|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
posted May 21, 2007 09:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
People don't really know, but feel sooooooooooo sure it's almost ridiculous 
This is exactly the point.
No one knows god exists, but many people STATE he/she/it does!
Only because of a "feeling"...or of a "book"...or of what other people say (without any evidence).
And then we come back again to the beginning. You have to bring evidences for something before you can convince somebody. Only stating "HE EXISTS" means nothing. It's like our law of justice....No accused person has to bring evidences for his INNOCENCE....u have to bring evidences for his GUILTY.
@ Baklava
Don't mix up church and god. At least I do not. The church as an institution has done so many shamfull things in history, I really hope for them, god does NOT exist...otherwise they will get their bill for that!
Only because we have a church since 200O years, doesn't mean god exists. Religion is something that mostly growth in "bad times" (when people suffer a lot), because they need something which gives them hope and confidence.
talk about folks of the rainw forest. They have "gods" refering to their woods, their animals, and nature. They never heard about a crucifx or such things.
Now tell me...do u believe there does exist a forest god, and a god who controls the rain and who will let it rain like hell if you don't make sacrifices? This was similar to the old Inka religion. Just a different century. Why do you think the god like most of the catholics, protestants, muslims and orthodox believe on is the "right" one?
"You must not have other gods besides me!".....
Only because something exists for a very long time, doesn' mean it is right or based on reality or is any good.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
SwampLord
Supreme Hero
Lord of the Swamp
|
|
posted May 21, 2007 09:50 PM |
|
|
So, that is applicable to humanity as well.
Tell me, do you still belive that the atom is just a ball? Viewpoints change.
|
|
Spectrum
Famous Hero
Plan B
|
|
posted May 21, 2007 09:59 PM |
|
Edited by Spectrum at 22:01, 21 May 2007.
|
Look people, there is a reason whey people believe in God or any other similar thing. Or any religion.
Humans are afraid of death.
Really, think about it. Every religion I can think of promises its followers an afterlife or a re-birth or something. Makes sense, right?
____________
Aculias is like the male nipple of HC, TNT being the other one -Baklava
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 21, 2007 10:15 PM |
|
|
What about buddism?
They believe they reborn until nirvana is reached, and nirvana seems like some sort of permadeath to me.
So, it's kinda opposite at times
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 21, 2007 10:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Don't mix up church and god.
That's what I was saying all along
Quote:
Why do you think the god like most of the catholics, protestants, muslims and orthodox believe on is the "right" one?
I DON'T!
Why do people always misunderstand my view on God... Perhaps I didn't explain it well...
I do not believe that any god is right... In fact I think humans don't nor ever did have a right view on that... The higher power, God, Spirit, however you like to call it, if it exists, certainly doesn't need temples and sacrifices and whatnot since it was around way before all that was invented... And it totally doesn't need representatives on Earth; actually everything is its representative. That's what followers of organized religion don't understand. I don't deny God, I deny the Church.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 08:28 AM |
|
|
@Baklava:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't do any senseless festivals or fasting.
Your problem
Personally, I'm a man of tradition, and whatever my religion is, I like festivals... Besides, here where I live most festivals include unbelievably vast amounts of food, drink, music etc. so it's really about atmosphere
And strangely enough, though not believing in organized religion, I like to hang out at the church... It's like it has a built-in natural air-condition system, plus the candles smell nice
Tradition isn't necessarily related to religion 
Quote:
Quote:
I'm pretty sure one of the "believers" now will say:
You shouldn't always take the Bible literally!
Some, perhaps. Others, like me, on the other hand, will continue to try to explain to atheist fanatics such as you guys (and as I can see you're more fanatical in atheism than most people in christianity)
In real life I couldn't care less to be honest. Just on here it's a sport
Quote:
that the Bible was written by people, not by God, and that it doesn't have anything to do with him/her/it (or whatever is there).
Believers are not inferior creatures compared to atheists as you tend to present them.
