me there.

Fine, it just appeared by the way you wrote it that Christians should be certain things, but okay, I get you.

Ah, I just love the way you use the word "irrelevant". By the way, that analogy was sarcasm. But I bet you have noticed that.

I was wondering if it was sarcasm, but that would be my argument against such as analogy if anyone had said it, so it doesn't have to be directed at you as such.

People built Churches, Temples, Mosques. Those are built for what purposes?

To answer to that. The reason that these places built because in these places will provide you with some certain atmosphere, condition, and air to it.Sense of unity; you will also find the sense of holiness as well, yes :yes: .

If they want to spend money on a place in which to pray just for a certain feeling, then fine. It's just that I would have though that they'd be more than capable of doing so without said feelings in a church. But I don't have to build it, so I don't particually mind to be honest.

[Apparitions]

What religion are you, Faris? I've always wondered this.

[Perseus]

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

Why is it sad? I bet you believe that Rome fell because there's proof.

[Amnesiac]

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

You say this about science, but it's better applied to religion. Scientific theories have their studies and research to back themselves up, what does religion have? A series of 2,000-year-old books that have questionable authorship, absurd stories that most of us would refuse to believe in modern times, and no factual standing whatsoever?

I think it's sad that all these religious ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

[darkwoon]

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

Ok, there is a misunderstanding here. 'Science' is not and never was about 'proofs'. It is not what matters, because in a lot of cases, you cannot really prove something with 100% certainty. Most of our science is made up of conjectures, some being very strong and matching facts, others being less satisfactory.

The same can be said of 'religion-based' theories like Creationism - they are another set of conjectures, and who are we to tell if one set is better than the other?

Yet there is a major difference between the theories that came from the scientific world, and those from religious fundamentalists:

You can always question a scientific theory.

That's precisely what makes religion and science so different: how good a scientific theory may seem, everybody can come and say: here is another element of knowledge, I have a theory that is different than the existing one and that matches facts as well or better. There will be debate, denial, pros and cons, yet, if the theory indeed explains things and does not present a contradiction with facts, it will be accepted as an alternative. That's how the Theory of Einstein replaced the one of Newton, how Copernicus and Galileo's theories replaced those of the ancient Greeks, and so on.

On the other hand, you cannot propose an alternative to religious-based theories, because they ultimately all come from a single, unquestionable source of knowledge. Creationism is not a scientific theory, because it doesn't allow you to question the truth of the biblical words. The Theory of Evolution is scientific, because you can, if you are clever enough, propose an alternative and show it leads to better-matching results. It is safe to say that evolutionists see their work as a "theory" (and thus subject to further changes or even complete replacement by something better), while creationist see their own work as an "axiom" that is true with zero doubt.

Science is doubting. Religion is believing. That's why I - and a lot of people - will spring on any scientifical proposition over a religious alternative any day.

[Death]

You say this about science, but it's better applied to religion.
...
I think it's sad that all these religious ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

Think is, Kaname (and too many others) get the two mixed up a lot since they seem to believe that one can prove/disprove the other. So the fact that he said something as pointless as you quoted doesn't surprise me.

Ok, there is a misunderstanding here. 'Science' is not and never was about 'proofs'. It is not what matters, because in a lot of cases, you cannot really prove something with 100% certainty. Most of our science is made up of conjectures, some being very strong and matching facts, others being less satisfactory.

The same can be said of 'religion-based' theories like Creationism - they are another set of conjectures, and who are we to tell if one set is better than the other?

I remember a quote from another site: Science is proof without certainty; religion is certainty without proof.

[darkwoon]

I remember a quote from another site: Science is proof without certainty; religion is certainty without proof.

"Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof." - Ashley Montague

Google does wonders for sure :D

[Jess]

the book I read says that there must be a Creator because who would create such a beautiful place and things (ex, a sunset) and how did we get our eyes to be so complex or whatever

(btw I'm not saying I believe this crap in the book I read - I don't believe in God)

[Contra]

Really, I don't see how religious people can find any kind of sense in religion, no offense. Science has proof for most things we question, though religion explains it with the existence of God. Why is it so easy for you to reject the scientific thories and yet, so easy to believe the religious ones?

Here, take the Bible, read the stories, did any of those things ever happened that you know of? If they did, I'd better watch out for the toads falling from the sky. Do you believe in ghosts, fairies or leprechauns? Me neither.

