|
Post by Phantom Zero on Jun 20, 2010 18:16:51 GMT
im not talking to the non religius people here... man its like every time i post some thing on here non religious people are always saying to me that i dont belve in god or im non religious. I know just to get that out i read this thing every once and a while so i know whos religious and who is not.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 20, 2010 19:55:27 GMT
What about Agnostics?
|
|
|
Post by izacque on Jun 23, 2010 1:18:03 GMT
hmm... Well i am as you know a non relgious person and an evolutionist. I need to get my 2 cents in... so tell me, why do you belive in this so called "god"? Is it because you have been tought that there is this "all mighty being in the sky" and you shouldnt question what we say or you will be sent to hell and never come back. Well what proff do you have that there is a god? Other than "The Bible says so" and "Thats what was tought at church". That is a disgusting generalization on the intelligence of religious people and I resent it. I assure you that there are many religious people, including myself, who are very capable of individual, intelligent thought. If I were to make generalizations about non-christian evolutionists, I could just as easily say, "The science book says so!" or "That's what was taught in school!" Now, in terms of evidence, I point to the evidence of design in bio-chemistry. What you see throughout biology at the cellular level is irreducible complexity. The chances of irreducibly complex mechanisms springing into existence are ridiculous. Also, origins. There is no plausible way that inorganic matter can be turned into a prokaryote. Qwerty, I read your links, wincing at how often the words "maybe someday...", "Not yet discovered", and "we hope to see..." appeared. Now I ask, why would 6 "huge" dimensions be too big for macro-atomic entities to show evidence of them, yet sub-atomic particles, some of them not even observed, be able to show evidence? What is this "indirect evidence" of the 6 dimensions? And how in the world do 6 extra dimensions prove, or even imply, an infinite amount of universes? In fact, qwerty, I also have PhDs to back me up. But of course, you could say that the majority is always right, regardless of the scientific evidence, but that kind of thinking merely suppressed Copernicus when he made one of the greatest astronomical discoveries.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 23, 2010 5:14:46 GMT
I don't think there are any PhDs in proving God exists, sorry.
|
|
|
Post by ganondorfchampin on Jun 23, 2010 11:59:55 GMT
Question: What do you gain from trying to convince people there is no God.
Lets say there is no God: What harm is there in beliving in a God?
Now letys say there is a God: Whats the harm in defying God?
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 23, 2010 13:49:54 GMT
If there is a God, the harm in defying God is going to Hell. If there isn't, the harm of believing in him is wasting time in church and starting wars in his name (More in the past than now, but still, look at Israel (only for zionists and extremists on that one, not EVERYONE would fight a war because of it)).
True, burning in Hell is worse, but at least it doesn't affect innocent people. Oh, wait, it does. It affects the innocent person going to Hell just because they decided to believe in what they can actually test.
|
|
|
Post by pir8ozzy on Jun 24, 2010 11:25:00 GMT
Now, in terms of evidence, I point to the evidence of design in bio-chemistry. What you see throughout biology at the cellular level is irreducible complexity. The chances of irreducibly complex mechanisms springing into existence are ridiculous. Also, origins. There is no plausible way that inorganic matter can be turned into a prokaryote. I've always seen it as a matter of numbers. Both theists and atheists are aware that the probabilities are incredibly tiny, but neither group knows for sure what the probabilities are. However atheists believe that there were enough permutations of the environmental conditions for these incredibly unlikely events to happen. Theists, on the other hand, generally believe that the atheists have either underestimated the odds, or overestimated the number of permutations. Until more biochemical research gives us more information, neither group can really make much headway.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Zero on Jun 24, 2010 17:44:19 GMT
Qwerty I agree with you it does affect other people, Innocent people just because we chose not to worship your religion we will get sent to hell when we die. Well on that subject lets go to all the religions of the world... One half is Christian(or some varyation there of) and the other half are uncountable others. So if this is true Half the people on earth will be sent to Hell just because they have thier own religion and the other half will aperently go to Heaven when they die. It doesnt make sence! Why would "God" send billions of people to Hell and have the select half of the world go to Heaven? As i said it doesnt make sence!
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 24, 2010 17:50:17 GMT
Let us hope Vishnu will forgive us.
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 25, 2010 14:50:27 GMT
I am kind of torn on this issue. I half believe there is a god and half believe he's a non-existant entity created by the human mind. Here is my standings on both sides.
No God: All Religion was devoloped by man to bring man together and to teach us lessons. God and other religous figures are just ancient man trying to explain the unexplainable. Also I believe in evolution and multiple dimmension/universes. Those impossible odds that life would develop, in my opinion, are proof of multiple universes in and of themselves. Biochemistries are completely possible to have evolved on earth. More proof yet that there is no god is that there are multiple religions, each with there own gods/goddeses.
There is God: Big Bang, Multiple dimmensions. How did they get there? How were they set off? The only explanation is either unexplainable or an intelligent force is driving itall, at an incomprehensible level of utter multi-dimmensinal control.
It is also possible that or entire universe is the figment of somethings imagination, that the past never existed but was fabricated by our or something elses mind. This imaginer or fabricator would be our "God".