Certainly more gullible though.
@The Death:
Quote:
Like I said before, we are not discussing phyisics laws here. It isn't a 'fixed' law that should work EVERYTIME, because God is not a machine -- humans NEVER EVER do the same things again, even if we think we're doing it, that's why 'manual work' is imprecise
but think of art -- it's beauty comes from feelings, not from laws -- it is not just a mathematical formula, it is based on feelings.. Scientists call it 'random'.
Believing in God should be an act of feelings, trust, not just 'apparent' doings. If you 'pray' to God, but think inside yourself "Man, I hope this ****ing prayer ends up soon", it's a total waste of time. If you truly love someone, you do it with your 'inside' feelings, not just with your phyisical showings (for example, showing someone that you love, but on the inside you think it's a waste of time). You have to love and pray to God with your thoughts, not with your hands or mouth
You're avoiding the point. If millions of people pray for ONE amputee to get better, even if there's surely someone who truly loves/believes whatever IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. EVER. THE LEG WILL NEVER GROW BACK NO MATTER HOW MUCH THE PRAYER IS LOVING OR BELIEVING. EVER EVER.
Is the point clear now?
Quote:
If you love your mother, for example, you truly do it on the inside. If you only love her for money and inheritance, but you want to show her that you love her, because otherwise you won't get the inheritance/money, then this is no love at all, not feelings.. God doesn't work like that, and neither precise, just as art doesn't as well.
Thanks for explaining love to me, seeing as atheists have no feelings
Quote:
Before Adam and Eve ate from the tree, there were no amputees if I recall. And before man started wars, there were no human-made deaths as well. God doesn't shield us from our own doings.
What has that got to do with anything?
This is about god never answering prayers, not Adam and Eve... 
Quote:
If God got rid of the Devil, where would 'evil' humans be happy?? they are defined, and they don't even want to go to Heaven, because it doesn't define them. If you are scared of Hell (and if you're evil, obviously), then you are just confused. You cannot be scared of what you are, of what defines you.
If you have a mind, you can't be scared of it, now can you?
Why did god make them evil? What kind of a ridiculous person makes something and then yells at the thing for being what he made it?
If god is omnipotent and omniscient then we could not be anything other than exactly what god wants us to be. Forget free will, god made us how he wanted knowing full well what we would do.
And for the last time: You don't have to prove that something DOESN'T exist. Only that it DOES.
@Doomforge:
Quote:
I understand angelito, TitaniumAlloy and all other.. look, when we were kids, we felt so proud when we discovered that santa claus doesn't exist. I believe similar mechanism applies here: people feel "wiser" and more "modern" when they refute such "myths". I suspect that angelito/TitaniumAlloy just can't refrain from writing here when they see ppl who still believe in such a "infantile myth". Didn't you argue with your friends that santa doesn't exist when you were 6 or 7?
That's the reason I think such arguing is childish and pointless, btw. As kids, we weren't able to say if santa does or doesn't exist, yet we kept arguing, even though our arguments were truly laughable. Same here. People don't really know, but feel sooooooooooo sure it's almost ridiculous
I'd say, time will tell who is right and who is wrong. Just be patient. Either science will do it, or you'll die and check if there's something on the other side
If you don't want to discuss it, then don't post in the thread. It's that simple.
This is a discussion. There are opinions being put forward. No one is trying to undermine anyone else, but since they ARE opinions that does mean that the person thinks that they are right. Is it so wrong to think you are right? It's not ridiculous. It's your own opinion. If you feel uncomfortable reading other people's opinions in which they don't say "i'm probably wrong" after every sentence then this isn't the discussion for you.
Quote:
In other words: religion =/= figment of single cracked mind. Better to call it a group mirage or so if you really want to
See that is where you are dead wrong. That is exactly what it is in the case of Christianity
Christianity = figment of a single cracked mind. Jesus.