[huginnmuninn]

1.science deals in probabilities rather than certainties.
2.you cannot prove or dissprove that god exists
3.religion has brought many good and bad things to our world
4. religion is the only place where you can have an all powerful ruler and people still follow it
5. because people will still follow the ruler they will follow rules like the christian 10 commandments and churches can help people by raising money for charities and so on so it has good effects
6.religion also has bad effects like religous radicals who run planes into tall buildings and start religous wars
so dont try to destroy belief in religion because that may have unexpected concequences like taking away hope which helps many people live day to day but that doesnt mean you have to advocate it either

[Magus]

6.religion also has bad effects like religous radicals who run planes into tall buildings and start religous wars

Sorry for this intruding and irrelevant post, but.

Read this: CLICK ME! (http://911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646) - Feed your brain a bit.

[Jess]

Really, I don't see how religious people can find any kind of sense in religion, no offense. Science has proof for most things we question, though religion explains it with the existence of God. Why is it so easy for you to reject the scientific thories and yet, so easy to believe the religious ones?

Here, take the Bible, read the stories, did any of those things ever happened that you know of? If they did, I'd better watch out for the toads falling from the sky. Do you believe in ghosts, fairies or leprechauns? Me neither.

I agree, like people coming back from the dead

[Contra]

so dont try to destroy belief in religion because that may have unexpected concequences like taking away hope which helps many people live day to day but that doesnt mean you have to advocate it either

People shouldn't just rely on God or some mystical force to guide their lives, I have the same point of view as Nietzsche or Marx, I think, is that God doesn't let people achieving stuff for themselves, they always have God to depend on, and that turns people weak. If they want to believe, fine, but I just don't see any sense, does praying do everything for you? I wish it would, so I could do it and my grandmother would be better.

[CaptainObvious]

I think that too many people are trying to define religion with science. It doesn't work that way. People will believe what they want to, and little can change their minds.

This is true. Though, it would be a better world if people stopped believing things merely because they're told those things are true, without any substantiating proof (which is how most religious belief develops).

And it makes more sense than "deepened" theories of scientists.

Only if you don't understand those theories. Which, in fairness, most of us don't - the difference is that some of us take that as a sign that we ought to be trying harder to learn, rather than as a sign that we should just ignore the theories.

According to some Atheists, we "evolved from dirt" so even to them its not ridiculous.

You're ignoring his point. If I walked up to you on the street with a friend of mine and told you I'd made him out of dirt 10 minutes before, and then introduced my other friend and said I took one of his ribs to make her, you'd either laugh or think I was insane. Either way, you wouldn't believe me without me proving it. So why does the fact that a lot of other people believe it and it's written down in a book all of a sudden cause you to not require proof?

I think it's sad that all this scientific ideas are surfacing and that most people spring to believe them because there is so called proof.

So called proof? Do you have some specific objection to the evidence science has provided for the current consensus on the issues of our universe's evolution, the beginnings of life and its evolution to its present state? I doubt it, since you don't even appear to understand the theories themselves, which would be required to take issue with them.

Your problem here is the fact that the evidence all conflicts with the belief you hold and do not want to change. That is a fallacious way to argue, but that's the whole basis of religion, right? You wouldn't accept anything as true without some level of proof... except this, for which there is no proof but a lot of preaching. This, you don't just accept as true, but you believe that its truth is necessary and the truth of anything else in the world is contingent upon God's existence.

On that note, though, I have a question:

In the past, religion has contested many scientific claims on the basis that they conflicted with God. Among these, for example, is the concept of the Earth being a sphere. When this was first proposed, it was seen as entirely incompatible with religion and it was said that on that basis it must be wrong.

That is precisely the same argument you're making now with respect to evolution. So: why do you think this argument is a good one here, when science has been right and religion has been wrong in every instance of conflict we have found that can actually be tested?

[baruch6132]

I just wondering why people believe in God? There is no proof for him and surely science will eventually prove the big bang theory. As Ashley Montage said: "Science has proof without certainty. Creationists have certainty without proof". IS THERE ANY POSSIBLE REASON TO BELIEVE IN GOD?

ok first, hows it so say that god idnt creat everything with the big bang? and secondly, u cant prove u even exist. u cant prove if anything happened before you were born. think that over and get back to me

[deadpie]

ok first, hows it so say that god idnt creat everything with the big bang? and secondly, u cant prove u even exist. u cant prove if anything happened before you were born. think that over and get back to me


You're making life sound like an illusion. That kind of goes off topic in the idea of this thread.