Conclusion: In the end, untill we get undoubtable proof, it all boils down to your personal belief.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 25, 2010 19:59:05 GMT
The second argument doesn't really fit. You would have to assume God came from somewhere as well.
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 25, 2010 23:23:16 GMT
If an intelligent entity does indeed drive the universe, than it has to have come from somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Artifact123 on Jun 27, 2010 9:56:19 GMT
There is no god(without capital letter) or big bang. Maybe this isn,t real. Maybe nothing actually exists. Maybe the world is a very long dream. Maybe i will wake up and you will all dissapear. Maybe i am going crazy. Maybe... sakjghsfgdjfhgbrjdgytrdhj.
EDIT: Look at my signature. Who gave us weapons? Him.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 27, 2010 11:36:48 GMT
No, pretty sure Humans invented weapons.
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 27, 2010 20:39:53 GMT
Weapons... humans never did do anything good
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Zero on Jun 28, 2010 0:44:33 GMT
Humans will screw up this world
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 28, 2010 1:05:52 GMT
who's to blame for humans? god or science?
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 28, 2010 2:35:02 GMT
Well, science isn't to blame. Science is the process of discovering things, it has only existed since humans have.
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 28, 2010 21:02:52 GMT
Excuse my wording, I meant evolution and other things like that.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 28, 2010 22:24:56 GMT
In that case, evolution and such things.
|
|
|
Post by Artifact123 on Jun 29, 2010 6:00:16 GMT
Humanity pwns!
|
|
|
Post by Vertigo on Jun 29, 2010 7:31:18 GMT
Existence itslef isn't strikes me as odd. It would have made a lot more sense if nothing existed to begin without.
But we're here. Things do exist, there's nothing around that. In all honesty, if the universe was here for ever, thermal energy would have been too spread out for things to, well, continue as they are now.
I for one am sure the universe wasn't just sitting here forever. Something made it, but the question is, what made that? Surely it, itself, couldn't of existed forever either. As science progresses, perhaps to unfathomable heights, we might just keep on going down an endless chain.
I don't like endless chains, they don't fit in well with reality and its rules, we can't even find a real life representation of the ever expanding number line, for one. I don't know if the route of logic I'm going down is too common. Perhaps logic changes as we tackle things like this, but doing things the normal way, in the end I'm afraid, something had to be here forever. Now, here's where things get a bit tricky for those of us that think that the trigger for everything just had to be here litteraly forever, what is it?
I don't care what exactly it is, I'll think of it as my God. Simple blind faith leads me to believe that my God is capable of other things as well. That's where the real problem begins. Eventually coming to the conclusion something has been in existence forever( albeit impossible, I reach a lot of impossible ends while thinking of this) is generally accepted by a larger amount of people, compared to those who believe in a God.
Now, 'slapping' on other attributes such as gender, ability to communicate, and the knowledge of everything, is where we split in most cases. Those I can't defend, again, I'm somebody who runs on blind faith. But if those attributes weren't there since the start of major religions, and if God was just thought of as a random event or object that's been here since forever<--(Only word that I find that fits), maybe more people would've accepted God. I don't know for sure.
The point is, why do people start wars over this? It's sheer stupidity, and I say this thread is as well. This debate won't even reach an end, maybe it's just because I only like debates only when people get into arguments that won't have a winning party.
Meh, me and my personal biases.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 29, 2010 7:40:57 GMT
Of course you come to an infinite chain of things, but how would God exist? Or could he create himself, against all logic? Either way, that's hardly an argument for God.
You like debates when people argue over things without a winning party? This is a mother of a debate without a winning party. You should love this one just fine. Unless you mean "Don't".
|
|
|
Post by Vertigo on Jun 29, 2010 7:48:18 GMT
I meant don't, and that wasn't a debate for God, Qwerty.
The part of me running on blind faith should have notified you that I'm in no position to argue for him.
=p
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 29, 2010 7:49:13 GMT
Oh. I was confused about that.
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jun 30, 2010 1:03:37 GMT
I saw on the science channel that one theory of how the universe was created is that there are many universes. whenever 2 or more colide, it sparks off a new universe. I choose to believe this, but the problem with it is where did the first 1 (or 2) come from? Perhaps god is responsible?
|
|
|
Post by Vertigo on Jun 30, 2010 2:21:05 GMT
Coming from a person that DOES believe in God, that still isn't a resonable conclusion. If you say God is responsible, then your also adding other things in to go along with that notion, such as God having a gender, being able to communicate with us, and among other things I've previously stated.
Having said that, why do I believe in God? I've said it enough for some of you to know, blind faith.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jun 30, 2010 5:14:28 GMT
At least you admit it. I'm fine with blind faith, just not people claiming they have proof.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Zero on Jul 1, 2010 0:32:14 GMT
My I sugest a chat for this thread?
|
|
|
Post by aWeSum on Jul 1, 2010 0:54:50 GMT
Vertigo, I implied no such things. I reffered him it as "god" because we have nothing else to refer to it as. further more, I said god not God.
|
|
|