I don't know as much about Islam, but Mohammad?
Religion as a whole, though, is more of a collective wish, a made up answer for questions we are yet to find the answer to
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 08:36 AM |
|
|
Perhaps I'll put it in it's own post to make make it clearer
TO THE DEATH:
The Death I must commend you on your skillful avoidance of my questions.
I shall list them here, if you don't mind
1. If we kill our children at childbirth, will they go to heaven, or to hell?
2. Why does god never heal amputees, despite any circumstances?
k Thanks
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 09:08 AM |
|
|
I really really shouldn't be posting after drinking this much, but....
Quote:
And for the last time: You don't have to prove that something DOESN'T exist. Only that it DOES.
For the first time: Who says you don't have to prove something doesn't exist? I say yes you *DO* have to prove it. You insist it's true, then prove it. "Claiming" you don't have to prove it is not proof. That's nothing more than an excuse for not being able to back your claims.
OK, another approach. Prove you don't have to prove it?
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 09:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If you don't want to discuss it, then don't post in the thread. It's that simple.
You repeat yourself. You've already said that before. Again, i do not participate in that pointless discussion, and quote-wars that entertain you so much, I just pointed some bad examples you guys give
How about another entertaining thread? Let's say I think the wall in my room is more white than gray, and you think it's more gray then white. Care for a new quote-war that proves nothing and is completely pointless?
There is no point in arguing with religious/atheistic fanatism. It's like arguing with colorblind person that the grass is green, not gray. (of course only when the daltonist isn't aware that the grass is really green )
Oh by the way, hell doesn't exist, even in the bible, so your question about unborn/killed children is kinda pointless. Have you ever bothered to read that "retarded" book before arguing?
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 09:59 AM |
|
|
As long as I've had a bit to drink
The question is not directed at me, but...
Quote:
1. If we kill our children at childbirth, will they go to heaven, or to hell?
A child at birth can't go to hell. They are born into heaven and without the corruption of the world they retain their innocence, therefore can't go anywhere but heaven. Hell can only be entered through denial of self, through denial of truth, through denial of what we feel in our hearts. In all circumstances we have something deep inside our heart, within our self, which tells us truth. When we deny the truth in our hearts, we have taken a step toward hell. When we accept what we know as truth, when we accept what we know in our hearts, we have taken a step toward heaven.
____________
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 10:18 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
If you don't want to discuss it, then don't post in the thread. It's that simple.
You repeat yourself. You've already said that before. Again, i do not participate in that pointless discussion, and quote-wars that entertain you so much, I just pointed some bad examples you guys give
How about another entertaining thread? Let's say I think the wall in my room is more white than gray, and you think it's more gray then white. Care for a new quote-war that proves nothing and is completely pointless?
There is no point in arguing with religious/atheistic fanatism. It's like arguing with colorblind person that the grass is green, not gray.
Sorry to say, but this is a typical post of someone who lacks in arguments after a short time.
You really don't seem to get the point.
YOUR WALL CAN BE SEEN....YOU CAN PROOF THE COLOR TO ME....SO THERE IS NO DISCUSSION.
Same with the grass...you can see the grass..the blind person not. You both do not have the same "qualifications".
How about I tell ya the rocks on Alpha centauri have a blue soft core.
A state this as my opinion...but I've never been to Alpha Centauri...so I've never seen or touched a rock from there.
Still I state this opinion. You will probably say "What a nonsense, rocks can't have soft cores....pressure...chemical reasons...blablabla".
But you haven't been to Alpha Centauri either...so you don't know yourself.
BUT.....it was ME who stated an "unrealistic", "irreal" and hard to believe opinion. So to convince you this core thing is true, it is ME who have to find an evidence for that.....it is not YOU who have to find an evidence against it.
There may exist "forces" we've never explored yet (telekinese or telepathy for example), because we still have to examine many many things. We will learn new things faster and faster. Just go back in time 200 years. And now take 5 modern things and imagine how the people would react in 1807 if they could see them (cell phone, Airbus 380, plasma tv, computer, fax).