[Camazotz]

ok first, hows it so say that god idnt creat everything with the big bang? and secondly, u cant prove u even exist. u cant prove if anything happened before you were born. think that over and get back to me

You're making life sound like an illusion. That kind of goes off topic in the idea of this thread.

Yes, it's as if you're implying that the world is like in the movie, the Matrix. As if reality is not as it seems.

[Church]

You cant disprove God, and just cause you cant prove he exist with science doesn't mean he doesn't exist, that would be ignorant.

To many Atheist now a days, and I'm not bashing on any on this site, think just cause you cant prove it that its not real and they seem rather arrogant about it, i.e flaunting their atheist.

If you wanna consider yourself open minding try looking to the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, the universe just happening doesn't make sense so it would point to a divine being, its better to keep your mind open to that idea rather than saying "nope doesn't exist no proof."

[Jess]

if God did create the universe, who created God?

[Amnesiac]

You cant disprove God, and just cause you cant prove he exist with science doesn't mean he doesn't exist, that would be ignorant.

To many Atheist now a days, and I'm not bashing on any on this site, think just cause you cant prove it that its not real and they seem rather arrogant about it, i.e flaunting their atheist.

If you wanna consider yourself open minding try looking to the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, the universe just happening doesn't make sense so it would point to a divine being, its better to keep your mind open to that idea rather than saying "nope doesn't exist no proof."

There are plenty of things that can't be proven or disproven. You can't disprove the flying spaghetti monster. You can't disprove when I say there's an invisible block of cheese in my backyard. So why not believe those things too?

The idea of a God is just as ridiculous as any of the things I just said. If there is no evidence for something, you shouldn't believe it. There's no solid reason to believe in God, just over 9000 "what if"s. It's not a question of open-mindedness, it's a question of whether you're willing to accept reality or not. I believe in things based on facts and research, not some 2,000-year-old book that makes outrageous and conflicting claims.

[Icarus7]

Ans: To answer Philosophical Questions.

Like:

Why we are here? Answering with Evolution is not a conclusion to answer why there is 'Matter' and 'Particles' - As this is what we are.

Where are we going?

Where will the world end?

What was before this, what will be after this?

What is beyond the 'Wall'?
==================

Science will make things clearer for 'Humans' and nothing else.

I have spend a lot of time think about those... If you know the answer please tell me :D

[deadpie]

You cant disprove God, and just cause you cant prove he exist with science doesn't mean he doesn't exist, that would be ignorant.

To many Atheist now a days, and I'm not bashing on any on this site, think just cause you cant prove it that its not real and they seem rather arrogant about it, i.e flaunting their atheist.

If you wanna consider yourself open minding try looking to the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, the universe just happening doesn't make sense so it would point to a divine being, its better to keep your mind open to that idea rather than saying "nope doesn't exist no proof."

I AM open minded. I was a catholic once for a bit of my childhood. I do know a great deal about religion and I know allot about it's flaws. I'm an Atheist because I don't really want to believe in any religion that has any flaws in it.

There's many reasons why I can say the Christian God didn't exist. Apparently the earth is 6000 Years old but we know that isn't true due to fossils of dead animals and geologists. We know the earth is over a billion years old. There's so many outrageous things in the Bible that have been proven to be false. And taking a books word over people dedicating their lives to figuring out answers is just insane.

And you talk like as if every Atheist thinks the same - ex: Nothing created from nothing, universe creation. Many of us Atheists have different thoughts and argue about who's right and who's wrong. So don't think of us as this one minded brain.

[Rutherford The Brave]

I AM open minded. I was a catholic once for a bit of my childhood. I do know a great deal about religion and I know allot about it's flaws. I'm an Atheist because I don't really want to believe in any religion that has any flaws in it.

There's many reasons why I can say the Christian God didn't exist. Apparently the earth is 6000 Years old but we know that isn't true due to fossils of dead animals and geologists. We know the earth is over a billion years old. There's so many outrageous things in the Bible that have been proven to be false. And taking a books word over people dedicating their lives to figuring out answers is just insane.

And you talk like as if every Atheist thinks the same - ex: Nothing created from nothing, universe creation. Many of us Atheists have different thoughts and argue about who's right and who's wrong. So don't think of us as this one minded brain.