You probably will be accused of witchcraft by the church and get burned on a pyre..
Maybe we will find out extraterrestials visited our planet 2000 years ago and made the people believe they are some kind of "gods" (I'd rather believe in this theory than in Adam and Eve...).
There is much to look forward too in the future in my eyes. I don't want to "waste" my time in something I will probably never meet, feel, see, talk to or understand.
Life is too short to focus on imaginations only.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 10:45 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Sorry to say, but this is a typical post of someone who lacks in arguments after a short time.
I guess you haven't understand me. I don't give any arguments because I do not care for such discussions. How can you state that I lack arguments when I don't wont to participate in a discussion? 
Quote:
Same with the grass...you can see the grass..the blind person not. You both do not have the same "qualifications".
He can see it too, albeit it looks different for him. A good example of relativity. For him, "green" doesn't exist and is something that's said to be out there, but can't be seen. I hope you get what I mean
Quote:
How about I tell ya the rocks on Alpha centauri have a blue soft core.
A state this as my opinion...but I've never been to Alpha Centauri...so I've never seen or touched a rock from there.
Still I state this opinion. You will probably say "What a nonsense, rocks can't have soft cores....pressure...chemical reasons...blablabla".
But you haven't been to Alpha Centauri either...so you don't know yourself.
BUT.....it was ME who stated an "unrealistic", "irreal" and hard to believe opinion. So to convince you this core thing is true, it is ME who have to find an evidence for that.....it is not YOU who have to find an evidence against it.
I don't need to prove anything, it's your belief. Finding an evidence to prove that somebody believes in fiction.. what for? I won't feel smarter or wiser by doing so.
Quote:
There may exist "forces" we've never explored yet (telekinese or telepathy for example), because we still have to examine many many things. We will learn new things faster and faster. Just go back in time 200 years. And now take 5 modern things and imagine how the people would react in 1807 if they could see them (cell phone, Airbus 380, plasma tv, computer, fax).
You probably will be accused of witchcraft by the church and get burned on a pyre..
Maybe we will find out extraterrestials visited our planet 2000 years ago and made the people believe they are some kind of "gods" (I'd rather believe in this theory than in Adam and Eve...).
That is of course possible, although that doesn't make any sense. That only moves the creation problem to another place, and not solves it.
Quote:
There is much to look forward too in the future in my eyes. I don't want to "waste" my time in something I will probably never meet, feel, see, talk to or understand.
Life is too short to focus on imaginations only.
What a hardcore realist you are! Dreaming is fun
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 11:12 AM |
|
|
@Binny
Quote:
I really really shouldn't be posting after drinking this much, but....
Quote:
And for the last time: You don't have to prove that something DOESN'T exist. Only that it DOES.
For the first time: Who says you don't have to prove something doesn't exist? I say yes you *DO* have to prove it. You insist it's true, then prove it. "Claiming" you don't have to prove it is not proof. That's nothing more than an excuse for not being able to back your claims.
OK, another approach. Prove you don't have to prove it?
That's ridiculous and you know it.
If you had to prove everything doesn't exist to be sure then you would never leave an airtight room.
Prove the boogey man doesn't exist. Prove santa doesn't exist. Prove that I'm not standing behind you about to kill you. Prove that the walls aren't watching you. Prove that we aren't surrounded by invisible squirrels.
These things are common sense. If something ISN'T THERE, then you CAN'T PROVE IT lol.
How can you prove that something isn't there?
Say, look, it isn't there.
Oh because it's invisible.
Can't feel it.
Yeah, its ethereal.
etc. You only have to prove that something IS there.
If you want people to believe that something is there you have to try and convince the gullible ones or prove it to those slightly more... logical
Quote:
As long as I've had a bit to drink
The question is not directed at me, but...
Quote:
1. If we kill our children at childbirth, will they go to heaven, or to hell?
A child at birth can't go to hell. They are born into heaven and without the corruption of the world they retain their innocence, therefore can't go anywhere but heaven. Hell can only be entered through denial of self, through denial of truth, through denial of what we feel in our hearts. In all circumstances we have something deep inside our heart, within our self, which tells us truth. When we deny the truth in our hearts, we have taken a step toward hell. When we accept what we know as truth, when we accept what we know in our hearts, we have taken a step toward heaven.
Oh I see. Then the easiest choice would be to kill our children. If you've already sinned and know you're going to hell, then you should do parents a favour and go to the hospital and just slaughter all the newborn babies. Free ticket to heaven! They should thank you.
That mother who killed her children in the name of god wasn't crazy after all, in fact she's probably the most logical Christian there is
And can a mod please remove Doomforge's posts.
Quote:
Quote:
There may exist "forces" we've never explored yet (telekinese or telepathy for example), because we still have to examine many many things. We will learn new things faster and faster. Just go back in time 200 years. And now take 5 modern things and imagine how the people would react in 1807 if they could see them (cell phone, Airbus 380, plasma tv, computer, fax).
You probably will be accused of witchcraft by the church and get burned on a pyre..
Maybe we will find out extraterrestials visited our planet 2000 years ago and made the people believe they are some kind of "gods" (I'd rather believe in this theory than in Adam and Eve...).
That is of course possible, although that doesn't make any sense. That only moves the creation problem to another place, and not solves it.
Doesn't make any sense? LOL
Like Adam and Eve does?
Aliens are theoretically likely. God is theoretically impossible.
And god doesn't answer the question of creation either. Who created god?
If something complicated requires a creator, then the creator must be much more complex than any of it's creations, so saying 'it was god' just pushes it back a step.. Of course you can make excuses like 'no it doesn't count in this case. because i said so.' but that doesn't mean anything and will be ignored.
'once apon a time god said right heres some dust, lets make a man, coulda said let there be man, there would have been man, definately, but made him out of some dust, just cause he can.. and then went to make a woman, adam said 'gna make her out of some dust?' 'no out of one of your ribs' 'you can't do that- OUCH' and there was a woman'
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 09:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
God is theoretically impossible.
lol
Dude, I agree you can make a few points, but this is just laughable. Please precise "biblical God, completely same as described in the Bible" before making such a statement, because saying that existance of any higher power is DEFINITELY, COMPLETELY and THEORETICALLY IMPOSSIBLE is not only untrue but simply dumb
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted May 22, 2007 10:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
..because saying that existance of any higher power is DEFINITELY, COMPLETELY and THEORETICALLY IMPOSSIBLE is not only untrue but simply dumb
I would love to read an explanation of yours refering to that bold statement.
Only because you (and maybe all other humans too) lack in understanding how the world works, doesn't mean there has to be a god.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted May 23, 2007 08:48 AM |
|
|
Did I get drunk and post in this thread? Yep, it sure looks like it.
I knew what I was saying though. Although I remember having to concentrate quite a bit to put the words together. For the record, now that I'm sober, I agree completely with what I said. Although one thing could use some slight clarification, but I won't get into that now.
Quote:
That's ridiculous and you know it.
It's not ridiculous and no I don't know it. You can't compare to Santa Claus. Nobody legitimately claims that Santa exists, so there is no debate about it. If intelligent mature adults made serious claims that Santa exists, and others claimed he doesn't, then the burden of proof lies with both claimants.
When it comes to the existence or non-existence of god, the burden of proof lies with both parties. No, I don't expect someone to prove there's not a god. Nor do I expect someone to prove there is a god either. But that's the point. If you want someone to prove there is a god, it's perfectly ok for them to want you to prove there is no god. The way I see it, you can't have different rules for each side.