Another thing is, most people think that everyone who thinks scientifically or with some reason is an atheist. I'm a religious person, but I consider myself a realist. The glass is twice the size it needs to be. If it isn't possible know it wasn't possible then.

[Perseus]

There are plenty of things that can't be proven or disproven. You can't disprove the flying spaghetti monster. You can't disprove when I say there's an invisible block of cheese in my backyard. So why not believe those things too?

The idea of a God is just as ridiculous as any of the things I just said. If there is no evidence for something, you shouldn't believe it. There's no solid reason to believe in God, just over 9000 "what if"s. It's not a question of open-mindedness, it's a question of whether you're willing to accept reality or not. I believe in things based on facts and research, not some 2,000-year-old book that makes outrageous and conflicting claims.

I have an inquiry. Do you think wormholes exist? I ask you because there is next to nothing for evidence of them, but it is a widely accepted theory.

[Sage]

You cant disprove God,
You can't disprove invisible unicorns or teapots in Jupiter's orbit.

and just cause you cant prove he exist with science doesn't mean he doesn't exist, that would be ignorant.
On the contrary, I think believing things for which there is no evidence would be ignorant.

To many Atheist now a days,
What's wrong with atheists?

and I'm not bashing on any on this site, think just cause you cant prove it that its not real
If you can't prove something, there is no reason to believe it.

If you wanna consider yourself open minding try looking to the fact that nothing can be created from nothing,
Elaborate, preferably with an example.

the universe just happening doesn't make sense
Indeed, that wouldn't make sense, unfortunately you're attempting a strawman argument as nobody is claiming the universe 'just happened'. That would be a skewed and obviously incorrect interpretation of currently accepted theories.

so it would point to a divine being,
No, it does not. If one doesn't know how something works, that doesn't mean god did it. If one doesn't know how something works, that means one doesn't know how something works. Nothing more.

its better to keep your mind open to that idea rather than saying "nope doesn't exist no proof."
I keep an open mind to things that can be proven through evidence. If I had to throw proof out of the equation, then I'd have to keep an open mind to the invisible pixies that live in the sky, or the events of Star Wars actually having played out a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, or that a flying spaghetti monster created all of us with his grand noodly appendages.

Keeping an open mind and believing anything you want without reason are different things. Evidence is what separates plausible hypotheses from baseless fantasies.

[Church]

I dont feel like going over everything but I'll give you an example of me saying the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, its simple physics really, "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed", if matter cannot be physically within the bounds of the laws of physics, created, then how was it created in the first place?

[Sith Lord 13]

or the events of Star Wars actually having played out a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, .

It wasn't that long ago, or that far away. How old do you think I am? :)

[/humor insertion into overly serious thread]

[Perseus]

I dont feel like going over everything but I'll give you an example of me saying the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, its simple physics really, "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed", if matter cannot be physically within the bounds of the laws of physics, created, then how was it created in the first place?

How was God created, then?

[Church]

Tis a good question, I believe God always has and always will be. And just cause there is no evidence doesn't mean it cant be, worm holes and parallel universes have little to no evidence but many scientist believe they exist, in my mind a God existing is logical, its give an answer to question that seem like they cant have a answer, like how the universe began you need a spark to start it, but if you can within the laws of physics have a spark then it doesn't make sense.

[Amnesiac]

I have an inquiry. Do you think wormholes exist? I ask you because there is next to nothing for evidence of them, but it is a widely accepted theory.

I wouldn't compare wormholes to God. Since wormholes are technically possible, I wouldn't outright call them non-existent, but since they haven't been observed I wouldn't say they're 100% real and existing either.

God isn't backed up by any theory; the lack of scientific reasoning for a god makes it appropriate to assume it doesn't exist.

[Perseus]

Tis a good question, I believe God always has and always will be. And just cause there is no evidence doesn't mean it cant be, worm holes and parallel universes have little to no evidence but many scientist believe they exist, in my mind a God existing is logical, its give an answer to question that seem like they cant have a answer, like how the universe began you need a spark to start it, but if you can within the laws of physics have a spark then it doesn't make sense.

... The Universe has always existed, too.

[Jess]

How was God created, then?

now there's a VERY good question :rolleyes:

[Church]

Can you prove the universe has always existed? And if not then why do you believe in it? Cause apparently no proof means its not true.