Bottom line is that I don't buy into the idea that something "can't" be proven. If god doesn't exist, I think it's possible to prove it, most likely by proving that god can't exist rather than directly proving god doesn't exist. If god does exist, I think it's possible to prove it.
Hmmm, now that I think about it I CAN prove god exists, but you won't like the way I do it, so I won't. But so as not to leave you hanging, I'll give you some idea. All I have to do is define god in a way that existence can be proven. In concept it's really quite simple, but trying to articulate it is not so simple. God is not an easy thing to define, that's why there's so much symbolism and metaphor associated with it.
Anyway, long story short. I don't really expect you to prove the non-existence of god as long as you don't expect me to prove the existence of it.
Quote:
Oh I see. Then the easiest choice would be to kill our children.
Wouldn't it be much easier to not have children in the first place? There are a lot of people who don't have children for that reason, both religious people and non-religious people.
Also, the idea of heaven and hell is a separate debate from the existence or non-existence of god. Actually the existence of heaven and hell are two separate debates, but it's understandable why they are lumped together. Heaven, hell and god can each exist on it's own, without the existence of the other two.
____________
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted May 23, 2007 09:06 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
That's ridiculous and you know it.
It's not ridiculous and no I don't know it. You can't compare to Santa Claus. Nobody legitimately claims that Santa exists, so there is no debate about it. If intelligent mature adults made serious claims that Santa exists, and others claimed he doesn't, then the burden of proof lies with both claimants.
How could the burden of proof lie with the person denying it?
Please explain to me how you could possibly ever prove that something is not there.
You can't.
Someone can always point out why you could be wrong.
Does that mean we should take every single conceivable thing as possible, and therefore sit down and think about every single thing conceivable (not to mention worshiping them)?
No.
Quote:
When it comes to the existence or non-existence of god, the burden of proof lies with both parties. No, I don't expect someone to prove there's not a god. Nor do I expect someone to prove there is a god either. But that's the point. If you want someone to prove there is a god, it's perfectly ok for them to want you to prove there is no god. The way I see it, you can't have different rules for each side.
It's not about rules.
If someone says 'prove the boogey man isn't real'
then the only thing you can say is 'I can't prove that because he ISN'T real.'
If you could prove something then it would have to actually be there, hence, be real. You can't prove something isn't there.
That's why you don't have to PROVE that god isn't there.
Quote:
Bottom line is that I don't buy into the idea that something "can't" be proven. If god doesn't exist, I think it's possible to prove it, most likely by proving that god can't exist rather than directly proving god doesn't exist. If god does exist, I think it's possible to prove it.
No matter what proof anyone comes up with someone can still come up with a reason why god is exempt.
That's why you can't prove it in theory, and you obviously can't prove it with evidence.
Quote:
Hmmm, now that I think about it I CAN prove god exists, but you won't like the way I do it, so I won't. But so as not to leave you hanging, I'll give you some idea. All I have to do is define god in a way that existence can be proven. In concept it's really quite simple, but trying to articulate it is not so simple. God is not an easy thing to define, that's why there's so much symbolism and metaphor associated with it.
Anyway, long story short. I don't really expect you to prove the non-existence of god as long as you don't expect me to prove the existence of it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
I'm not asking anyone to prove god. But if someone wants someone else to believe in god then they should have to prove it
Quote:
Quote:
Oh I see. Then the easiest choice would be to kill our children.
Wouldn't it be much easier to not have children in the first place? There are a lot of people who don't have children for that reason, both religious people and non-religious people.
That's a different topic altogether.
The easiest way to get our children to heaven I mean.
Many religious people are trying to convert people so that they go to heaven... It would be far more efficient just to have a baby and then chop it up straight away; 100% success rate!
What a strange religion it is, in this case 
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted May 23, 2007 10:07 AM |
|
Edited by Binabik at 10:08, 23 May 2007.
|
We aren't going to agree about proof, so consider it an impasse. Besides, my opinion is that if science ever proves the existence of god, the scientists would never use the word "god". They would probably make up some Latin based name that sounds real scientific just so they can save face.