[Sage]

I dont feel like going over everything but I'll give you an example of me saying the fact that nothing can be created from nothing, its simple physics really, "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed", if matter cannot be physically within the bounds of the laws of physics, created, then how was it created in the first place?

In the same post you first state that matter cannot be created and then ask how it was created.

Also, you've completely ignored everything else I said. If one is to believe on claim that lacks evidence, then one should believe every claim without evidence. If they don't, then it merely goes to show that they're simply picking and choosing what they want to believe and that there is no reason to take such belief seriously.

Can you prove the universe has always existed?
At the moment we can neither prove whether the universe is finite or infinite.

And if not then why do you believe in it?
Because I can experience the universe through my senses.

Cause apparently no proof means its not true.
Bingo.

[Amnesiac]

I, for one (:rolleyes:), don't know how the universe was created. Nobody does. Nobody will probably ever know. I don't see why people care so much, I don't really. However, when it comes to accepting which theory on universal creation is the most reasonable, I'm going to go with the Big Bang theory because it's thoroughly researched and largely accepted. Does that mean it's 100% true? No, but I'll stick with it until someone can come up with something better.

[Church]

Theres also no proof God doesnt exist, so why believe that side if theres no proof?

[Perseus]

Can you prove the universe has always existed? And if not then why do you believe in it? Cause apparently no proof means its not true.

Lol, I'm not like that. Good try, though. I believe in God, buddyboy.

[Sage]

Theres also no proof God doesnt exist, so why believe that side if theres no proof?

I already went into this. There's proof the universe exists. We live in it.

[Church]

Did I say the universe doesn't exist or there no evidence it does exist? Its obvious its exist. Unless you can come up with solid evidence there is no God in general from any religion or any God in general then your argument is just as invalid as you say mine is.

[Sage]

Unless you can come up with solid evidence there is no God in general from any religion or any God in general then your argument is just as invalid as you say mine is.

Not so, as one cannot prove a negative claim. Until something is proven to exist, one must assume it does not. "God exists" is a positive claim, and so the burden of evidence falls upon the person making a positive claim to prove their claim. "God does not exist" is a negative claim, and one cannot prove a negative.

[Church]

Seems like your trying to play lawyer with this which I hate. Since the Theory of Evolution isn't fully proven but only has evidence I shouldn't believe in it? Seems like thats the kinda stuff your trying to say

[Sage]

Seems like your trying to play lawyer with this which I hate.
I'm not "playing lawyer". The burden of evidence is a foundational part of logic and debate. If you're not going to accept logic, then there's no sense in debating you.

Since the Theory of Evolution isn't fully proven but only has evidence I shouldn't believe in it? Seems like thats the kinda stuff your trying to say
That couldn't be further from anything I've said at all.

[Church]

Until something is proven to exist, one must assume it does not..

Like you said, unless its PROVEN and things such as a the Big Bang and Theory of Evolution haven't been completely proven then we shouldn't believe them. (Btw I do believe in both of em just some gaps need to be filled I'm just using them as an example.)

[Sage]

Like you said, unless its PROVEN and things such as a the Big Bang and Theory of Evolution haven't been completely proven then we shouldn't believe them.

If you truly want to debate epistemology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology) then go ahead, in that context one could argue that we really don't know anything, but that viewpoint has no practical real-world applications. At the present time, and as shown by history, logic and the scientific method are the most effective means we have to learning the true nature of things. At the present time, currently accepted scientific theories have the most evidence to support them, and so we consider them true. It is absolutely possible that the Big Bang, Evolution, Gravity, and many of these things do not work in the way we understand them, though such a claim (the claim that our current understanding is completely untrue) would require a wealth of evidence to back it up.

I'd also like to point out that picking apart semantics (ie: you jumping upon my use of the word 'prove') is a poor debate tactic. You're still not addressing the key points I raise, such as the burden of evidence falling upon those making a positive claim (ie: "God exists.") to prove said claim.

Edit: I apologize, I incorrectly used the word 'metaphysics' in the first part of this post. Epistemology is what I was getting at.

[Church]

I dont really care bout a burden of evidence, you cant prove God doesn't exist and until you do you don't have the ground to say he doesn't exist

[Sage]

I dont really care bout a burden of evidence,

Then no amount of reason and debate can get through to you and everything else you have to add to this debate is invalid.