Quote:
I'm not asking anyone to prove god. But if someone wants someone else to believe in god then they should have to prove it
I guess I'm off the hook because I don't care if you believe in god or not. You can believe in whatever you want.
And the stuff about babies. I've hardly read any of this thread, so I have no idea how the subject got started, but talking about killing babies is disgusting (i.e. not much fun).
Quote:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Even if I chose to try it, it's not something that can be done in 20 words or less. But let's put it this way, *IF* I stick around this thread (which is doubtful), I will break every rule in the book and I will completely redefine god and many other things.
Oh yea! Speaking of scientific proof. Ever hear of string theory? Very interesting possibilities along those lines. The first time I heard about it I immediately recognized it and was wondering when scientists would finally figure that out....well duh!
Yep, I love breaking the rules. Shake things up a little and see what comes out.
____________
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted May 23, 2007 10:19 AM |
|
|
Quote:
We aren't going to agree about proof, so consider it an impasse. Besides, my opinion is that if science ever proves the existence of god, the scientists would never use the word "god". They would probably make up some Latin based name that sounds real scientific just so they can save face.
lol right ok
Quote:
And the stuff about babies. I've hardly read any of this thread, so I have no idea how the subject got started, but talking about killing babies is disgusting (i.e. not much fun).
Some Christian woman killed her 3 kids thinking it was the only way to save them from hell.
Quote:
Quote:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Even if I chose to try it, it's not something that can be done in 20 words or less. But let's put it this way, *IF* I stick around this thread (which is doubtful), I will break every rule in the book and I will completely redefine god and many other things.
God = chocolate
*eats chocolate*
Therefore god exists
Or...
did
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted May 23, 2007 10:42 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Some Christian woman killed her 3 kids thinking it was the only way to save them from hell.
I don't think Jesus ever considered that approach, or even mentioned it.. it is not that simple
Evil should not be done for the sake of good
First of all, as I repeat myself, is that God, Heaven and all that stuff do NOT work as strict rules or laws, because we're not using the laws of God (as in the laws of physics) to explain a behavior.
Therefore, God's actions are based on feelings. The 'afterlife judgement' (or whatever the name is), is not based on rules that can be 'abused', but on feelings. If you don't understand me, think of art which cannot be described by some mathematical formula/physic law.
For example, if some parent has a lot of inheritance, but will only give it to his son, if the son loves him, then:
1) the son 'fakes' to love him, apparentely.. but on the inside he's only caring for the inheritance
2) the son truly loves his dad, on the inside. (feelings)
3) the son doesn't care for the inheritance and neither for his dad
In 1 the son doesn't love his dad, even if visually he appears to be doing it fake. But in truth he doesn't -- and that's what matters. Same as the quote above (with doing evil for the sake of good).
In 2 the son truly loves his dad, I think you get it.
3 was there just for some humour
----------------------
Listen here: I saw God, with feelings.. Isn't that enough proof for you? Maybe we all have a new 'sense' like I said the spiritual sense, but you fail to use/acknowledge it.. but atheists are different than blind people:
Why do blind people just listen to the people that see, and believe them? They should never consider colors as proof, right? since they cannot see them, yet they believe the people with eyes
Of course, atheists don't even want God to exist (even if He is somehow proven) because they like the idea of 'no higher power', since it will make them more 'safe' and powerful -- yeah, power is the human flaw
I recall some quote you gave from someone, which said that God is even less likely to exist than a plane formed out of a Big Bang.. As far as I know, the laws of physics and the existence of matter do not change with successive Big Bangs (therefore the chances are converging to 0 because it only happens once), and they are made in such a way as to sustain life or planes in motion. How come?
By the way, how were the laws of physics created? Surely the Big Bang is not the answer
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