[Church]

This topic isnt really suited for debate imo either way, in debates it tends to need to be evidence for both sides and there isnt, I'll admit you cant prove God, but I rather believe they're is a God watching out for us and will be there for us than believe our world is doomed and no one is going to help us. Also Nationalism? As Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy puts it, "the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their national identity", sorry for liking my nation, guess I'm a bad guy.

[Amnesiac]

This topic isnt really suited for debate imo either way, in debates it tends to need to be evidence for both sides and there isnt, I'll admit you cant prove God, but I rather believe they're is a God watching out for us and will be there for us than believe our world is doomed and no one is going to help us.

Just because there isn't material evidence for or against God doesn't mean we shouldn't debate it. There are plenty of philosophical arguments that can be discussed, such as the problem of evil or the omnipotence paradox.

[Church]

I believe when it comes to God our minds cant completely understand it, just cause we cant completely understand it doesn't mean its less real. I think its philosophically correct to think they're must be a God, cause they're cant be nothing from nothing like I said before, something had to of always been theres, the universe just couldnt of always been, that wouldn't make since and the universe was started by the Big Bang which shows the universe hasn't always existed, also I consider the Big Bang Gods way of starting things.

Simply put the logic behind why I think God exist setting aside my faith is, also this is a big reason why I stopped being an Atheist and became a Christian; There always has to be something, and that something in my opinion is God.

[deadpie]

I believe when it comes to God our minds cant completely understand it, just cause we cant completely understand it doesn't mean its less real. I think its philosophically correct to think they're must be a God

How is it philosophically correct? That's dun goofed up. It doesn't even make sense. Sense when do we choose only one philosophy (obviously the Christian one) over all of them?


Simply put the logic behind why I think God exist setting aside my faith is, also this is a big reason why I stopped being an Atheist and became a Christian; There always has to be something, and that something in my opinion is God.

That statement doesn't even support anything. That's like saying, God's real because there's gotta be something real so it's real. What are you EVER saying? It's like an opinion over an opinion with no facts or justified opinions on anything.

[MattHolyman41]

First of all God is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. It's just that every time someone makes a discovery of the universe around us som crazy brainwashed religious guy says: "Well maybe God is beyond that... He's much bigger and much more powerful!"
Most importantly God is beyond existence. The Universe would just deal happily without a deity. Big Bang is most probably another natural phenomenon when pure vacuum becomes matter and energy...

Let's say I claim to have an invisible and untouchable dinosaur. You wouldn't see it and you can't touch it... but I claim to own it... I say he exists! Would this make any
difference from all religions??

And then you should admit than everything that exists in this universe or an entire existence is either MATTER or ENERGY... both able to be seen or detected in some way. GOD is NONE of these two!

We are not a result of an intelligent design. Deal with it.... we have NO PURPOSE. Purpose is a human characteristic. It describes usage of an item. My computer has a purpose, but the piece of rock on a field doesn't. I don't. You don't either! We are all just a cluster of evolved organic matter.

We began without purpose and we shall end without purpose. So stop asking "why?" OMG!

[Deathwingo0o]

God, the ultimate being. If there is one, we will never find God because we are made specifically not to accomplish that. If there is none human will try to prove their belief nonetheless.

[Bougainvillea]

We began without purpose and we shall end without purpose. So stop asking "why?" OMG!
It's our nature as humans to ask "Why". It always has been. And I wouldn't want it any other way. We need people to ask "Why" and "How come".

[Perseus]

I believe when it comes to God our minds cant completely understand it, just cause we cant completely understand it doesn't mean its less real. I think its philosophically correct to think they're must be a God, cause they're cant be nothing from nothing like I said before, something had to of always been theres, the universe just couldnt of always been, that wouldn't make since and the universe was started by the Big Bang which shows the universe hasn't always existed, also I consider the Big Bang Gods way of starting things.

Simply put the logic behind why I think God exist setting aside my faith is, also this is a big reason why I stopped being an Atheist and became a Christian; There always has to be something, and that something in my opinion is God.

Herp derp, let me repeat my self. The universe has always existed, just not in this state.

[MattHolyman41]

It's our nature as humans to ask "Why". It always has been. And I wouldn't want it any other way. We need people to ask "Why" and "How come".

No seriously. In nature there's no such thing as purpose or determination of something to exist. Only humans and their "tools" and technology and cities and social groups have purpose. But our evolutionary existence does not. I would like to know what is my purpose! But I will never know because there is none.

Does that mean My life is meaningless and not worth living???? NOOOO!!!!
I live to enjoy reality around me as it is. There are pros and cons of this existence and one of the bad stuff is that no organism can live forever (at least not in the civilisation that has not achieved immortality through advanced biotechnology, genetic engineering and robotics)

[MattHolyman41]

What is interesting is that actually no theist will ever explain what god-ish entity is. I have some reasonable scientific explanation: Higgs Boson!!!

google it if you don't know what it is...

[Sith Lord 13]

Does that mean My life is meaningless and not worth living????

Ummmm, actually yes. No purpose = no meaning = no reason to live. Now whether or not that purpose is given to us by God, or by fate, or by ourselves, is a completely different issue.

Also, please don't double post.

[Amnesiac]

No seriously. In nature there's no such thing as purpose or determination of something to exist.

The purpose of living is to simply contribute to the progression and well-being of the species. Nothing more.

Does that mean My life is meaningless and not worth living???? NOOOO!!!!
I live to enjoy reality around me as it is.

Just because you enjoy life doesn't mean that your life has meaning. If you're not doing anything to help the human race, be it having a job, in school training for a job or doing community service of some kind, there's really no reason for you to live. The only exceptions are children too young for school and elderly people who've lived productive lives.

It may be a depressing and politically incorrect thing to say, but it's the truth. Nobody said the truth is easy.

[VTry007]

I have to recommend a book for everyone. It's "A Divine Revelation of Hell" by Mary K. Baxter. You can download it from this site:

http://spiritlessons.com/mary_k_baxter_a_divine_revelation_of_hell.htm

This book will impact you because it will tell you what you want to know about what hell is like.

I'll tell you the most important life's lesson that I've learned. It's, "Living is loving and God is love."

[Sage]

I have to recommend a book for everyone. It's "A Divine Revelation of Hell" by Mary K. Baxter. You can download it from this site:

http://spiritlessons.com/mary_k_baxter_a_divine_revelation_of_hell.htm

This book will impact you because it will tell you what you want to know about what hell is like.

I'll tell you the most important life's lesson that I've learned. It's, "Living is loving and God is love."

The psychotic ramblings of a delusional woman don't constitute an rational viewpoint. Your argument is invalid.

[BOBBY HILL]

Arguing over the existence of God is pointless, there is no way of proving against his existence, or no way of proving it

[Amnesiac]

I have to recommend a book for everyone. It's "A Divine Revelation of Hell" by Mary K. Baxter. You can download it from this site:

http://spiritlessons.com/mary_k_baxter_a_divine_revelation_of_hell.htm

This book will impact you because it will tell you what you want to know about what hell is like.

I'll tell you the most important life's lesson that I've learned. It's, "Living is loving and God is love."

It has no impact on me because I believe in no hell and no God. Therefore, it's a pointless book.

[deadpie]

Arguing over the existence of God is pointless, there is no way of proving against his existence, or no way of proving it


You're right. Well, I guess that's all folks

/end topic.


No. You debate for the sake of debating.

There's evidence to prove that most of the God's didn't exist. For example: read the bible, notice that most of it is bad philosophy, violence and unlogical. Bible says earth is flat, 6000 years old, and a bunch of other trash that's already been proven wrong.

Edit: For evidence sense you'll want it.


"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"


Job 37:33 He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven and sends it to the ends of the earth.

[Sage]

Arguing over the existence of God is pointless, there is no way of proving against his existence, or no way of proving it

The concept of god itself is unfalsifiable, however, when one makes specific claims, said claims can be falsified. For example: The story of Noah's Ark. Evidence suggests such a flood would be impossible, and if it did happen, we would be able to see the aftermath.

[The Dark Lord]

Arguing over the existence of God is pointless, there is no way of proving against his existence, or no way of proving it

The purpose of debating isn't about proving the point, its about making your point of view valid and convincing others to agree.

[Azunite]

Only thing science cannot answer is "How everything began?" ( How did big bang happen etc.)
Religion always connects things to God, IMO, it is a good way to escape from truth and lay things on God, things you cannot answer

[Sage]

Only thing science cannot answer is "How everything began?" ( How did big bang happen etc.)
Firstly, there are many things science can't explain yet. Second, look up 'M-Theory'.

Religion always connects things to God, IMO, it is a good way to escape from truth and lay things on God, things you cannot answer
Having an answer is not the same as having the answer.

[Deathwingo0o]

It's impossible to prove something much advance than us in the form of technology. It's just like stone age people trying to find an underwater city.

[Deathwingo0o]

The purpose of life, of universe an everything is, 42.

[Rutherford The Brave]

It's impossible to prove something much advance than us in the form of technology. It's just like stone age people trying to find an underwater city.

The purpose of life, of universe an everything is, 42.

What now?

Look we have proof the the world is older than 6000 years old. I.E Carbon dated fossils, rocks and such. We can't prove much but atleast we know that our history extends much further into the past then 600 years.

[Rainstorm]

Religion always connects things to God, IMO, it is a good way to escape from truth and lay things on God, things you cannot answer

Religion connects things to their religious books. Which are full of contradictions.

[Deathwingo0o]

What now?

Look we have proof the the world is older than 6000 years old. I.E Carbon dated fossils, rocks and such. We can't prove much but atleast we know that our history extends much further into the past then 600 years.

Stone age people knows that they have ancestors. But does that mean they proved earth was here billions of years ago? For us to prove God would be as hard as stone age people proving earth existed for billions of years and is almost round.

[Perseus]

The purpose of life, of universe an everything is, 42.

Where'd you get that from?

[Sage]

Where'd you get that from?
The Hitchhiker's Guide to The Galaxy. That line sort of stopped being witty or amusing several years ago.
Stone age people knows that they have ancestors. But does that mean they proved earth was here billions of years ago? For us to prove God would be as hard as stone age people proving earth existed for billions of years and is almost round.

That's a false comparison, because by stating that proving god is the same as proving ancestry, and stating that people know they have ancestors, you are implying that people know there is a god. They don't.

[DarkHorses]

The biggest reason for me is that I believe there had to be a reason for all of it. Nothing happens just because. There's always an answer to the question "Why did this happen?" To Me, God holds the answer to that question. Believing in God means that I believe the earth and humans were created for a reason. I can't bring myself to imagine that life and everything that has ever happened is pointless and meaningless.

[Sage]

The biggest reason for me is that I believe there had to be a reason for all of it. Nothing happens just because. There's always an answer to the question "Why did this happen?" To Me, God holds the answer to that question.
Having an answer is not the same as having the answer. I feel it is more intellectually honest to admit you do not know something than to claim a mere belief is true.

Believing in God means that I believe the earth and humans were created for a reason. I can't bring myself to imagine that life and everything that has ever happened is pointless and meaningless.
Humans create their own meanings. A meaning was not handed down to us. If you truly do care about discovering any possible universal truth, a cause of existence, then refusing to consider one possibility (that there is no inherent, objective meaning or purpose) is digging yourself a philosophical grave.

[DarkHorses]

Having an answer is not the same as having the answer. I feel it is more intellectually honest to admit you do not know something than to claim a mere belief is true.
I claim my beliefs are true, but at the same time I don't say that the big bang theory is false. I wouldn't say it's false that there is no God, because for all I know there might not be. I don't really think I can believe something is fact without evidence that it is a fact, so I don't claim my religion is a fact. It's just a belief, not a fact, and I recognize that.

[Sage]

I claim my beliefs are true, but at the same time I don't say that the big bang theory is false.
That is a false dichotomy, ie, implying those are the only two possibilities.

I don't really think I can believe something is fact without evidence that it is a fact, so I don't claim my religion is a fact.
Then why do you believe it?

[deadpie]

The biggest reason for me is that I believe there had to be a reason for all of it. Nothing happens just because. There's always an answer to the question "Why did this happen?" To Me, God holds the answer to that question. Believing in God means that I believe the earth and humans were created for a reason. I can't bring myself to imagine that life and everything that has ever happened is pointless and meaningless.

All because God might not be real, or in my thoughts he isn't, doesn't mean the human race is pointless and meaningless. We could always become a good species without religion.

[baruch6132]

if God did create the universe, who created God?

G-d wasn't created. He is an existence that doesn't owe His existence to anything or anyone else. after taking a philosophy class, get back to me

[Commander Thor]

G-d wasn't created. He is an existence that doesn't owe His existence to anything or anyone else. after taking a philosophy class, get back to me

This thread is old. 2 years old to be exact.
Please don't bump threads this old, and keep it to threads less than 2 months old.
Thanks.

:locked: