SRL Archive - Discussions & Debates

God in my opinion is not real. I am a strictly rational person and I only conclude on cold, hard evidence. I believe god does not exist. He's a figment of people's imagination for centuries.

God was, in my opinion, conjured to give people strength. Nothing gives more hope to a man than knowing a higher power is watching over them lending them strength. God was just a being, an almight, all- powerful being who was there to fill in the spots that science was not able to fill. As science is solving all of life's problem, there is becoming little need for god. What has God done? Give you a nice fancy car? A nice job with a nice rich house? Has he given us a world without Genocide? Without Oil? Without greedy people?

God does not exist. Period.

Yet I fail to understand why some poor sod would believe in god and waste their time on Sunday to go sit on pews to listen to some pastor drone on about a being whose deeds are so great, yet still not evident in the world.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg

Just a light notification, these kind of topics are very controversial and will easily turn into flaming. Might it do so i will be forced to close it. Try to stay civilised.

I'll try to minimize flaming and rants as much as I can, but its not under my power. :)

I agree with Kobra, I don't believe in god too.
I think there is more evidence for the church of the flying spaghetti monster then for god. At least the pastafarians have some good arguments why it exists.

From: markus
I agree with Kobra, I don't believe in god too.
I think there is more evidence for the church of the flying spaghetti monster then for god. At least the pastafarians have some good arguments why it exists.

Haha are these endorsements true?

http://www.venganza.org/evidence/endorsements1

That's fucking hilarious, if you get a doctorate and you endorse a crackpot stunt like this :p

Read the whole site and the reasons why they did it.
It was a protest against a decission of the Kansas schoolboard to teach intelligent design (god) at schools.

RAmen

From: VG_Kobra

Yet I fail to understand why some poor sod would believe in god and waste their time on Sunday to go sit on pews to listen to some pastor drone on about a being whose deeds are so great, yet still not evident in the world.

Why? That's easy…because they're afraid of what people would think of them if they stopped coming to church.

Well, here's a debate that has been inherent and ongoing since what..uh…the dawn of mankind?

I don't consider myself a theologian, not by any means, but I do believe devoutly in God and Jesus Christ. However, I am NOT a creationist, and do believe that God and science can co-exist, regardless of whether some believe that…"As science is solving all of life's problem, there is becoming little need for god".

I am also a very rational person however it is human nature to want to believe in things that aren't tangible. Just as science has theories of where the universe came from, is it not fair, not right for religion to theorize about the origins of the universe?

Let's examine one of the most widely proliferated scientific theories of creation: the "Big Bang". I'm no astronomer but as far as I know the theory is as follows. At some point, for some reason, an extremely dense pocket of matter and space exploded and started expanding and formed what is today our universe.

I can't really prove or disprove this unless I go back billions, maybe trillions of years. But this theory centres around one thing: there was that pocket of matter in space. Where did this matter come from? Did it simply "come into existence"? Well, that's possible, but only with the help of a higher power, God. For life to exist in our universe, many things had to occur favourably, and everything had to come from somewhere. I find it too hard to believe that this is a coincidence.

Now its all well and good for people to say that God doesn't exist, because he doesn't send angels to bring you good fortune, nor does he use his power to protect everyone from harm.

What has God done? Give you a nice fancy car? A nice job with a nice rich house? Has he given us a world without Genocide? Without Oil? Without greedy people?

No offence, but I find this attitude rather cynical. ( I hope nobody attributes this as "flame"). The only reason that there are wars and greedy people is that God gave us free will when he created us. Of course he has a plan for us, but he does not force people to accept it.

What has God ever done? Well, aside from creating us, redeeming us from sin by sacrificing his own son, and bestowing his love on us each and every day…well…I suppose not much. But if that's not good enough for you, I don't know what is.

From: A G E N T 83
No offence, but I find this attitude rather cynical. ( I hope nobody attributes this as "flame").

Nop, handled like a mature person. As long as it stays with discussions its ok …

I'd like to believe he could excist, but i'd rather live my life in my way and not the way put into example from the bible.

So put me down as a aetheist, doesn't believe in god but likes the idea

From: A G E N T 83
Well, here's a debate that has been inherent and ongoing since what..uh…the dawn of mankind?

I don't consider myself a theologian, not by any means, but I do believe devoutly in God and Jesus Christ. However, I am NOT a creationist, and do believe that God and science can co-exist, regardless of whether some believe that…"As science is solving all of life's problem, there is becoming little need for god".

I am also a very rational person however it is human nature to want to believe in things that aren't tangible. Just as science has theories of where the universe came from, is it not fair, not right for religion to theorize about the origins of the universe?

Let's examine one of the most widely proliferated scientific theories of creation: the "Big Bang". I'm no astronomer but as far as I know the theory is as follows. At some point, for some reason, an extremely dense pocket of matter and space exploded and started expanding and formed what is today our universe.

I can't really prove or disprove this unless I go back billions, maybe trillions of years. But this theory centres around one thing: there was that pocket of matter in space. Where did this matter come from? Did it simply "come into existence"? Well, that's possible, but only with the help of a higher power, God. For life to exist in our universe, many things had to occur favourably, and everything had to come from somewhere. I find it too hard to believe that this is a coincidence.

Now its all well and good for people to say that God doesn't exist, because he doesn't send angels to bring you good fortune, nor does he use his power to protect everyone from harm.



No offence, but I find this attitude rather cynical. ( I hope nobody attributes this as "flame"). The only reason that there are wars and greedy people is that God gave us free will when he created us. Of course he has a plan for us, but he does not force people to accept it.

What has God ever done? Well, aside from creating us, redeeming us from sin by sacrificing his own son, and bestowing his love on us each and every day…well…I suppose not much. But if that's not good enough for you, I don't know what is.

Agreed fellow Canadian :p Pretty much stole my thoughts and typed em up :)

From: A G E N T 83
I can't really prove or disprove this unless I go back billions, maybe trillions of years. But this theory centres around one thing: there was that pocket of matter in space. Where did this matter come from? Did it simply "come into existence"? Well, that's possible, but only with the help of a higher power, God. For life to exist in our universe, many things had to occur favourably, and everything had to come from somewhere. I find it too hard to believe that this is a coincidence.

I have a question…

You said the pocket of mass that became the big bang had to have come from somewhere, and everything has to come from something, then where did God come from? Has he/she always existed? I'm not trying to flame you, it's an honest question

the debate on wether or not god exists is no fun at all, but debating on why most leading cultures believe in god is fun:), even now, western europe + usa uses all morals from christianity so i consider them believing in a god aswell… so why is this helpfull for surviving? any ideas?

No flame…umm…taken? That's the very essence of why God must exist, he is a HIGHER power. Christians call these things that nobody can understand "sacred mysteries", only God in him omniscience can know how. God was not created, so it's hard for anyone to justify or explain where He came from. Good question though, you've stumped me.

From: lolpie
Why? That's easy…because they're afraid of what people would think of them if they stopped coming to church.

Exactly so what that means is that society has set a standard for people to follow. If you do not believe in god you'll be deemed an outcast. This is what happens in America, incase you have not noticed, politics in America is very much like a Church. All the presidents so far have been Christian, one of them was a Catholic, the other, Protestants. Most recently Bush has vetoed a bill fo Stem Cells, yet another example of a Bible Belt Lobbyist. God is mythical, and yet he is controlling most governments and most aspects of our modern day life.
Man is not left to think for himself anymore. Everything he does must bind to the Holy Bible, because that 2000 year old book apparently teaches the right way to do things.

God, Religion, all these things when the stream into politics and brainwash people. Terrorism (Islamic factions) and Religious Wars (Palestine and Isreal) commence.

From: A G E N T 83

I don't consider myself a theologian, not by any means, but I do believe devoutly in God and Jesus Christ. However, I am NOT a creationist, and do believe that God and science can co-exist, regardless of whether some believe that…"As science is solving all of life's problem, there is becoming little need for god".

This coming from a Christian is noble. However some of your fellow Christians are against scientific progress. For example as I noted above, Stem Cell research. First the Christian Coalition in America used fetuses as an example as crime against humanity so we stopped. Then we started using the Umbilical Cords as they contained Stem Cells as well. And what does Bush (The Bible Belt Lobbyist) do? He vetoes the bill. Come up with an explanation for that.

Science and God in my opinion cannot co-exist because all the mysteries and answers God used to represent are being proven by Science. We started with the Heliocentric Model and we are still answering most of life's question. God will solely become a personal thing. If people still manage to believe in him then it will be to comfort them emotionally or mentally. Something which Science will never be able to do without drugs.

From: A G E N T 83

I am also a very rational person however it is human nature to want to believe in things that aren't tangible. Just as science has theories of where the universe came from, is it not fair, not right for religion to theorize about the origins of the universe?

Absolutely, anyone can theorize about anything. But the fact that the Universe came about through the Big Bang or some other Cataclysmic force is much more feasible than the theory of Genesis where the idea is *Poof* there it is. As technology advances we are able to see and solve more things. Idk if you have heard but there is a large project going on in Geneva with something called a LHC- LArge Hadron Collider, the project aims to answer the question of creation by creating life, many universes in one small area. Read an overview here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article642339.ece

One more way Science is trying to answer life's questions.

From: A G E N T 83

Let's examine one of the most widely proliferated scientific theories of creation: the "Big Bang". I'm no astronomer but as far as I know the theory is as follows. At some point, for some reason, an extremely dense pocket of matter and space exploded and started expanding and formed what is today our universe.

I can't really prove or disprove this unless I go back billions, maybe trillions of years. But this theory centres around one thing: there was that pocket of matter in space. Where did this matter come from? Did it simply "come into existence"? Well, that's possible, but only with the help of a higher power, God. For life to exist in our universe, many things had to occur favourably, and everything had to come from somewhere. I find it too hard to believe that this is a coincidence.

Right now you may be a skeptic but once again read this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article642339.ece

When the project is ready and the LHC is fired up the concluding evidence will make a believe out of you.

From: A G E N T 83

Now its all well and good for people to say that God doesn't exist, because he doesn't send angels to bring you good fortune, nor does he use his power to protect everyone from harm.

It's all well to say God doesn't exist because there is no proof, forget the damn Angels or Messiahs or w/e. Is there a slight chance or even whiff of his existence? There is none, thats why its so hard to believe. It's like saying I saw Santa Clause, everyone knows thats a lie, but people still believe in Jesus. Who just Santa Clause has not been seen.

From: A G E N T 83

No offence, but I find this attitude rather cynical. ( I hope nobody attributes this as "flame"). The only reason that there are wars and greedy people is that God gave us free will when he created us. Of course he has a plan for us, but he does not force people to accept it.

There is no proof that god created us, therefore its not a valid conclusion. I do agree with you that humans are the fault. Humans have greed, ego and desires built into them, which creates such Chaos, but my statement was if God is so kind and powerful, why hasn't he stopped it? Maybe because there is no such thing as god.

From: A G E N T 83

What has God ever done? Well, aside from creating us, redeeming us from sin by sacrificing his own son, and bestowing his love on us each and every day…well…I suppose not much. But if that's not good enough for you, I don't know what is.

All those things are fictitious, the fact the he reincarnated is absurd, I can't believe people still believe in it. You argue good but all your statements are unfounded, You cannot build a building without a foundation, because if you do it comes crumbling down.

I am glad to see a thread on the matter of religion considering most threads up to this have had something to say on the matter.

One thing I'd have to say is not to blindly follow Science or Religion and keep an open mind.

Science is forever changing, and I think it would be a bit naive to think that we are able to know everything at this point. From the world being flat to theories on how the moon formed and global warming.

On Religion many cultures used Gods for things they have didn't understand. We still debate our purpose on life, we still don't know much about the possibility of an after life, and why are we who we are considering all the other creatures on this planet.

I've heard about the Large Hadron Colliders and other such devices of science before; likewise, I have heard of the theory that by descending into certain particles, it could be that you might discover another universe, likewise, we may be encapsulated in a particle somewhere.

From my worthy opponent who has criticised my arguments for being groundless, I think that arguing on the basis of results that we have yet to receive is a bit dodgy, however, I'll play along.

(P.S. You linked to an article about the Higgs boson, purported creator of mass "fields", don't know if that has to do with universe-within-universe).

As is the mark of any gifted debater, you have eloquently deconstructed my rash arguments and nicely glossed or skipped over the more significant ones. Let me return to one of my more important arguments.

Now all this talk about bosons, quarks, mesons, leptons, I-can-go-on-and-ons ( :P ) is very interesting, and a very controversial theory. Problem for those who believe that God does not exist is that there has to be that one particle at the top of the "chain", if you will, that spawned all of the smaller universes inside of it. Where did it come from? Why was it created? There has to have been something or someone that was there before it to have created it. We're left with few options on how to explain this miraculous appearance: namely, a higher power-God.

Now this may be hard to conceive or explain; how can God always have existed, if he didn't come into existence, how can he always have existed? No living person knows, nor will any living person ever know.

As much as I do believe in many scientific facts and am open to many theories, including the aforementioned, there is always that that one thing that roots my belief that God must exist. For whichever particle, or pocket of matter, or whatever science may make up in the future, it has to have come from somewhere. God.

Onwards to your arguments, I'll kick it off with your Santa Clause-Jesus analogy. Unlike Santa, Jesus was not a corporate invention. It's easy enough to discredit the Bible as falsehood or storytelling, but aside from Christians who believe in him in faith, the Jews historically acknowledge him as a prophet, although they do not believe in his divinity.

All those things are fictitious, the fact the he reincarnated is absurd, I can't believe people still believe in it.

Now, if you met a person at random on the street at random and struck up a conversation with them (this is somewhat absurd), you could tell them that two groups of people believed that a) in the air around them, amongst the molecules, inside the atom, if they looked closely enough they would find a universe, and b)2000 years ago a man was crucified, died, and was resurrected from the dead, they would probably say that both are about equally likely. Is it really that "absurd"?

Enough of that. To Vicious:

I am glad to see a thread on the matter of religion considering most threads up to this have had something to say on the matter.

One thing I'd have to say is not to blindly follow Science or Religion and keep an open mind.

Science is forever changing, and I think it would be a bit naive to think that we are able to know everything at this point. From the world being flat to theories on how the moon formed and global warming.

On Religion many cultures used Gods for things they have didn't understand. We still debate our purpose on life, we still don't know much about the possibility of an after life, and why are we who we are considering all the other creatures on this planet.

I agree completely. There is a lot we don't know about God and science. They should be kept in balance.

From: A G E N T 83
Onwards to your arguments, I'll kick it off with your Santa Clause-Jesus analogy. Unlike Santa, Jesus was not a corporate invention. It's easy enough to discredit the Bible as falsehood or storytelling, but aside from Christians who believe in him in faith, the Jews historically acknowledge him as a prophet, although they do not believe in his divinity.

Actually Santa was a real person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa#Ancient_Christian_origins

The only reason he's still around now, though, is money hungry corporations (okay, that's a little exaggerated, but you get the point, right?)

Agnostic. I want solid proof. I might not totally believe in God, but I do still have morals. I don't mind that Bush vetoed the bill against embryonic stem cells, as it technically is killing a human life. I don't agree with abortion, as it's basically the same thing.

I could care less about the whole gay rights thing. If they want to be married, then let them be. It's really a violation of the Constitution if they are not allowed.

I DO support religion though. It gives people morals and values. It helps keep kids in line. Those who have attended both private(Christian) schools and public schools should be able to attest to that.

From: crossback7
…I don't mind that Bush vetoed the bill against embryonic stem cells, as it technically is killing a human life. I don't agree with abortion, as it's basically the same thing.

If a child were to be born to an underage woman, who was raped by her father and did not want to have the child, shouldn't she be allowed to choose not to have it? Not to mention certain abortions are given before any actual life has began to form, or something along the lines of that. And what about the more recent thing Bush did? I forget what it's called, but it basically made it so that if a pregnant women is dieing, and if they were to take the baby out early she would live, but the baby would die, they are not allowed to do so. They must allow both her and the baby to die. So, abortion should be up to the woman, not the government. The government shouldn't be able to tell her what to do with her body. And as for stem cell research, well if people were allowed to get abortions already, then why not put it to good use?

Sorry if any of this sounds like flaming..But i just hate Bush so much :fiery:

As for me, i don't know which one i'd be classified as. I believe in God and Jesus, but i don't really follow any church or find myself agreeing with them on most issues. Every religion has such large flaws in it (and i don't mean in the ideas they preach, but in the way that they preach them) that i simply can't say which one i am. So i dunno what that classifies as, but if it's one of the ones on the poll lemme know and i'll vote it :p

But i can say, that following anything blindly will not end well. I personally can't stand people who a blindly religious, but that applies elsewhere than only religion.

From: lolpie
Actually Santa was a real person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa#Ancient_Christian_origins

Ofcourse I'm real!

There are parts of religion I think are good and parts I think are bad.

good:

• give people morals
• tells people how to live their lives
• gives some kind of meaning in life
• hope

bad:

• people seem to throw their morals out the window when it comes to killing/hating people of other religions
• i think most of religion is too arbitrary. i dont think anything should change on a whim or because its popular (burning of witches, books of the bible, etc)
• people think religious people are more moral than non-religious people
• people can be blind/ignorant

you shouldnt pull in facts when debating about religion; the core of religion is faith and belief, and that doesnt require proof

anybody hear of joseph campbell? i think his ideas about the role of mythology in society (how you relate yourself to the universe) are pretty good

basically, whatever can answer your questions is good for you, and other people should respect that

no offence but why did u make this thread. ur first post clearly says that GOD IS NOT REAL….. you really think every christian who has held the belief for all their life that God is real will suddenly go "ok he's right. goodbye God" I mean really…..

I believe in God and I doubt you could ever give me enough evidence to prove me wrong.

In religion there is flaws, in Science there are flaws I believe that there will never be a stage in the time of this world that everyone will be under one roof about whether God exists or not, unless of course Jesus returns….

I respect what you think, and hope you'll respect what I and many others think. Please don't try and tell us what's right and wrong cos there really isn't any point. Hope I don't seem to flamey it's just I get this A LOT! the funny thing is they all complain about christians telling them that God is the only way and how unfair that is, the next minute they're doing their best to tell me that God has got to be the most lamest idea ever.

anyways i hope some more interesting points come up in this thread that's all i find these things useful for. soz i'm not making much sense today, i have trouble with sentence structure apparently >.<

I wish I could have been bothered to write same thing…

From: rkroxpunk
no offence but why did u make this thread. ur first post clearly says that GOD IS NOT REAL….. you really think every christian who has held the belief for all their life that God is real will suddenly go "ok he's right. goodbye God" I mean really…..

That's his belief though. He's not forcing his belief on anyone or telling anyone to abandon theirs, he's debating the matter. I belief debating is the best way to bring out all aspects and it is good to hear different viewpoints.

I DO NOT want to insult anyone or anything by(NOTE ITS MY OPINION):
I DONT BELIEVE IN GOD
I DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS
I HATE GOD
I HATE JESUS
NONE OF THEM EXISTS

meh i guess u did use IMO a few times which is all good but still i kinda assumed that when u said

God does not exist. Period.

you were telling us all he doesn't exist, no doubt about it. anywayz carry on…

From: n3ss3s
I DO NOT want to insult anyone or anything by(NOTE ITS MY OPINION):
I DONT BELIEVE IN GOD
I DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS
I HATE GOD
I HATE JESUS
NONE OF THEM EXISTS

How can you hate something that you don't believe in?
Your contradicting yourself there buddy :P
By saying you hate God you are acknowledging that he exists, you just dont like him :)

From: neG
How can you hate something that you don't believe in?
Your contradicting yourself there buddy :P
By saying you hate God you are acknowledging that he exists, you just dont like him :)

Thats just being a smarty pants … smarty pants.

From: lolpie
Actually Santa was a real person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa#Ancient_Christian_origins

No, Saint Nicholas, the bishop, was a real person. He didn't zip-line down peoples' chimneys and chuck gifts at them, he just…was a bishop.

It's like writing a book with a guy named Stephen (my name :P) in it then saying he's real because I'm real.

From: crossback7
I don't mind that Bush vetoed the bill against embryonic stem cells, as it technically is killing a human life. I don't agree with abortion, as it's basically the same thing.

Uh…ES (embryonic stem) cells and abortion are COMPLETELY different. In abortion, you kill a deformed, unhuman thing that doesn't even resemble a baby. ES stem cells are completely different because they aren't anything yet…only about 100-150 cells in a ball called a blastocyte. I would rather have ES cell research going on because it actually benefits us. However I don't have a problem with abortion because it's the mother's choice if she wants to kill it. She gave birth to it, she should decide.

From: Sumilion
Thats just being a smarty pants … smarty pants.

Well yes but Smarties taste great and pants keep me warm! Moving back onto topic… NeG was right, regardless of how hair-splitting/nit-picking his logic was. This topic is probably doomed to have an ongoing debate of three people:

1) The science can explain everything crowd. (vg_cobra)
2) The God can explain everything crowd. (me)
3) The moderates who the other two ignore xD (Vicious,masquerader).

From: A G E N T 83
No, Saint Nicholas, the bishop, was a real person. He didn't zip-line down peoples' chimneys and chuck gifts at them, he just…was a bishop.

It's like writing a book with a guy named Stephen (my name :P) in it then saying he's real because I'm real.

actually he did put presents in peoples shoes :p or it might have only been one family. anyways i know he did it..

Before reading this post let me make sure you know lol. This is not flaming. Flaming would be sumthing much worse. I am simply expressing my opinion. If this is not flaming…..

I DONT BELIEVE IN GOD
I DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS
I HATE GOD
I HATE JESUS
NONE OF THEM EXISTS

…..by N3ss3s then this surely isnt :) It's all in good fun to me

God was just a being, an almight, all- powerful being who was there to fill in the spots that science was not able to fill. As science is solving all of life's problem, there is becoming little need for god. What has God done? Give you a nice fancy car? A nice job with a nice rich house? Has he given us a world without Genocide? Without Oil? Without greedy people?

lmao at this bro. "What has science done for you. Give you a nice fancy car? A nice job with a nice rich house? Has it given us a world without Genocide? Without Oil? Without greedy people?" wait…wait… am i kewl now? Science has done nothing and that isnt even what God is supposed to do. Seriously i do my homework on science's part of the story(not just because i take science in class but because i really want to know what could they possibly be thinking. But what ticks me off is that the evoulutionists or watever you are dont do theirs. Actually ready the stories about God (I for one am Christian so i would say read the Bible in Genesis) but im sure any other religious person would at least say learn something about the stories. God is not a magical genie waiting to do your every wim and give you anthing you want lol.

I DO NOT want to insult anyone or anything by(NOTE ITS MY OPINION):
I DONT BELIEVE IN GOD
I DONT BELIEVE IN JESUS
I HATE GOD
I HATE JESUS
NONE OF THEM EXISTS

sigh, this is what some Americans bring to the tables these days(assuming you are American). Unthoughout, uneducated, unresearched, prolly makes F's in school, worthless piece of crap posts like this. (SORRY I DID NOT WANT TO INSULT YOU OR ANYTHING, BUT ITS MY OPINION)

drink your ovaltine bizatch.

From: masquerader
There are parts of religion I think are good and parts I think are bad.

good:

• give people morals
• tells people how to live their lives
• gives some kind of meaning in life
• hope

bad:

• people seem to throw their morals out the window when it comes to killing/hating people of other religions
• i think most of religion is too arbitrary. i dont think anything should change on a whim or because its popular (burning of witches, books of the bible, etc)
• people think religious people are more moral than non-religious people
• people can be blind/ignorant

you shouldnt pull in facts when debating about religion; the core of religion is faith and belief, and that doesnt require proof

anybody hear of joseph campbell? i think his ideas about the role of mythology in society (how you relate yourself to the universe) are pretty good

basically, whatever can answer your questions is good for you, and other people should respect that

You know what Masquerador(or however you spell it). Your post actually made me smile. Thats because 98 % of it is well thought out and true (he does not discuss what is right and wrong, he discusses the concept of religion.) The only thing that bothered me is this

people think religious people are more moral than non-religious people

Why not? For the most part , they are. The young man who lives in L.A. and believes in some sort of "God" is less likely to rob, kill, rape someone than the young man who lives in L.A. who doesnt. Its a fact of life. I live in Memphis so i personally see all the time people who kill people on the news. And i guarentee not one of the is religious (unless they are not correct in their religion (such as the muslims((or whoever they were)) who flew into the twin towers. Now they were just crazy lol).

@pwnzor, Right on. :) Ovaltine pwns all.

@rkrockpun, you know he did it? Of course…was it the rope in the living room, or the poison in the parlour? :P :P
FINE, maybe he did. However, Bishop-distributing-confections-and-gifts-at-random-to-one-family<>Big-fat-guy-in-red-suit-flying-in-sled-powered-by-ungulates-distributing-presents-to-billions-of-people.

I'm agnostic.

Well shoot, i typed out my entire arguement it took like an hour, then my family/friends came in and screwed it up so now it got deleted. BTW im in North Carolina right now and im leaving on my plane ride in a few hours so i have to pack. I will type it all out again when i get home lol.

I don't like these debates…

People have the right to believe what ever they want, I don't think debating about it is 'fun'.

From: pwnaz0r

sigh, this is what some Americans bring to the tables these days(assuming you are American). Unthoughout, uneducated, unresearched, prolly makes F's in school, worthless piece of crap posts like this. (SORRY I DID NOT WANT TO INSULT YOU OR ANYTHING, BUT ITS MY OPINION)

Your opinion is that if he were American, that meant he didn't think through what he said and he is uneducated? Not only that, but you assume he's American because what you think he said is stupid? Be that it is your opinion, that's just plain..i dunno. Unfair? Kind of like saying "I HATE YOU, but no offense intended." Except to a group of people. But then again, that's somewhere else, and an entirely different topic, so disregard this post. And yes, i'm an American. California to be specific. Hell, i'll even give you that at least half of all Americans are how you described them, but that doesn't make it fair to assume all the ones you encounter are.

Also, i'm gonna try not to come back to this thread ;) Doesn't seem like anything good will come of it

From: A G E N T 83
No, Saint Nicholas, the bishop, was a real person. He didn't zip-line down peoples' chimneys and chuck gifts at them, he just…was a bishop.

It's like writing a book with a guy named Stephen (my name :P) in it then saying he's real because I'm real.

Actually he did give out gifts to poor children

sigh, this is what some Americans bring to the tables these days(assuming you are American). Unthoughout, uneducated, unresearched, prolly makes F's in school, worthless piece of crap posts like this. (SORRY I DID NOT WANT TO INSULT YOU OR ANYTHING, BUT ITS MY OPINION)

Are you retarded? People don't sit at dinner and talk about if God is real or not. That's what scientists and philosophers do. That's like saying "OMG, he's British, so he must not bathe or brush his teeth!" <- lots of people think that :D

From: pwnaz0r

You know what Masquerador(or however you spell it). Your post actually made me smile. Thats because 98 % of it is well thought out and true (he does not discuss what is right and wrong, he discusses the concept of religion.) The only thing that bothered me is this

people think religious people are more moral than non-religious people

Why not? For the most part , they are. The young man who lives in L.A. and believes in some sort of "God" is less likely to rob, kill, rape someone than the young man who lives in L.A. who doesnt. Its a fact of life. I live in Memphis so i personally see all the time people who kill people on the news. And i guarentee not one of the is religious (unless they are not correct in their religion (such as the muslims((or whoever they were)) who flew into the twin towers. Now they were just crazy lol).

my reply is in the form of another quote, haha
i read this in an interview in discover magazine and it made me think
lisa randall

So does your science leave space for untestable faith? Do you believe in God?

There's room there, and it could go either way. Faith just doesn't have anything to do with what I'm doing as a scientist. It's nice if you can believe in God, because then you see more of a purpose in things. Even if you don't, though, it doesn't mean that there's no purpose. It doesn't mean that there's no goodness. I think that there's a virtue in being good in and of itself. I think that one can work with the world we have. So I probably don't believe in God. I think it's a problem that people are considered immoral if they're not religious. That's just not true. This might earn me some enemies, but in some ways they may be even more moral. If you do something for a religious reason, you do it because you'll be rewarded in an afterlife or in this world. That's not quite as good as something you do for purely generous reasons.

also from the same article that might interest people:

Will physics ever be able to tackle the biggest questions—for instance, why does the universe even bother to exist?

Science is not religion. We're not going to be able to answer the "why" questions. But when you put together all of what we know about the universe, it fits together amazingly well.

…..

This sounds like your formula for keeping science and religion from fighting with each other.

A lot of scientists take the Stephen Jay Gould approach: Religion asks questions about morals, whereas science just asks questions about the natural world. But when people try to use religion to address the natural world, science pushes back on it, and religion has to accommodate the results. Beliefs can be permanent, but beliefs can also be flexible. Personally, if I find out my belief is wrong, I change my mind. I think that's a good way to live.

edit: btw, im american:)

Wow well lol. Being American wasnt even part of the arguement so get off it lol. I myself am American it was supposed to be discriminating or anything lol

BTW

Hell, i'll even give you that at least half of all Americans are how you described them, but that doesn't make it fair to assume all the ones you encounter are.

thats one of my points exactly if you read it thoroughly.

I is a amerikan two. I am is sota stoopid somtimes. . .Stop stereotyping.

@ New to Autoing - I think that abortion is still morally wrong, as it's killing something that will become a human. And your case about the whole father raping daughter thing is different. Adoption anyone??

I must admit, I don't know a whole lot about embryonic stem cell research. But if you have to kill an embryo, which will become a human, I still believe it is wrong. Unless the embryos are going to be destroyed anyways, I don't endorse it.

From: crossback7
And your case about the whole father raping daughter thing is different. Adoption anyone??

If you're saying that if a father raped his daughter and the baby should be put up for adoption…There are so many things wrong with that.

From: A G E N T 83
I've heard about the Large Hadron Colliders and other such devices of science before; likewise, I have heard of the theory that by descending into certain particles, it could be that you might discover another universe, likewise, we may be encapsulated in a particle somewhere.

From my worthy opponent who has criticised my arguments for being groundless, I think that arguing on the basis of results that we have yet to receive is a bit dodgy, however, I'll play along.

(P.S. You linked to an article about the Higgs boson, purported creator of mass "fields", don't know if that has to do with universe-within-universe).

As is the mark of any gifted debater, you have eloquently deconstructed my rash arguments and nicely glossed or skipped over the more significant ones. Let me return to one of my more important arguments.

Now all this talk about bosons, quarks, mesons, leptons, I-can-go-on-and-ons ( :P ) is very interesting, and a very controversial theory. Problem for those who believe that God does not exist is that there has to be that one particle at the top of the "chain", if you will, that spawned all of the smaller universes inside of it. Where did it come from? Why was it created? There has to have been something or someone that was there before it to have created it. We're left with few options on how to explain this miraculous appearance: namely, a higher power-God.

Now this may be hard to conceive or explain; how can God always have existed, if he didn't come into existence, how can he always have existed? No living person knows, nor will any living person ever know.

As much as I do believe in many scientific facts and am open to many theories, including the aforementioned, there is always that that one thing that roots my belief that God must exist. For whichever particle, or pocket of matter, or whatever science may make up in the future, it has to have come from somewhere. God.

Onwards to your arguments, I'll kick it off with your Santa Clause-Jesus analogy. Unlike Santa, Jesus was not a corporate invention. It's easy enough to discredit the Bible as falsehood or storytelling, but aside from Christians who believe in him in faith, the Jews historically acknowledge him as a prophet, although they do not believe in his divinity.


Now, if you met a person at random on the street at random and struck up a conversation with them (this is somewhat absurd), you could tell them that two groups of people believed that a) in the air around them, amongst the molecules, inside the atom, if they looked closely enough they would find a universe, and b)2000 years ago a man was crucified, died, and was resurrected from the dead, they would probably say that both are about equally likely. Is it really that "absurd"?

Your arguements are groundless, I don't see any logic or proof in any of those statements. God is just a belief, a faith. Now I'll let you believe any fairy tale you want but I'm not going to acknowledge a statement which utilizes a non-existent being as a reason or in most cases, excuse. Show me proof, then we'll talk.

Now about the Alpha particle, I don't see why it couldn't just have existed at the beginning of time. Or more aptly called Time Zero. I don't see why God has to be labeled as the maker of that particle. And you said that when you ask two people on the street with two different viewpoints both would say they are fathomable. I disagree, if you take two non biased people and asked them, the scientific method would seem more plausible. Why? Which makes more sense? The idea that a being which has not revealed itself has *poof* created something is much less fathomable than the idea that the particle has existed since the beginning of time and we use equations, formulas, proofs, theorems to prove every single thing that has happened since then. ( This is not totally true as of now but after the LHC project it will be confirmed )

Religion has done nothing but place God as the label, no explanation, no description. Kept people in the dark and leashed them like dogs. Ever since the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution people have been getting wise to the church so it had to use more subtle tactics such as brainwashing. No longer can they kill and go on Crusades in the name of the Church.

The only good thing Religion is good for is morals. However, Religion is dying, Church attendance is visibly slow and fewer people are entering the Clergy.

You are free to believe anything you want, but statements with no proof are not going to be taken seriously. Once again I respect people's beliefs and I am sorry if I came on too hard by saying "God does not exist. Period", God may or may not exist in your book. But all I am asking is for people to prove it to me.

From: pwnaz0r

lmao at this bro. "What has science done for you. Give you a nice fancy car? A nice job with a nice rich house? Has it given us a world without Genocide? Without Oil? Without greedy people?" wait…wait… am i kewl now? Science has done nothing and that isnt even what God is supposed to do. Seriously i do my homework on science's part of the story(not just because i take science in class but because i really want to know what could they possibly be thinking. But what ticks me off is that the evoulutionists or watever you are dont do theirs. Actually ready the stories about God (I for one am Christian so i would say read the Bible in Genesis) but im sure any other religious person would at least say learn something about the stories. God is not a magical genie waiting to do your every wim and give you anthing you want lol.

I think I should have broken it down a little better for the better understand of people like you.

Yes Science has given me a car, a nice home and medicines to cure myself. I have to work for it and earn it. Last I checked God did not invent the motor engine, the conveyor belt, or any medical breakthroughs. All those things you talked about are morals. I'm cool with that, morals are good. But its not cool when Religion starts poking its head into areas where it does not belong.

@ Agent, BTW I am not saying Science has the answers to everything, some things you just can't explain and are not meant to be explained. However, Science has produced more answers and attached with it is proof, cold hard proof. Religion has also produced answers and does not come with proof and gathers its followers solely on faith and tales of prophecies and doom.

Why did it have to be the FATHER and his daughter? That just makes me feel sick. I do believe that there are drugs and whatnot that a person can take that destroy the egg and sperm before they ever combine, thus not destroying a life.

From: crossback7
I is a amerikan two. I am is sota stoopid somtimes. . .Stop stereotyping.

@ New to Autoing - I think that abortion is still morally wrong, as it's killing something that will become a human. And your case about the whole father raping daughter thing is different. Adoption anyone??

I must admit, I don't know a whole lot about embryonic stem cell research. But if you have to kill an embryo, which will become a human, I still believe it is wrong. Unless the embryos are going to be destroyed anyways, I don't endorse it.

Yes, I agree with Vicious on the adoption thing….ugh.

As to stem cell research, in past, they basically created a zygote (fertilized egg) which developed into a blastocyst. Since it was not yet technically an embryo, scientists argued that it was not a human life. It was very contentious nonetheless.

However in recent years, they have developed a way of taking stem cells from the umbilical cord which is useless after the child is born. Many countries support this, I think, with the notable exception of the united states, or, rather, good old George Dub-ya.

And would everyone PLEASE stop ripping on Americans? Sure, as a people we may not like them, but as individuals, they're really not bad. :)

From: VG_Kobra
Your arguements are groundless, I don't see any logic or proof in any of those statements. God is just a belief, a faith. Now I'll let you believe any fairy tale you want but I'm not going to acknowledge a statement which utilizes a non-existent being as a reason or in most cases, excuse. Show me proof, then we'll talk.

Now about the Alpha particle, I don't see why it couldn't just have existed at the beginning of time. Or more aptly called Time Zero. I don't see why God has to be labeled as the maker of that particle. And you said that when you ask two people on the street with two different viewpoints both would say they are fathomable. I disagree, if you take two non biased people and asked them, the scientific method would seem more plausible. Why? Which makes more sense? The idea that a being which has not revealed itself has *poof* created something is much less fathomable than the idea that the particle has existed since the beginning of time and we use equations, formulas, proofs, theorems to prove every single thing that has happened since then. ( This is not totally true as of now but after the LHC project it will be confirmed )

Religion has done nothing but place God as the label, no explanation, no description. Kept people in the dark and leashed them like dogs. Ever since the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution people have been getting wise to the church so it had to use more subtle tactics such as brainwashing. No longer can they kill and go on Crusades in the name of the Church.

The only good thing Religion is good for is morals. However, Religion is dying, Church attendance is visibly slow and fewer people are entering the Clergy.

You are free to believe anything you want, but statements with no proof are not going to be taken seriously. Once again I respect people's beliefs and I am sorry if I came on too hard by saying "God does not exist. Period", God may or may not exist in your book. But all I am asking is for people to prove it to me.

You posted as I was posting on a different train of thought. :P
I'm afraid we're both as equally stubborn and determined as the other. Now, if you insist on dredging out the old arguments again, fine. Furthermore, if you insist on dragging things in that are unrelated, such as Church policies, fine.

"The Church"<>God. Nor is it so that the Church brainwashes people. You could argue two sides of a coin; if the Church brainwashed people (it does not) why would attendance be "dwindling"? Church attendance, my friend, is dwindling not because people think Science>God, it is because of today's culture. Now I'm not going to get into gritty detail but people would rather do certain things which the Church's teachings forbid. The church does not brainwash people, people go to Church because they believe in God.

Now you've repeatedly called my arguments unfounded. For a man whose main argument centers around the results of a device that is currently nothing much more than a big hole in the ground somewhere in Western Europe, I think that's pretty audacious.

What could this wonderful machine solve anyways? Sure, it can tell us how our universe works, but not why. Enter God, or, if you so choose, "Alpha Particle".

Now about the Alpha particle, I don't see why it couldn't just have existed at the beginning of time.

You are free to believe anything you want, but statements with no proof are not going to be taken seriously.

Oh, won't they? You go back in time billions of years and find me the Alpha Particle, and I'll go right back with you and find you God.

From: A G E N T 83
You posted as I was posting on a different train of thought. :P
I'm afraid we're both as equally stubborn and determined as the other. Now, if you insist on dredging out the old arguments again, fine. Furthermore, if you insist on dragging things in that are unrelated, such as Church policies, fine.

"The Church"<>God. Nor is it so that the Church brainwashes people. You could argue two sides of a coin; if the Church brainwashed people (it does not) why would attendance be "dwindling"? Church attendance, my friend, is dwindling not because people think Science>God, it is because of today's culture. Now I'm not going to get into gritty detail but people would rather do certain things which the Church's teachings forbid. The church does not brainwash people, people go to Church because they believe in God.

Now you've repeatedly called my arguments unfounded. For a man whose main argument centers around the results of a device that is currently nothing much more than a big hole in the ground somewhere in Western Europe, I think that's pretty audacious.

What could this wonderful machine solve anyways? Sure, it can tell us how our universe works, but not why. Enter God, or, if you so choose, "Alpha Particle".





Oh, won't they? You go back in time billions of years and find me the Alpha Particle, and I'll go right back with you and find you God.

Church = God because the Church represents God. The Church does brainwash people, in my opinion, all it does is try and get more converts. From what I can see it goes to poverty ridden areas and converts the groups by the masses. Examples are Africa, India and South America. I have atleast 1 evangelist come knocking to my house and and they keep telling me do I want to be saved? WTF?

Haha so true right? A big hole worth multi billion dollars which is going to shake the very foundation on which we stand on today.

Science - So far cannot prove the Alpha Particle but has proved everything else thoroughly since then.

Religion - So far has labeled the Alpha Particle as a work of god and since then has labeled everything else the work of god.

I don't know about you but if you use logic I don't think its hard to see which one is more dependable for answers.

Get real. Once again you smartly dodge my question of showing me God. You say all this is the work of God, where is he? Any evidence? Proof. There is no proof unless your opinion on God is that it's a particle or mass amount of energy.

From: VG_Kobra
Church = God because the Church represents God.

Get real. Once again you smartly dodge my question of showing me God. You say all this is the work of God, where is he? Any evidence? Proof. There is no proof unless your opinion on God is that it's a particle or mass amount of energy.

How is the Church God? The Church represents Him/Her, but that doesn't make the Church God. That's like saying Microsoft = computers, even though Microsoft pretty much makes software, not hardware.

Also, as you said, belief in God is just that, belief and faith. The definition of those 2 things are something that's spiritual, not rational. You can't define or prove spirituality.

From: lolpie
How is the Church God? The Church represents Him/Her, but that doesn't make the Church God. That's like saying Microsoft = computers, even though Microsoft pretty much makes software, not hardware.

Also, as you said, belief in God is just that, belief and faith. The definition of those 2 things are something that's spiritual, not rational. You can't define or prove spirituality.

Well this is how the world works, whatever you represent, has its reputation on the line with you. You fuck up, its reputation goes down. It's similar with Church and God.

Absolutely, Faith and Belief cannot be defined but that also means you cannot place all of the world's meanings and definitions on that which cannot be defined.

From: VG_Kobra
Absolutely, Faith and Belief cannot be defined but that also means you cannot place all of the world's meanings and definitions on that which cannot be defined.

Why not? Btw, I'm Atheist

all of you are totally missing the point, continuing to post about santa clause, incest and radioactive decay

*sigh*… i think ive given up on trying to steer this topic in a thoughtful direction. it doesnt matter because nobody reads my posts anyway (i dont think anybody here truly reads any posts, or puts any thought in writing them for that matter)

oh well, good luck

From: masquerader
all of you are totally missing the point, continuing to post about santa clause, incest and radioactive decay

*sigh*… i think ive given up on trying to steer this topic in a thoughtful direction. it doesnt matter because nobody reads my posts anyway (i dont think anybody here truly reads any posts, or puts any thought in writing them for that matter)

oh well, good luck

Yeah, seriously. I only put that part in there to make it seem as horrible as possible so that those who view it as okay when it's not multiple sins in itself would get the point.

From: Vicious

From: crossback7

And your case about the whole father raping daughter thing is different. Adoption anyone??

If you're saying that if a father raped his daughter and the baby should be put up for adoption…There are so many things wrong with that.

Yeah, honestly. Growing up without parents would be hard enough, let alone something like that. Not to mention it could lead to health problems (i think)..

If you're against abortions, i disagree with you, but then i can understand what makes you be against stem cell research. Mainly because you're not looking at it as "if they're already gonna have an abortion, then why not help find the cure for cancer" as i am. (just an example, i dunno specifically what could be done with the research)

From: A G E N T 83
if the Church brainwashed people (it does not) why would attendance be "dwindling"?

Maybe because people are getting tired of being brainwashed? :p In my opinion it's in between, the church brainwashes people or the parents do by not really giving them a choice in religion. Also, (somewhat offtopic) isn't being baptized supposed to be to cleanse your soul of sins? So then how come babies are baptized? Are they sinning by being born, or sinning in the womb, or something..? (If i'm wrong on what i just said, then disregard it)

Once more going back to abortions (sorry, it just came to my mind) what about those who just dump their babies in dumpsters? (Horrible I know, but it has happened. Multiple times. I hear it on the news quite frequently. "Another baby found in an abandoned dumpster.."). Wouldn't an abortion be better? Instead of having a baby be born to die shortly after (Referring to the ones not found) it could not have to go through any of it, and also contribute to advancements in medicine and science.

It's funny, i find myself agreeing a little bit with VG_Kobra and a little bit with A G E N T 83. Though i think the person i share the most views with is lolpie :p (or at least from what i can see..)

ya the problem with religious topics is that everyone gets so caught up in them they post massives post meaning icbf reading them :D

Rkroxpunk, are you God damn psychic. I was thinking just the same thing.

From: NewToAutoing
Once more going back to abortions (sorry, it just came to my mind) what about those who just dump their babies in dumpsters? (Horrible I know, but it has happened. Multiple times. I hear it on the news quite frequently. "Another baby found in an abandoned dumpster.."). Wouldn't an abortion be better? Instead of having a baby be born to die shortly after (Referring to the ones not found) it could not have to go through any of it, and also contribute to advancements in medicine and science.

People throw em in dumpsters because they can't afford abortions, which are really expensive

From: NewToAutoing
It's funny, i find myself agreeing a little bit with VG_Kobra and a little bit with A G E N T 83. Though i think the person i share the most views with is lolpie :p (or at least from what i can see..)

:D

From: lolpie
Why not? Btw, I'm Atheist

Lol Why Not?

Because Belief and Faith are just that, belief and faith. They are emotional and mental things. You cannot say trees grow because of gods will or the people's faith.

You can say trees grow because of those things but it is purely fictional, you cannot prove that because of those things trees grow. But Science has proof how trees grow :D

Once again, Religion is great of morals and sense of direction in life. But it should not attempt to make itself all powerful by smacking the label of God on every damn thing.

From: VG_Kobra
Lol Why Not?

Because Belief and Faith are just that, belief and faith. They are emotional and mental things. You cannot say trees grow because of gods will or the people's faith.

But if you believe that they do, then in your own opinion you are right.

From: VG_Kobra
You can say trees grow because of those things but it is purely fictional, you cannot prove that because of those things trees grow. But Science has proof how trees grow :D

It's faith and belief. They don't need proof ;)

From: VG_Kobra
Once again, Religion is great of morals and sense of direction in life. But it should not attempt to make itself all powerful by smacking the label of God on every damn thing.

Wow this is a neverending arguement

From: NewToAutoing
Maybe because people are getting tired of being brainwashed? :p In my opinion it's in between, the church brainwashes people or the parents do by not really giving them a choice in religion. Also, (somewhat offtopic) isn't being baptized supposed to be to cleanse your soul of sins? So then how come babies are baptized? Are they sinning by being born, or sinning in the womb, or something..? (If i'm wrong on what i just said, then disregard it)

I'm a Roman Catholic, so I'm not sure about the beliefs of other denominations such as Anglicans, United, Jehovah's Witness ( the come-to-your-door people :P) (sorry if I offended any Jehovah Witnesses out there). In the Roman Catholic faith, we believe that every human is born with an "original sin", a sinfulness that is inherent to mankind. Supposedly it is from the story of Adam and Eve, but I choose not to read the Bible that literally.

This argument is truly not going anywhere. There are two opposing sides and neither is going to give up any ground. It, as (I Forget Who) said, is a never-ending argument.

Science has its place, as does religion. My opinion is my opinion, I've made it clear, and I've had it with making the 30-minute long posts directed only @ one person. If you read this as me conceding defeat, so be it, but it is not.

Toodles,
A G E N T 83

Eh my two cents:

I don't believe in god. (I stopped believing in the tooth fairy and santa clause very early.) If god or an angel came down to me in a cloud, or a bush inexplicably started burning and talking to me, or something like that, I would take that back and believe in god. (Technically I guess it wouldn't be believing, but rather knowing, but if I knew god existed, then I would believe in heaven and angels, or if I knew angels existed then I would believe in god etc.)

Now what event would do the opposite to someone that believes in god? Nothing can prove (an event or well thought out points with evidence on a thread like this) that god doesn't exist, because of 'the wind exists but you can't see it, god exists but is invisible' and other convenient excuses. The rare occasions when a believer stops believing is usually when something bad happens to them or a loved one, which is kinda selfish because god lets good people die all the time. So yea, nothing can convince a true believer, so this thread won't lead to anything good.

Discussions and debates don't apply to faith.

From: Boreas
Eh my two cents:

I don't believe in god. (I stopped believing in the tooth fairy and santa clause very early.) If god or an angel came down to me in a cloud, or a bush inexplicably started burning and talking to me, or something like that, I would take that back and believe in god. (Technically I guess it wouldn't be believing, but rather knowing, but if I knew god existed, then I would believe in heaven and angels, or if I knew angels existed then I would believe in god etc.)

Now what event would do the opposite to someone that believes in god? Nothing can prove (an event or well thought out points with evidence on a thread like this) that god doesn't exist, because of 'the wind exists but you can't see it, god exists but is invisible' and other convenient excuses. The rare occasions when a believer stops believing is usually when something bad happens to them or a loved one, which is kinda selfish because god lets good people die all the time. So yea, nothing can convince a true believer, so this thread won't lead to anything good.

Discussions and debates don't apply to faith.

hmm i'd believe in evolution if i sat for a few million or billion years and watched an ape evolve in front of me. or if i was somehow existant when the big bang happened :D

Once again, Religion is great of morals and sense of direction in life. But it should not attempt to make itself all powerful by smacking the label of God on every damn thing.

of course we're gonna smack the label off God on every damn thing.

lol we believe God made science so when scientists prove something in science we can just pwn them - "Ha God made science! Owned!" :p *smacks label on einstein*

and yes Santa psychicsismness is my God given gift along with word making

I'm apagnostic. I don't care about what people say about God, because I have no interest either way. It's laziness, that's what it is.

Apagnostic = Apathetic agnostic.

From: lolpie
But if you believe that they do, then in your own opinion you are right.



It's faith and belief. They don't need proof ;)



Wow this is a neverending arguement

I'm feeling a bit repetitive now. Faith and Belief is emotional and personal, ofcourse you don't need proof. And since it doesn't need proof it cannot be used to define things. You can say, that Orange is really an Apple, as you said, in your own opinion, you are right. But to others your just a few marbles short. If you want to convince people you need proof. If you want me to convince me that God exists then show me proof. Telling me he exists is not a valid argument.


BTW your an Atheist why are you playing against yourself? :p

From: VG_Kobra
BTW your an Atheist why are you playing against yourself? :p

For the sake of arguement

From: VG_Kobra
I'm feeling a bit repetitive now. Faith and Belief is emotional and personal, ofcourse you don't need proof. And since it doesn't need proof it cannot be used to define things. You can say, that Orange is really an Apple, as you said, in your own opinion, you are right. But to others your just a few marbles short. If you want to convince people you need proof. If you want me to convince me that God exists then show me proof. Telling me he exists is not a valid argument.


BTW your an Atheist why are you playing against yourself? :p

define proof…..:p

From: lolpie
For the sake of arguement

Its funny how we need to validate our arguments and then come up with counterarguments for our arguments for the sake of arguing :rolleyes: :p

From: rkroxpunk
define proof…..:p

"Any factual evidence that helps to establish the truth of something"

Something like a Manual or a Public recreation that can make people believe.

I see all of your points about the stem cell thing, and I must say: If the mother is already going to get an abortion, then I really don't see anything wrong with it.

I still think a zygote is a human in a way, but we might as well try to make a positive out of abortions.

The whole God-Science deal is useless to argue about. If people are truly faithful in God, then their mind's most likely won't be changed. Vice-versa also.

Unless you're adopted, you can't say what abandoned kids want or need. I have about a dozen friends who've been adopted, some of them not until recently. Some have contact with their birth parents, some don't. Either way, most of them don't complain about being in an orphanage. A few even liked it, as the were with people who understood their situation.

The father raping daughter thing is just fucked up, and I'm at a lost of words for what to say about that. And yes, it could possibly cause health problems for the child, especially with that direct of a bloodline.

I'm never going to have another post that long.

since the arguments have kind of died down, i will give a new, semi-related question:

do you believe in the human soul, afterlife, ghosts, near death experiences or out of body experiences?

aka: does some essence of you exist without your body?

Umm, you actually provided about five different questions there.

For more thoughts on most of them while having a good read, get the Golden Compass trilogy. Very immersing.

From: masquerader
since the arguments have kind of died down, i will give a new, semi-related question:

do you believe in the human soul, afterlife, ghosts, near death experiences or out of body experiences?

aka: does some essence of you exist without your body?

Just the last two

From: Here
Umm, you actually provided about five different questions there.

kk, just answer the last one then if you want: does some essence of you exist without your body?

From: masquerader
kk, just answer the last one then if you want: does some essence of you exist without your body?

Well, disregarding all religious aspects…

Technically, yes, because people remember you.

But from the stand point I'm guessing your asking from, I'm not sure.

I think its better to believe than not to believe…=]

I think its better to believe than not to believe…=]

if that's why u "believe" then ur not really believing….

do you believe in the human soul, afterlife, ghosts, near death experiences or out of body experiences?

aka: does some essence of you exist without your body?

Soul: Yes
AfterLife: as in heaven/hell? yes
ghosts: nope
as for the next 3 i don't really understand what you mean

From: rkroxpunk
if that's why u "believe" then ur not really believing….



Soul: Yes
AfterLife: as in heaven/hell? yes
ghosts: nope
as for the next 3 i don't really understand what you mean

Near death experience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_death_experience
Out-of-body experience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_body

I don't believe in ghosts either, I don't think that souls or whatever keep wondering around to reek havoc/revenge. That's just pure Hollywood…

i believe God exists, how else can the world have come to? and dont even bother about th big bang it has been proved wrong too many times. the man who thought up with the theory (charles darwin) was angry at God at the time, he left his religion and wanted a new theory on how the world may have begun

Lol Darwin came up with big bang? Who has been brainwashing you with false information?

From: aspolokmon
i believe God exists, how else can the world have come to? and dont even bother about th big bang it has been proved wrong too many times. the man who thought up with the theory (charles darwin) was angry at God at the time, he left his religion and wanted a new theory on how the world may have begun

HAHAHAHAHA. You win Retard of the Year. I mean, HOLY SHIT, you didn't even bother to research, did you? Big Bang? Darwin? Religion? Lemme set some things straight for you, little boy.

The Big Bang, was not thought up by one man, but was proposed by Georges Lemaître, with research from Kepler, Newton, Einstein, and other less notables. Next, the Big Bang has nothing to do with evolution, the theory that Darwin brought up. Last, Darwin did not initially attempt to prove human evolution from monkeys, but his research was started by finches. Why didn't he? Because he knew he would be attacked, and furthermore, was not an atheist, but was an agnostic.

In response to your question, that's like saying, "How do things come to be if I never saw them happen?" A totally ridiculous, irresponsible question.

……………………..ok…………………well then………………….ill admit i was wrong, but the forum does say be polite so i think you should out what you said about me, thats not very nice

Gah, it was in play, and I really don't see anything in the rules about being polite.

But if you wish, you're not Retard of the Year. Just do your GODdamned research next time.

^^^ Ah wow. . .That really made me laugh. Screw this, I think I might take up Buddism or Hinduism. . .We learned about them in Ancient Civ, and I found them much more appealing.

My parents would probably disown me if I told them I didn't believe in God though. Can't wait 'till I'm 18 though. They'll be in for a shock.

Ehh, Buddhism and Hinduism both have their corruptions and misleadings. If you need to believe in something, believe in yourself. Outside sources of belief fall very quickly, and if not, tend to be inefficient at best.

From: Here
HAHAHAHAHA. You win Retard of the Year. I mean, HOLY SHIT, you didn't even bother to research, did you? Big Bang? Darwin? Religion? Lemme set some things straight for you, little boy.

The Big Bang, was not thought up by one man, but was proposed by Georges Lemaître, with research from Kepler, Newton, Einstein, and other less notables. Next, the Big Bang has nothing to do with evolution, the theory that Darwin brought up. Last, Darwin did not initially attempt to prove human evolution from monkeys, but his research was started by finches. Why didn't he? Because he knew he would be attacked, and furthermore, was not an atheist, but was an agnostic.

In response to your question, that's like saying, "How do things come to be if I never saw them happen?" A totally ridiculous, irresponsible question.

Interesting thing about that was that Lemaitre was Catholic.

And BTW Buddhism, believe it or not, has very few corruptions acquainted with it. Any corruptions that exist derive from its followers who give in to temptation. If was to turn religious I would pick Buddhism, and BTW Buddhism is not really a religion, its a cult kinda thing that preaches about your soul and body.

your pollis not really complete atheist is someone who doesnt believe in god but believes in a higher power. agnostic is someone who believes that the evidence for and against the existence of God is inconclusive and religous is someone who believes in god what about the people who dont believe in god and does not believe in a higher power like myself i think that we are just here no one or anything put us here we are just here nobody created us

From: Here
Ehh, Buddhism and Hinduism both have their corruptions and misleadings. If you need to believe in something, believe in yourself. Outside sources of belief fall very quickly, and if not, tend to be inefficient at best.

Or can you can create your own religion. That's what most people do

Eh, Buddhism isn't really corrupt from what I've learned about it. I just think it's more believable than the traditional Christian Religions. Plus a bit less of an annoyance.

From: lolpie
Or can you can create your own religion. That's what most people do

You mean like Scientology, it's the most immediate proof of a religion with strange events going on. Instead of burning bushes or reincarnations, its crazed hollywood actors jumping on talk show mogul's couches.

From: VG_Kobra
You mean like Scientology, it's the most immediate proof of a religion with strange events going on. Instead of burning bushes or reincarnations, its crazed hollywood actors jumping on talk show mogul's couches.

No…I mean creating a religion that you believe 100% yourself but don't share with tons of other people. ie. someone I know believes that when you die, you become the ruler of an alternate universe (a god)…

From: lolpie
No…I mean creating a religion that you believe 100% yourself but don't share with tons of other people. ie. someone I know believes that when you die, you become the ruler of an alternate universe (a god)…

Certainly a different perspective. Not sure I'd go with that one though. . .

I know, but as long as they don't come knocking on my doorstep, I'm fine with it :D

Very true. Especially if they don't try to convince me it's true.

I believe in God and you said it's what the scientists make to fill in the hole the science part of it is all rubbish they jst made that up plz they said we were tiny moucles wen we 1st came to earth then why have we stoped evoling anyway think about this dont go on scientists go on the bible and and you say well you don't believe him because you don't see him? you don't see air yet u believe its there, you dont see gravity yet you believe its there…

From: VG_Kobra
Interesting thing about that was that Lemaitre was Catholic.

And BTW Buddhism, believe it or not, has very few corruptions acquainted with it. Any corruptions that exist derive from its followers who give in to temptation. If was to turn religious I would pick Buddhism, and BTW Buddhism is not really a religion, its a cult kinda thing that preaches about your soul and body.

First, yes, Buddhism doesn't have too many corruptions acquainted with it, but where there's money, there's corruption, and in this world, it's impossible to live without money. Whether you like it or not.

From: crossback7
Eh, Buddhism isn't really corrupt from what I've learned about it. I just think it's more believable than the traditional Christian Religions. Plus a bit less of an annoyance.

The traditional Christian religions have been teaching plague, massacre, and revenge for thousands of years. Annoyance is a bit of an understatement, don't you think?

From: VG_Kobra
You mean like Scientology, it's the most immediate proof of a religion with strange events going on. Instead of burning bushes or reincarnations, its crazed hollywood actors jumping on talk show mogul's couches.

Well, it was created by a science fiction writer on a bet that he could create a religion that people would follow. He won.

From: ThePrince
I believe in God and you said it's what the scientists make to fill in the hole the science part of it is all rubbish they jst made that up plz they said we were tiny moucles wen we 1st came to earth then why have we stoped evoling anyway think about this dont go on scientists go on the bible and and you say well you don't believe him because you don't see him? you don't see air yet u believe its there, you dont see gravity yet you believe its there…

Let me try to make your post a bit more coherent.

Q:What you're trying to say is that scientists look to the Bible, and these same people made up science to fill the holes that religion couldn't fill?
A: Some people say yes to that, others no. That is a matter of opinion. Belief isn't related to science, nor is it the polar opposite.

Q:Furthermore, are you stating that we "came to earth as tiny molecules"?
A: The EARTH is made up of molecules, fool. All living things are made of carbon molecules. The Earth has an enormous variety of different combinations of atoms to create molecules. Nobody has tried to affirm what you have accused us of. You are plainly wrong.

Q:Next, are you trying to accuse us of "we don't believe what we don't see"?
A: If so, then your argument falls on its face again. Your proponents, "air and gravity", can both be observed in different stages. I can see air when it forms bubbles in my water. I can feel gravity when I trip and land on my face. But when has your so-called God affected me? My mother has given me birth, I have made my mistakes, and other people have helped or hurt me. Others have created this world what it is, not some unknown mystical being.

I would go on, but I need to sleep now.

fuck you vg, god is Real In All Of uf.. do you choose to recognize it? How Do We Know About Wind..? Wind And God Are Alike, You Cant See Them, But You Knoe It Is Real. 75%+ poeople in america believe god is real, and i believe over 50% of the world does too. That Many People cant be deluded/wrong. This Is A Good Starter To A Flaming thread.

so, you are saying you dont feel wind? the are other ways of observing something besides seeing it, but i have never seen, felt, smelt or anything else…god…

From: Here


Q:What you're trying to say is that scientists look to the Bible, and these same people made up science to fill the holes that religion couldn't fill?
A: Some people say yes to that, others no. That is a matter of opinion. Belief isn't related to science, nor is it the polar opposite.

Q:Furthermore, are you stating that we "came to earth as tiny molecules"?
A: The EARTH is made up of molecules, fool. All living things are made of carbon molecules. The Earth has an enormous variety of different combinations of atoms to create molecules. Nobody has tried to affirm what you have accused us of. You are plainly wrong.

Q:Next, are you trying to accuse us of "we don't believe what we don't see"?
A: If so, then your argument falls on its face again. Your proponents, "air and gravity", can both be observed in different stages. I can see air when it forms bubbles in my water. I can feel gravity when I trip and land on my face. But when has your so-called God affected me? My mother has given me birth, I have made my mistakes, and other people have helped or hurt me. Others have created this world what it is, not some unknown mystical being.

I would go on, but I need to sleep now.

man are you the stupid person to ever exsist on this planet???????????????????

i said the science part is all shit ffs ur stupid wen i read ur reply i jst wantd to smash the hell out of u… and i said that they!!!!!(scientists) said that we were all moucles read u stupid idiot tryna be all big im sayn all scientists r all rubbish about it
so how about u read and im nt sayn scientists look at the bible im sayn thats our proof ffs u nw hw to anoy sum1

As I said before, faith does not apply to discussion or debates. The pro god (especially) 'arguments' are becoming more and more poorly thought out, the spelling and swearing is getting worse, and they don't even have real reasons. Make it into a proper discussion or debate right now or I move it to BBQ pit.

Lol Prince. . .I totally agree with Here on that one, and people won't take you seriously if you can't spell correctly and just curse at people instead of trying to make a valid arguement. I honestly can't really tell what you're trying to prove, your grammer is so incorrect.

The molecule thing that Here talked about is most definetely true.

You're saying that the Bible is your proof, though you don't say what it's proof of, and how do you know the Bible is true?

From: Here
First, yes, Buddhism doesn't have too many corruptions acquainted with it, but where there's money, there's corruption, and in this world, it's impossible to live without money. Whether you like it or not.

So you're just saying that the whole world is corrupt, so every religion is too? It is impossible to live with no money at all, but I don't think money corrupts everyone that comes into it. That'd be like saying every teenager who works a summer job is corrupted because they have a little bit of pocket money now. . .

Lol Here I love reading your replies to stupid posts like Prince's and the guy who said Darwin created the Big Bang theory

I agree with Pie on that :)

From: SmarterChild <3
One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

That's the definition of agnostic, if you were wondering. And it's what I am. I shuffle between whether I think I'm atheist or agnostic. But then you have this. Runescape's POH came out, and Durial had his little fally massacre on 6/6/06. I don't play Runescape anymore, but that is a little.."out of any day, it had to be that day?"

He's a satanist maybe?

No, but he was smart enough to know that if he did it on THAT day, it would garner much attention.

I don't think he controlled the situation though, did he?

From: ThePrince
man are you the stupid person to ever exsist on this planet???????????????????

i said the science part is all shit ffs ur stupid wen i read ur reply i jst wantd to smash the hell out of u… and i said that they!!!!!(scientists) said that we were all moucles read u stupid idiot tryna be all big im sayn all scientists r all rubbish about it
so how about u read and im nt sayn scientists look at the bible im sayn thats our proof ffs u nw hw to anoy sum1

WOOH! Another post to decode. Stupidity is a hard language to recognize and translate, but I'll do my best.

Ok, if the science part is all shit, then what are you doing here? Programming is based on math, and science uses math, so science can't be all that "shit".

Next, what's wrong about being all molecules? Is there some part of you that hurts when you feel that you're not actually made solely of dirt, or maybe a man's ribs if you're female (but you're probably not that either, in regard to your stupidity), but actually of these "moucles"?

Last, I'm trying to read what you spout, but it's hard to know what you're saying. I know you're not using a translator either, because no computer is THAT stupid.

From: Boreas
As I said before, faith does not apply to discussion or debates. The pro god (especially) 'arguments' are becoming more and more poorly thought out, the spelling and swearing is getting worse, and they don't even have real reasons. Make it into a proper discussion or debate right now or I move it to BBQ pit.

BBQ pit is probably the right place for ANY religious discussion, with all these 3rd graders running around and all.

From: crossback7

So you're just saying that the whole world is corrupt, so every religion is too? It is impossible to live with no money at all, but I don't think money corrupts everyone that comes into it. That'd be like saying every teenager who works a summer job is corrupted because they have a little bit of pocket money now. . .

No, I'm not talking small change, but I'm talking MONEY here, man! Not like for your Hot Cheetos, but these priests have to run TEMPLES. It costs money, and money is hard to run across especially if your job is to lead meditation sessions or make an example of celibacy.

EDIT:@IEatJ00erBaybees: Didn't he? I was away on that day. New York, I think. But if he didn't it's inconclusive yet still thought-provoking, as you mentioned.

From: Here
@IEatJ00erBaybees: Didn't he? I was away on that day. New York, I think. But if he didn't it's inconclusive yet still thought-provoking, as you mentioned.

If the story is correct, Durial was in a fight in whoever got to #1 construction first (I have no idea what his/her name was). That person kicked everybody when the party was over, and Durial had been fighting. When you get kicked from a home, you land in Falador, if I'm correct? (I'm not p2p). He could still attack people w/o attacking him back, and well, there you go.

Like you said, this is a very thought-provoking situation and it leaves me from where I think I'm athiest, to agnostic, because it's just so damn weird that coincidences like this happen.

IEJB

Well, there is that something called coincidence.

From: Here
No, I'm not talking small change, but I'm talking MONEY here, man! Not like for your Hot Cheetos, but these priests have to run TEMPLES. It costs money, and money is hard to run across especially if your job is to lead meditation sessions or make an example of celibacy.

We should go back to the old days where religious buildings weren't taxed.

[sarcasm]And various religions could coexist like they did in the days of Cromwell and the Protestants[/sarcasm]

:D

Of course. And people wouldn't have to fight about "religion" like they did in the 30 years war.

Here i think you have some sort of blockage in your brain i didnt say all science is all shit i was talking about the part of how they said the earth was made…

and lolpie lmao your so stupid

god pwnz end of story

Prince you just have no idea what I was talking about do you? Go back to playing RS

ThePrince, you seem like a zealot of Jesus. Why then, do you play RS? Doesn't it bug you that RS uses a non-Christian religion, but actually semi-pagan?

On the other hand, you say my brain has a blockage. Instead of humiliating you through my words, you want to put that up for a vote somewhere? In fact, I'll make two polls right now.

EDIT: In fact, I have already made the thread. ThePrince, if you yourself vote on the poll, then I will too, so don't try to be cheap.

THE THREAD: Does Here have a blockage in her brain?

Btw, this is not (god) a subject to argue of, but

lol we believe God made science so when scientists prove something in science we can just pwn them - "Ha God made science! Owned!"

Sciense has the explanation for almost everything they talk about,
facts that can be proved and written to paper.
If god, exists, isnt that right he created saddam hussein, tornados, every fucked up thing also?

Just my opinion… I like sience..

I would first like to say that I am a Christian and I do believe in creation. There is many interesting facts that lead towards intelligent design. I also see a lot of flaws in evolution.

String theory, although just a theory which we do not know all that much about, possibly explains how there can be a God, which has always existed and why we cannot scientifically test his existence.

String theory theorizes that there are different dimensions. There is different theories, but most of them theorize there are 10/11 dimensions. The other has 26 dimensions. In these dimensions, the only thing that can interact between the dimensions is closed strings. Everything we know, other than gravity, is an open string. This means we are completely limited to only our brane. So unless we develop a way to control or generate gravity, we cannot interact with these other branes. Obviously, this is only part of string theory, and it has much more complicated parts.

And as for creation, answersingenesis.org is an awesome website.

I also find it funny that the popularization of evolution was based off a book trying to prove the supremacy of the white race.
I also find that the base of evolution is off similarities between species, but can't you find similarities in everything, DNA, etc? We are believed to have branched off from chimpanzees. The percentage varies, but we are somewhere around 88%-98% similar genetically. This is of course, after the separate all the genes, and mix them all together. You also need to keep in mind that there is 4 different types of genes, so we are at least 25% similar to EVERYTHING. I also think this may point to a common creator. Why would a creator use a different tool(DNA, etc) for everything he made?

People always argue that God made us do all these bad things, like the Catholic crusades, etc. I personally think this is a prime example of people messing things up. God teaches us love and forgiveness, not slaughter. Darwinism, however was created for the purpose of genocide. The original name of his book was "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection".

I also find it funny that we were taught that living things ALWAYS come from living things and that we have NEVER proven otherwise, even with current technology. Then we are taught that we were made in a gas pocket at the bottom of the ocean that was struck by lightning. I couldn't resist when I learned this in class to ask, "How does lightning strike the bottom of the ocean?" Obviously, my teacher replied "I'll get back to that", but never did.

There is some interesting facts, like the oldest tree is around 4500 years old, which is around the expected date of the flood, based on genealogy. And the evolution of a lot of animals just didn't make sense. I believe it was the horse that had 5 or 6 different numbers of ribs based on which step of evolution it was in and it was not in a logical order, it was like 21, 18, 23, etc.

I'd continue, but I'm hungry. It's T-bell time.

From: thephanatik
I would first like to say that I am a Christian and I do believe in creation. There is many interesting facts that lead towards intelligent design. I also see a lot of flaws in evolution.

String theory, although just a theory which we do not know all that much about, possibly explains how there can be a God, which has always existed and why we cannot scientifically test his existence.

String theory theorizes that there are different dimensions. There is different theories, but most of them theorize there are 10/11 dimensions. The other has 26 dimensions. In these dimensions, the only thing that can interact between the dimensions is closed strings. Everything we know, other than gravity, is an open string. This means we are completely limited to only our brane. So unless we develop a way to control or generate gravity, we cannot interact with these other branes. Obviously, this is only part of string theory, and it has much more complicated parts.

I'm reading a book right now called "The Great Beyond" which talks about all of this stuff (String theory, M-theory)

From: thephanatik

I also find it funny that the popularization of evolution was based off a book trying to prove the supremacy of the white race.
I also find that the base of evolution is off similarities between species, but can't you find similarities in everything, DNA, etc? We are believed to have branched off from chimpanzees. The percentage varies, but we are somewhere around 88%-98% similar genetically. This is of course, after the separate all the genes, and mix them all together. You also need to keep in mind that there is 4 different types of genes, so we are at least 25% similar to EVERYTHING. I also think this may point to a common creator. Why would a creator use a different tool(DNA, etc) for everything he made?

People always argue that God made us do all these bad things, like the Catholic crusades, etc. I personally think this is a prime example of people messing things up. God teaches us love and forgiveness, not slaughter. Darwinism, however was created for the purpose of genocide. The original name of his book was "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection".

I also find it funny that we were taught that living things ALWAYS come from living things and that we have NEVER proven otherwise, even with current technology. Then we are taught that we were made in a gas pocket at the bottom of the ocean that was struck by lightning. I couldn't resist when I learned this in class to ask, "How does lightning strike the bottom of the ocean?" Obviously, my teacher replied "I'll get back to that", but never did.

There is some interesting facts, like the oldest tree is around 4500 years old, which is around the expected date of the flood, based on genealogy. And the evolution of a lot of animals just didn't make sense. I believe it was the horse that had 5 or 6 different numbers of ribs based on which step of evolution it was in and it was not in a logical order, it was like 21, 18, 23, etc.

Well, the first part of your post is speculation on all sides, so there's nothing to prove for either of us. As for the rest of your quote, I can definitely respond to it.

First, let me respond to the second paragraph, because I have more to say about it. You say "God teaches us love and forgiveness, not slaughter". WRONG. If anybody in the Bible, God was THE slaughterer, murdering more people than Hitler, Stalin, everyone else that people consider "mass-murderers" (I'm not saying this to justify THEIR murders, but rather show an example). He teaches people to take their revenge, he teaches people jealousy. Look it up yourself, Exodus and Job.

Darwin did not create the "natural selection" scheme to use it on humans, though it was a commonly spread misconception. Some people just found it fit to do that. I forgot the name, but it wasn't Charles Darwin. A cousin or somebody.

Who says that "living things always come from living things"? If you're talking about Sex Ed, that applies to humans. And humans were not the first "animal" on earth, and whether they be descended from Moneys, Aliens, or God, each of those would be classified as living. Just because you asked the lightning question and wasn't answered does not mean the knowledge is not known, but just was not shared with common teachers.

The flood, known for Noah, could not have been 4500 years ago. Ancient civilizations predate that to a few thousand years. China has had dynastic rule for more than 15 millenniums.

Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?

Back to your first point, but if we're related to EVERYTHING, that also points to evolution more strongly than the "common creator" idea.

I'd elaborate, but it's my sleep time.

God didn't teach anyone anything. Priests, prophets, and the Bible taught people slaughter, revenge, and jealousy. . .

From: Here
Darwin did not create the "natural selection" scheme to use it on humans, though it was a commonly spread misconception. Some people just found it fit to do that. I forgot the name, but it wasn't Charles Darwin. A cousin or somebody.

"The White Man's Burden"

From: lolpie
"The White Man's Burden"

"The White Man's Burden" has almost nothing to do with natural selection, but imperialism. Also, it has written by Rudyard Kipling.

From: Here
"The White Man's Burden" has almost nothing to do with natural selection, but imperialism. Also, it has written by Rudyard Kipling.

Wasn't social darwinism used to justify imperialism? And "TWMB" is basically justifying social darwinism by saying that it's white people's duty or destiny, so "TWMB" has SOMETHING to do with natural selection, because that theory spurred on social darwinism….

I don't think I'm making any sense

From: lolpie
Wasn't social darwinism used to justify imperialism? And "TWMB" is basically justifying social darwinism by saying that it's white people's duty or destiny, so "TWMB" has SOMETHING to do with natural selection, because that theory spurred on social darwinism….

I don't think I'm making any sense

Hmm, ok, you make sense, but not with the natural selection part. For it would be stupid to kill all your would-be "slaves".

Rationally speaking, there is no such thing as God.

I'm Buddhist&Christian, I guess. :) Although, I have only gone to Church/Temple once, or twice in my life. :p Based on my current life conditions, without the thought of a greater being guiding me, idk how I would survive.

That is why I believe in God.

From: WhiteShadow
Rationally speaking, there is no such thing as God.

I'm Buddhist&Christian, I guess. :) Although, I have only gone to Church/Temple once, or twice in my life. :p Based on my current life conditions, without the thought of a greater being guiding me, idk how I would survive.

That is why I believe in God.

Wouldn't really be a point to it all, would there? And this was my 200th post.

From: Here
Hmm, ok, you make sense, but not with the natural selection part. For it would be stupid to kill all your would-be "slaves".

Who said anything about killing them off? Just make them powerless and problem solved

For the record, I know God exists, but I'm not going to argue it here, so if that angers you, please speak to me on aim.
What I wanted to say is that I have NEVER seen such HORRIBLE and ridiculously stupid and WEAK pro God arguments. It's utterly pathetic, and makes most of you look like fools.
Perhaps you guys should take a little bit more deep thought into this, rather than regurgitating what you have been told.
Sometimes it doesn't matter if you are right or not, because truth itself is not very persuasive.
[oh yeah, this post is NOT directed at anyone in particular, so don't think I am flaming anyone, I'm just encouraging better thought out posts People such as Here, are creaming you all, lol.]

From: lordgreggreg
For the record, I know God exists, but I'm not going to argue it here, so if that angers you, please speak to me on aim.
What I wanted to say is that I have NEVER seen such HORRIBLE and ridiculously stupid and WEAK pro God arguments. It's utterly pathetic, and makes most of you look like fools.
Perhaps you guys should take a little bit more deep thought into this, rather than regurgitating what you have been told.
Sometimes it doesn't matter if you are right or not, because truth itself is not very persuasive.
[oh yeah, this post is NOT directed at anyone in particular, so don't think I am flaming anyone, I'm just encouraging better thought out posts People such as Here, are creaming you all, lol.]

Thanks for the encourage from a believer, but I'm not a non-believer, nor an atheist. As I said before, I'm an apagnostic, so I really don't care about religion. I'm only arguing for the sake of argument, and as you put it, the pro-God side is putting up truly pathetic reasons.

I'd also like to see better posts on why God is here. You know what? The Chronicles of Narnia did a much better job than all of you plus a thousand more (besides Lord Greg) could've done, even if you had drums and megaphones. Bad arguments are bad, and there's nothing going for you.

And Lord Greg, for the record, if God exists, then He mustn't be all that people claim he is. Perhaps he's dead or lost control of the world. And drops in every once in a while, to see what a mess stupid idiots are making.

Here's a funnier take on God: http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/God

It's not meant to be taken seriously, so please don't.

PS Uncyclopedia is definately one of the best sites ever

How about Encyclopedia Dramatica?

Meh it doesn't look as good and doesn't have as many articles, not to mention the first thing I saw was a picture of 2 dudes kissing :(

It's not meant to be taken seriously AT ALL. In fact, it wants to be the biggest encyclopaedic blemish on the internet.

From: rkroxpunk
if that's why u "believe" then ur not really believing….



Soul: Yes
AfterLife: as in heaven/hell? yes
ghosts: nope
as for the next 3 i don't really understand what you mean

Lol lets get this straight and over and done with…

When I said I think its better to beleive than not to beleive, im really saying being very religious is better than beleive in nothing (my opinion)…

Im Greek orthodox and attend at church nearly every Sunday…

I go to a Catholic school and have also attended at every mass…

At school I have atleast 1 period of religion perday day…

OF COURSE I BELEIVE IN GOD

From: lolpie
Here's a funnier take on God: http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/God

It's not meant to be taken seriously, so please don't.

PS Uncyclopedia is definately one of the best sites ever

I didn't find that article that funny really. I didn't look at any of the other articles though. . .

From: Here
Bad arguments are bad, and there's nothing going for you.

And Lord Greg, for the record, if God exists, then He mustn't be all that people claim he is. Perhaps he's dead or lost control of the world. And drops in every once in a while, to see what a mess stupid idiots are making.

Yups :) Bad arguments are worse then bad, by making a bad argument supporting this pro God side, it's really hurting your side alot, by making it look weak and stupid, especially when it can be so easily and effectively crushed.

And I agree, God is not all that most people claim he is. Most people don't have a single clue on what he is, and (like the bad arguments) just regurgitate and pervert the things that they hear or read.
I have some personal reasons that (unfortunately) have proven to me that he is very alive and active.
This definitely does bring to question why the world is spinning seemingly out of control. And it takes allot of thought to look at it too, but suppose this. God, if he exists, is unarguably all knowing (probably on a quantum overseeing level) and, although lots of really messed up things happen in life, that would really want to make me say "if there was a God, this monstrosity would have never been allowed to happen";
but honestly, on a high level of thinking, perhaps this is all part of his plan for the best. Obviously on a way that I can't really understand, (which unfortunately drags faith into this), but at least it's a logical feasible option.
For basic instance, God can't make any good happen unless there is a bad to contrast it… stuff like that kinda.
Anyhow, that concludes my small, unelaborated counter to him being dead.

As another thing to ponder. Take a brief look at the earth, and it's complexities, may be study a few physic's books on the unbelievably balanced world we are living in.
Despite all of the evolutions theory's (which I do believe are at least 80% correct), I really don't think it would be possible for a human being to arise out of it, unless there was an intelligent thought path driving it. (zomg, may be, God uses evolution?! may be… he programs the world, just like we all do(program)?! may be, instead of starting from scratch each time, he builds off of what he already has, and throws away what doesn't work?)

Anyhow, I know the thing above is really an explanation, not really an argument, but that's really just because I don't feel like posting an argumentative comment at the moment, rather, just something to ponder.
Enjoy :)

Edit: ROFL!! "Don't make their God bust out locusts on yo' ass"

Kudos to Lord Greg for being one of the few to put thought into his post in this "there-is-no-argument-really" thread.

You know, if I believed in God, I would take the Piers Anthony view: that he forsook this world, or is just in an epic battle with Satan to control it. In no way would I worship someone.

Sorry about that. Because you know, believing in something…I'm just not a person of faith.

hash brown

From: Here
Kudos to Lord Greg for being one of the few to put thought into his post in this "there-is-no-argument-really" thread.

You know, if I believed in God, I would take the Piers Anthony view: that he forsook this world, or is just in an epic battle with Satan to control it. In no way would I worship someone.

Sorry about that. Because you know, believing in something…I'm just not a person of faith.

Hmm…
So he forsook the world, rather than just guiding it in a weird way…
and he is battling satan, rather than letting us battle satan…

I think the first one is all perceptive.
I can see how it looks like that, and that does make allot of since too. It's even allot easier to explain than my whole guidance idea :). I suppose that it is just my own opinion that he really has an active complete control, just because a few things in my life have happened that are just so "slap you in the face! It's GOD".

an epic battle with Satan to control it.

I really don't think that God is actively battling Satan. I know that's a cute and classic way of looking at life and how things play out (the devil made me do it!). But honestly, I don't think we would really even have a satanic figure. I heard a quote once, forgive me for regurgitating. It was something like "Satan cannot control you, and God will not control you".

that he forsook this world,

Now, saying that he forsook the world, I interpret as him giving up, deciding we are all going to hell, and moving on to he better behaved universe… I would assume this is concluded by observing all of the crazyness that has happened in the world. I can't prove you wrong one bit unfortunately, but I can make you think about this.

If God really wanted to test people, if he really wanted to see what they are made of, (which I believe is one of the reasons we are here on earth). Then he wouldn't really be allowed to do much of this "mericle" stuff all the time. That (for the most part) takes faith out of the picture.
If he is going to be helping out… He has got to bless his believer (he promissed) but he probably should do it in such a subtle way… that only people looking for his blessing would even notice it.

Ok, i think i have gone off into explaining things rather than arguing with things. All of what I am saying hinges on the very fact that we are arguing, lol.
So heres a little bit more meat.

Souls. For all of you who believe that humans have souls, yet don't believe in God, this is for you, because that Really close to a contradiction.
Yeah, think about it, just that nature of admitting that every human has a soul that is driving them, not just their brain and instincts…
I don't really think that it is possible to assume that how humans act and feel is really nothing but what their brain thinks to do.

Most people can agree that there is a general good, and bad in the world. Where did this originate? Sure, you can go utilitarian style if you would like to avoid God. But utilitarianism is more of an after thought. Where did all of this get started? I promise you that lesser civilized people rarely classified their actions as good or bad by thinking through how it would affect everyone. lol. I think this Good and bad thing is more inherent than that, and that people knew about it before they even read the bible, got taught it in school, or observed how others act.
I don't think this "good/bad" classification feeling can be explained by instinct either. If all of it was really bend on survival and stuff like that (which alot of it is… but not all) then I could understand it being instinct.

Ok, im going to work, be back around … 6-7ish.

From: Here
Well, the first part of your post is speculation on all sides, so there's nothing to prove for either of us. As for the rest of your quote, I can definitely respond to it.

First, let me respond to the second paragraph, because I have more to say about it. You say "God teaches us love and forgiveness, not slaughter". WRONG. If anybody in the Bible, God was THE slaughterer, murdering more people than Hitler, Stalin, everyone else that people consider "mass-murderers" (I'm not saying this to justify THEIR murders, but rather show an example). He teaches people to take their revenge, he teaches people jealousy. Look it up yourself, Exodus and Job.

Darwin did not create the "natural selection" scheme to use it on humans, though it was a commonly spread misconception. Some people just found it fit to do that. I forgot the name, but it wasn't Charles Darwin. A cousin or somebody.

Who says that "living things always come from living things"? If you're talking about Sex Ed, that applies to humans. And humans were not the first "animal" on earth, and whether they be descended from Moneys, Aliens, or God, each of those would be classified as living. Just because you asked the lightning question and wasn't answered does not mean the knowledge is not known, but just was not shared with common teachers.

The flood, known for Noah, could not have been 4500 years ago. Ancient civilizations predate that to a few thousand years. China has had dynastic rule for more than 15 millenniums.

Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?

Back to your first point, but if we're related to EVERYTHING, that also points to evolution more strongly than the "common creator" idea.

I'd elaborate, but it's my sleep time.

Well, A. If you don't believe in God, your comment about something that doesn't exist is irrelevant, and B. he doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill. 6th commandment, "Thall Shall not murder"
Numbers 14:19 - "In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, just as you have pardoned them from the time they left Egypt until now."
1 Kings 8:34 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their fathers."
1 Kings 8:36 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel. Teach them the right way to live, and send rain on the land you gave your people for an inheritance."
1 Kings 8:50 - "And forgive your people, who have sinned against you; forgive all the offenses they have committed against you, and cause their conquerors to show them mercy;"
Jeremiah 33:8 - "I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me."
How about Jesus' prayer, many know as a Lord's prayer in Matthew 6:9 - "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors."
How about The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant? Mathew 18:21
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
Colossians 3:13 - Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
I could go on, but you should get the point by now.


As for Darwin creating evolution, that is not what I said. I stated "the popularization of"


And for the living coming from living. I am talking about we have never seen one thing "living" that has come from something that wasn't living. It was from the characteristics of living organisms.

There is some strong evidence of a flood, which also throws the geologic column idea right out the window. There's tons of examples of trees that are upside down or sideways that are sticking through multiple rock layers. This has happened all over the world. And China's dynasties started with the Xia Dynasty which started around 2070BC. The flood is believed to have happened somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 BC. There's also a few sites that suggest it was around 7,000 years ago. This just makes my point stronger, yes?

"Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?"
We have seen nature tends towards disorder and chaos. Soil and mountains are eroding away, we don't see mountains being "pushed up" like evolution suggests. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that "life" just happened to get the right order of strands of RNA to create something that was living and worked. That sounds less likely than something creating it. If you roll 2 dice, the chance of you getting the 2 numbers you wanted are 1:36. Even a small protein has a 1:10^67 of being created. That is 1:100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Keep in mind, that is merely a small protein, not even life.
Mathematicians generally agree that, statistically, any odds beyond 1 in 10 to the 50th (1:10^50) have a zero probability of ever happening - Emil Borel, Elements of the Theory of Probability.

Being related to everything could point to either one, it's just evolution is a fallacy. Not to mention it was popularized by a man with severe mental and personality disorders. Never read that in your science books, did'ya?

From: thephanatik
Well, A. If you don't believe in God, your comment about something that doesn't exist is irrelevant, and B. he doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill. 6th commandment, "Thall Shall not murder"
Numbers 14:19 - "In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, just as you have pardoned them from the time they left Egypt until now."
1 Kings 8:34 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their fathers."
1 Kings 8:36 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel. Teach them the right way to live, and send rain on the land you gave your people for an inheritance."
1 Kings 8:50 - "And forgive your people, who have sinned against you; forgive all the offenses they have committed against you, and cause their conquerors to show them mercy;"
Jeremiah 33:8 - "I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me."
How about Jesus' prayer, many know as a Lord's prayer in Matthew 6:9 - "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors."
How about The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant? Mathew 18:21
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
Colossians 3:13 - Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
I could go on, but you should get the point by now.

What about the Crusades?

From: thephanatik
And for the living coming from living. I am talking about we have never seen one thing "living" that has come from something that wasn't living. It was from the characteristics of living organisms.

Because all of it happened during prehistoric Earth, when conditions were A LOT different than they are today. I forget the names of the scientists, but 2 of them recreated prehistoric conditions in a test tube. They made conditions similar to those in the prehistoric times, added some electricity and some inorganic molecules….viola - organic molecules were created.

From: thephanatik
"Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?"
We have seen nature tends towards disorder and chaos. Soil and mountains are eroding away, we don't see mountains being "pushed up" like evolution suggests. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that "life" just happened to get the right order of strands of RNA to create something that was living and worked. That sounds less likely than something creating it. If you roll 2 dice, the chance of you getting the 2 numbers you wanted are 1:36. Even a small protein has a 1:10^67 of being created. That is 1:100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Keep in mind, that is merely a small protein, not even life.
Mathematicians generally agree that, statistically, any odds beyond 1 in 10 to the 50th (1:10^50) have a zero probability of ever happening - Emil Borel, Elements of the Theory of Probability.

The universe is most likely infinite. That means there are trillions of galaxies out there. I would say that life would have to occur on AT LEAST a few planets out of trillions^2 of planets. Earth is just lucky :)

From: thephanatik
Being related to everything could point to either one, it's just evolution is a fallacy. Not to mention it was popularized by a man with severe mental and personality disorders. Never read that in your science books, did'ya?

So? Lots of unstable people have contributed to science…Stephen Hawking, Einstein, Albus Dumbledore…. :D

From: thephanatik
Well, A. If you don't believe in God, your comment about something that doesn't exist is irrelevant, and B. he doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill. 6th commandment, "Thall Shall not murder"
Numbers 14:19 - "In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, just as you have pardoned them from the time they left Egypt until now."
1 Kings 8:34 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their fathers."
1 Kings 8:36 - "then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel. Teach them the right way to live, and send rain on the land you gave your people for an inheritance."
1 Kings 8:50 - "And forgive your people, who have sinned against you; forgive all the offenses they have committed against you, and cause their conquerors to show them mercy;"
Jeremiah 33:8 - "I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me."
How about Jesus' prayer, many know as a Lord's prayer in Matthew 6:9 - "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors."
How about The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant? Mathew 18:21
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
Colossians 3:13 - Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
I could go on, but you should get the point by now.


As for Darwin creating evolution, that is not what I said. I stated "the popularization of"


And for the living coming from living. I am talking about we have never seen one thing "living" that has come from something that wasn't living. It was from the characteristics of living organisms.

There is some strong evidence of a flood, which also throws the geologic column idea right out the window. There's tons of examples of trees that are upside down or sideways that are sticking through multiple rock layers. This has happened all over the world. And China's dynasties started with the Xia Dynasty which started around 2070BC. The flood is believed to have happened somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 BC. There's also a few sites that suggest it was around 7,000 years ago. This just makes my point stronger, yes?

"Lastly, who says Nature must follow true logic over thousands of years? And who says that those numbers don't follow logic?"
We have seen nature tends towards disorder and chaos. Soil and mountains are eroding away, we don't see mountains being "pushed up" like evolution suggests. I also find it incredibly hard to believe that "life" just happened to get the right order of strands of RNA to create something that was living and worked. That sounds less likely than something creating it. If you roll 2 dice, the chance of you getting the 2 numbers you wanted are 1:36. Even a small protein has a 1:10^67 of being created. That is 1:100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Keep in mind, that is merely a small protein, not even life.
Mathematicians generally agree that, statistically, any odds beyond 1 in 10 to the 50th (1:10^50) have a zero probability of ever happening - Emil Borel, Elements of the Theory of Probability.

Being related to everything could point to either one, it's just evolution is a fallacy. Not to mention it was popularized by a man with severe mental and personality disorders. Never read that in your science books, did'ya?

Why is my comment irrelevant? I can say that the same goes for you, but that won't make any sense on either side. Also, as I stated before, I don't believe in the nonexistence of God, neither do I believe in His existence.

He doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill, does he? Well, it seems like you VERY NEATLY sidestepped the Flood. However bad the people were, did he need to kill the whole Earth? Next, in the book of Job, he tortures Job to no end, just to win a wager against Satan. And what happened to Egypt? He did kill a great many people in Egypt too, you know. If he could create the world, why didn't he just use a stronger form of divine intervention to get them out of Egypt? And why are they the only people who can claim the title "His people"? I thought the world was all "His people", being sons of Adam and daughters of Eve?

I see you quote from the bible that you so fervently believe in. Do you want me to do the same?

Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Genesis 38:7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

Exodus 7:4 But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.

Exodus 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD. And they did so.

Exodus 15:6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.

Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

The whole book of Leviticus is about the cruel sacrifice of animals

Numbers 5:2 Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
5:3 Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.
5:4 And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the LORD spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel.

You want me to go on? I could go on to list every single book.

Actually, Darwin did create the first well-known theory of evolution. Unless you're talking about human evolution. Which he did also, but was not the strongest proponent.

As for the "living from living", you just affirmed what I said.

Umm, no. China's dynasties have lasted FAR FAR longer than what you say. And let's say the flood is true. Then that affirms what I say about God being a murderer, no? And there's no proof that the flood was a divine thing.

I can disprove your last statement without going over the first part. Mathematicians DO NOT generally agree that odds in 1:10^50 are BOUND not to happen. If that were true, as you stated, then there would be nobody studying quantum mechanics.

Hmm, well, using your first statement against you, if you don't believe it, then your comment is irrelevant. Otherwise, to disprove it, that's just plain stupid. You whole last paragraph hinges on the "fact" that Darwin had mental disorders. But as you yourself said, Darwin didn't create the theory of human evolution. So there goes that out the window, huh?

Your whole post is full of contradictions and holes. Patch them up for me so I can actually have a debatable opponent.

From: lolpie
What about the Crusades?



Because all of it happened during prehistoric Earth, when conditions were A LOT different than they are today. I forget the names of the scientists, but 2 of them recreated prehistoric conditions in a test tube. They made conditions similar to those in the prehistoric times, added some electricity and some inorganic molecules….viola - organic molecules were created.



The universe is most likely infinite. That means there are trillions of galaxies out there. I would say that life would have to occur on AT LEAST a few planets out of trillions^2 of planets. Earth is just lucky :)



So? Lots of unstable people have contributed to science…Stephen Hawking, Einstein, Albus Dumbledore…. :D

The test tube thing was disproved a long time ago, but like most stuff with evolution, when it is disproved, it just dies, there is no "we were wrong, sorry people"

For the sake of argument. There is VERY VERY few planets actually suitable for life. And there are some problems even with that. They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone. UV rays would kill the organisms then. This is a commonly known thing. Laboratories commonly use UV lights to sterilize stuff. If there was oxygen, this would have killed the organisms too.

But were any of them suffering from depersonalization?

From: thephanatik
The test tube thing was disproved a long time ago, but like most stuff with evolution, when it is disproved, it just dies, there is no "we were wrong, sorry people"

For the sake of argument. There is VERY VERY few planets actually suitable for life. And there are some problems even with that. They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone. UV rays would kill the organisms then. This is a commonly known thing. Laboratories commonly use UV lights to sterilize stuff. If there was oxygen, this would have killed the organisms too.

But were any of them suffering from depersonalization?

How was the test tube thing disproved? Because they PROVED that it actually worked. So how did they disprove something that was already proved? And more importantly, why is my high school biology teacher still teaching it then?

And how would you know how many planets are/were actually suitable for life? Have you been to other galaxies or solar systems? A few of your statements aren't even understandable. "They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone." Such as that. How do you know there would be no ozone in the atmosphere of the planet?

And even if they were suffering from depersonalization, they proved their shit. Depersonalization just means they felt like they were living in a dream and didn't have a strong sense of reality.

I command you to respond to my post too, phanatik.

Here's getting antsy. Nothing to argue about :)

From: crossback7
How was the test tube thing disproved? Because they PROVED that it actually worked. So how did they disprove something that was already proved? And more importantly, why is my high school biology teacher still teaching it then?

And how would you know how many planets are/were actually suitable for life? Have you been to other galaxies or solar systems? A few of your statements aren't even understandable. "They believed that there wasn't any oxygen, but there wouldn't be any ozone." Such as that. How do you know there would be no ozone in the atmosphere of the planet?

And even if they were suffering from depersonalization, they proved their shit. Depersonalization just means they felt like they were living in a dream and didn't have a strong sense of reality.

You are referring to the Miller and Urey experiment. They claimed to have made simple amino acids, which makes up RNA, which then makes up DNA. No one has yet to create life from this.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2097

We can see other planets. You don't need to physically visit planets to know what they are life. There are very complicated techniques they use to identify the atmospheric composition of other planets. Not to mention the extreme temperatures of some planets that obviously cannot support life. There are tons of other requirements needed for life, which most planets do not have. There was an outstanding video I saw on it, but I can't seem to remember the name of it.

How do you know there would be no ozone in the atmosphere of the planet?
They didn't believe to be any Oxygen at the time of the first life being created. Oxygen would have destroyed the combinations needed to create the amino acids. Now they know that there must have been oxygen, because the UV light would have killed the life too. The UV light would have also reacted with the water vapor and created oxygen. We now know that there was actually at least 10% MORE oxygen than there is now. 1% oxygen would have been enough to destroy it.
http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-3.htm



Edit:

Two well known scientists calculated the odds of life forming by natural processes. They estimated that there is less than 1 chance in 10^40,000 that life could have originated by random trials.

thephanatik, you're still not responding to ME.

I have a MUCH stronger argument, because it DIRECTLY responds to yours. Because yours is MUCH weaker than mine.

Haha, calm down

K phanatic…here is a picture of the known galaxies:

People say that many planets won't support life as we know it. We don't know what life is. Therefore, life other than what we know must exist. :D

Also, here's an article http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009FCA4-1A8F-1085-94F483414B7F0000

From: Here
Why is my comment irrelevant? I can say that the same goes for you, but that won't make any sense on either side. Also, as I stated before, I don't believe in the nonexistence of God, neither do I believe in His existence.

He doesn't teach us to slaughter and kill, does he? Well, it seems like you VERY NEATLY sidestepped the Flood. However bad the people were, did he need to kill the whole Earth? Next, in the book of Job, he tortures Job to no end, just to win a wager against Satan. And what happened to Egypt? He did kill a great many people in Egypt too, you know. If he could create the world, why didn't he just use a stronger form of divine intervention to get them out of Egypt? And why are they the only people who can claim the title "His people"? I thought the world was all "His people", being sons of Adam and daughters of Eve?

I see you quote from the bible that you so fervently believe in. Do you want me to do the same?

Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Genesis 38:7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

Exodus 7:4 But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments.

Exodus 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the LORD. And they did so.

Exodus 15:6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.

Exodus 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

The whole book of Leviticus is about the cruel sacrifice of animals

Numbers 5:2 Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
5:3 Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.
5:4 And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the LORD spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel.

You want me to go on? I could go on to list every single book.

Actually, Darwin did create the first well-known theory of evolution. Unless you're talking about human evolution. Which he did also, but was not the strongest proponent.

As for the "living from living", you just affirmed what I said.

Umm, no. China's dynasties have lasted FAR FAR longer than what you say. And let's say the flood is true. Then that affirms what I say about God being a murderer, no? And there's no proof that the flood was a divine thing.

I can disprove your last statement without going over the first part. Mathematicians DO NOT generally agree that odds in 1:10^50 are BOUND not to happen. If that were true, as you stated, then there would be nobody studying quantum mechanics.

Hmm, well, using your first statement against you, if you don't believe it, then your comment is irrelevant. Otherwise, to disprove it, that's just plain stupid. You whole last paragraph hinges on the "fact" that Darwin had mental disorders. But as you yourself said, Darwin didn't create the theory of human evolution. So there goes that out the window, huh?

Your whole post is full of contradictions and holes. Patch them up for me so I can actually have a debatable opponent.

First of all, most of your statements are talking about GOD destroying the corrupt and wicked. This not teaching US to go slaughter millions of Jewish people because they are an inferior race. A lot of them were also referring to wars and destroying the enemy.

And for the animal cruelty: Old Testament, before Jesus died for our sins. No longer relevant to our lives.

Others, including Darwin's own wife, argued that his mental problem stemmed from guilt over his life's goal to refute the argument for God from design (Bean, 1978, p. 574; p. 28; Pasnau, 1990, p. 126).

As I edited to my last post, its actually 1:1^40,000 for life to have been created.

Before the Xia dynasty was the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors. These were MYTHOLOGICAL rulers. There was people living there, but there was also people living before the flood too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhuangwudi

From: Here
thephanatik, you're still not responding to ME.

I have a MUCH stronger argument, because it DIRECTLY responds to yours. Because yours is MUCH weaker than mine.

There you go, lots of stuff to type, not enough time.
I also don't see you producing much of your own information to support evolution, just trying to refute everything I say.

From: thephanatik
First of all, most of your statements are talking about GOD destroying the corrupt and wicked. This not teaching US to go slaughter millions of Jewish people because they are an inferior race. A lot of them were also referring to wars and destroying the enemy.

And for the animal cruelty: Old Testament, before Jesus died for our sins. No longer relevant to our lives.

Others, including Darwin's own wife, argued that his mental problem stemmed from guilt over his life's goal to refute the argument for God from design (Bean, 1978, p. 574; p. 28; Pasnau, 1990, p. 126).

As I edited to my last post, its actually 1:1^40,000 for life to have been created.

Before the Xia dynasty was the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors. These were MYTHOLOGICAL rulers. There was people living there, but there was also people living before the flood too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhuangwudi

So, God can break the rules because he is Almighty, huh? How would you like it if your parents did that to you? You don't. Unless you're trying to imply that God is the biggest hypocrite in the universe. If God can create the world in seven days, then he can surely remove these "enemies" of his (why does he have so many enemies anyways? Isn't he the Supreme?) without resorting to cruel and unusual methods.

Well, you refer mostly to the old testament, so I did too. I can pull a lot of stuff out of the new testament too, if you wish. Especially Revelations.

With the Darwin thing, you just disproved your own point. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but he also knew it was the truth. So either it doesn't support you at all, or it undermines you.

As for the China info, I'll admit I was wrong, I had read the dates terribly. But again, I tell you that the flood has no proof of divine intervention.

From: thephanatik
There you go, lots of stuff to type, not enough time.
I also don't see you producing much of your own information to support evolution, just trying to refute everything I say.

Yes, I explained why I "try to refute everything you say" in a previous post. I will not reiterate here, but proof by contradiction is also a valid proof.

Wow… you guys really need to pick your battles. Your basically falling into every trap!

When you debate, you need to think as much of the opponents arguments, as well as your own (please, I learned that in like middle school).

Some one really needs to get here to switch sides, lol. [] is utterly slaughtering every weak post here (thank you for doing so). So.. stop making them!

EDIT:
Forgive me, I don't have a clue where this conversation started, or even what its about. So im just going to take bits of pieces of what I read recently. Sorry.

God can create the world in seven days

This is genesis stuff. Which is probably some of the most abstract crap in the bible. Anyhows, It is stated quite a few times in the bible (please don't make me look them up) That Gods time scale is NOT the same as ours. A few biblical quotes give some ratio's of it, but I think its even more advanced than that, I think the ratio of God's time to ours can VARY as he chooses.

then he can surely remove these "enemies" of his (why does he have so many enemies anyways? Isn't he the Supreme?)

God doesnt really have enemies. not even the devil really. And although god theoreticaly could, at any point in time, remove anyone or thing that is against him. He never would. It would defeat the entire plan of salvation. It would make earth a worthless, dull, unchallenging experience. There must always be a contrast, with out bad, good does not exist. God wasn't trying to get people out of Egypt, he was trying their faith. Pushing them to thier limits. There were experiences in egypt that needed to happen, both for the people at the time, and people reading about them. If God wanted them out of egypt, they would have never been there in the first place.

without resorting to cruel and unusual methods.

Why would god ever try to adhere to our standards of cruel and unusual? Theres no point in making what he does look good to us. God>Bill of rights (or may be it was the constitution.. sorry)

Anyhow, I know this picking apart is a bit unfair, I'll try to stay up to speed for now on.

From: lordgreggreg
Wow… you guys really need to pick your battles. Your basically falling into every trap!

When you debate, you need to think as much of the opponents arguments, as well as your own (please, I learned that in like middle school).

Some one really needs to get here to switch sides, lol. [] is utterly slaughtering every weak post here (thank you for doing so). So.. stop making them!

You know, you're right again.

If you can portray to me a loving God without resorting to the Bible, then I'll have nothing to say. Chronicles of Narnia could've made me become Christian again. But then I also read the Golden Compass series.

I say don't look to the bible, because that's one of THE WORST examples of love you can give me. People compare its violence to the Qur'an, if that means anything to you.

You want me to prove God is loving without using the Bible? I can do that…

http://tinyurl.com/quufe
http://tinyurl.com/dry6p
http://tinyurl.com/2lp3v8
http://tinyurl.com/l3qho
http://tinyurl.com/363of7

From: thephanatik
You want me to prove God is loving without using the Bible? I can do that…

http://tinyurl.com/quufe
http://tinyurl.com/dry6p
http://tinyurl.com/2lp3v8

Omg, are you kidding me???? Just because a kittens face looks cute to your humans eyes has next to NOTHING to do with god being loving!
Oh wait, are your trying to say that god loves you so much , he made kittens have cute faces so you could look at them on the internet and be happy? Thats pathetically abstract, and relys upon way to many debatable points. (One of them being that kittens are cute, lol)

Way to ruin a good opportunity.

Here, I'll give you a decent example in a little bit ok?

Edit: Ok, this turned out to be allot harder than I thought. Not because there arent any, but more of, there arent any that are blatant enough. (ie not personal)

God, for the most part, is just. I would say tht that is his most defining quality. Jesus, on the other hand, is the forgiving one, (forgive me if I am confusing you by separating them).
And unfortunatly, the only decent documentary on christ we have is the bible, so .. trash that.

What about now…
A while back… I made a post about a baby bird my fiencee brought home. I didn't know how to take care of it, and I probably would have killed it. It was supposed to receive food every hour… I didn't feed it for at least a 13… It was weak, it couldn't open its eyes, and it was getting cold. I knew it was going to die. (I apologize for the lack of real evidence, I never thought it necessary to video take me try to count its pulse, of measure its temperature).
Long story short, I got attached to that bird, I was breaking down emotionally, the bird was breaking down physically.

i asked God for help, stopped crying, went to sleep, the bird was better in the morning, and we were finally contacted by an expert who could take care of it.

It's a small thing, but its the most recent thing that happened to me that I attribute to be related to God more then most other chances.

I know this is a pretty weak argument, and most people would consider this just bull and that the bird would have made it just fine regardless of my prayr or not. Perhaps the reason I felt better after the prayr was just because in my head I felt that a god was going to take care of it, putting me at ease.
But look, I'm no fool, and If i had any choice whether to believe in God or not, I wouldn't. But unfortunately I know that there was a little bit more than random chance helping me out there.

…sigh… Here, you win. I can't show you a loving God without referring to the bible. Because it is only in the bible where I can avoid annoying issues such as "was it god who did that?"

You can notice a loving god, once you admit that things don't happen by chance.

From: lordgreggreg
Omg, are you kidding me???? Just because a kittens face looks cute to your humans eyes has next to NOTHING to do with god being loving!
Oh wait, are your trying to say that god loves you so much , he made kittens have cute faces so you could look at them on the internet and be happy? Thats pathetically abstract, and relys upon way to many debatable points. (One of them being that kittens are cute, lol)

Way to ruin a good opportunity.

Here, I'll give you a decent example in a little bit ok?

It was a joke. It wasn't meant to be all that serious.

From: lordgreggreg
Wow… you guys really need to pick your battles. Your basically falling into every trap!

When you debate, you need to think as much of the opponents arguments, as well as your own (please, I learned that in like middle school).

Some one really needs to get here to switch sides, lol. [] is utterly slaughtering every weak post here (thank you for doing so). So.. stop making them!

EDIT:
Forgive me, I don't have a clue where this conversation started, or even what its about. So im just going to take bits of pieces of what I read recently. Sorry.

This is genesis stuff. Which is probably some of the most abstract crap in the bible. Anyhows, It is stated quite a few times in the bible (please don't make me look them up) That Gods time scale is NOT the same as ours. A few biblical quotes give some ratio's of it, but I think its even more advanced than that, I think the ratio of God's time to ours can VARY as he chooses.


God doesnt really have enemies. not even the devil really. And although god theoreticaly could, at any point in time, remove anyone or thing that is against him. He never would. It would defeat the entire plan of salvation. It would make earth a worthless, dull, unchallenging experience. There must always be a contrast, with out bad, good does not exist. God wasn't trying to get people out of Egypt, he was trying their faith. Pushing them to thier limits. There were experiences in egypt that needed to happen, both for the people at the time, and people reading about them. If God wanted them out of egypt, they would have never been there in the first place.


Why would god ever try to adhere to our standards of cruel and unusual? Theres no point in making what he does look good to us. God>Bill of rights (or may be it was the constitution.. sorry)

Anyhow, I know this picking apart is a bit unfair, I'll try to stay up to speed for now on.

All right. Let's see now…

First of all, I agree with you, the time scale thing is off. I have thought about it ever since I have become an apagnostic. So I have nothing to say there, except that I don't really believe God created the world by himself. Even scientists have team members.

Next, with the enemies, I was responding to another quote in which phanatik said that God was destroying his "enemies". So I don't believe God has "enemies" either, what with everyone being sons of His. As for the Devil, if he did not exist, then the point of God would be gone too. So they are more team members than enemies. God WOULD NOT destroy Satan. Else people would stop believing in him (for people that would still believe, I respect them very highly.)

The "cruel and unusual" is the only thing I disagree with. God is purported to have an infinite sense of mercy, what stops him from using it? And I was quoting from the Bill of Rights to show a point, not referring to it.

So yes, I have agreed with you on some points there. Why? Read on.

I have finally found what bugs me about people that try to prove the existence of God. God is the Ultimate, the Almighty. Why would he want YOU to be definite of his presence? A tiny little smidgen? What proof do you have that he has not created another universe, and forsaken you? None.

Next, I have no problem with Christians in general. In fact, I even welcome the Jehovah's Witnesses who come to my doorstep every so often to try and make me join their local church. I always decline politely, but I love them for they GENUINELY believe they are working for MY welfare. Also, they try to make me join NOT by trying to prove the existence of God, but by showing how I can be a loving person, and how THEY are too. Nowhere in their pamphlets do they tell me to believe in God. They are a persistent, kind people, people I would rather talk with than argue.

Next, religion has already conceded proofing to science.

Lastly, when you try to PROVE God, you are not resorting to faith (not blind faith, which I despise), but are coming onto science's grounds. I am SURE God does NOT want to you try and prove him, but rather love him, or spread love to other people.

If God is all that [phanatik] says he is, I'd rather not trust him with my welfare. Though I am less perfect, I prefer my independence to his control of destiny. If God is portrayed as a human, who is able to make mistakes, yet follows the same rules as we do, I would be more likely to believe in him. With the state of the world, the latter seems more real.

I have seen your kittens post, thephanatik. I am amused at what you resort to. Want me to pull out my own pics?

A cat.
Another cat.
A last cat.

They're all cute in their own ways, but my point is that trying to prove the kindness of God with kittens is futile.

From: Here
The "cruel and unusual" is the only thing I disagree with. God is purported to have an infinite sense of mercy, what stops him from using it?

Jesus in my opinion is the one with mercy. God doesn't use it because he doesn't really need to. Mabey some people really needed to see "Locusts up on ya azz". Perhaps by deciding to be a bit harsh was the most merciful thing he could do. Sure, mabey not on earth, but as a lesson that can help them thereafter. If you think of earthlings as his children, sometimes the parent needs to be merciful and forgiving, other times, it's time for a whooping. :)

From: Here
I have finally found what bugs me about people that try to prove the existence of God. God is the Ultimate, the Almighty. Why would he want YOU to be definite of his presencneee? A tiny little smidgen?

Yes! Exactly! If it were so easy to prove his existence, then that would just defeat the purpose of testing people. It would remove any and all rewards of trust and faith! I don't think god will EVER do anything to prove his existence unless he KNOWS that people still won't believe. (exodus for example)

From: Here
What proof do you have that he has not created another universe, and forsaken you? None.

Well, as far as him making another universe, yeah, none. In fact, ive a good hunch that he already has… there are references to it in the bible.

Now, as far as forsaken this one? I have the bible saying that the earth is supposed to get really wiked and .. away from god.. as it can before he finally comes back (second comming). And I have my own personal revelations that force me to belive that he still, not only cares about what happens on earth, but has his hand in every little bit of it.

What proof do you have that he has forsaken this world?

From: Here
Next, I have no problem with Christians in general. In fact, I even welcome the Jehovah's Witnesses who come to my doorstep every so often to try and make me join their local church. I always decline politely, but I love them for they GENUINELY believe they are working for MY welfare. Also, they try to make me join NOT by trying to prove the existence of God, but by showing how I can be a loving person, and how THEY are too. Nowhere in their pamphlets do they tell me to believe in God. They are a persistent, kind people, people I would rather talk with than argue.

I have never really read through their pamplets… but I agree with you, they are very nice people, who really believe in what they think. It's a good idea to not really try to prove god's existence, it's supposed to be hard, in fact, it's supposed to be impossible. The only thing that can prove someting like that is a personal conversion, whatever form that will take. (I belive that 90% of all god belivers, if not more, don't truly belive in him, because they have not had this… therefore they have no proof, and just have faith blindly).
This blind faith explains quite a few of the downfalls of most organized religion.

From: Here
Lastly, when you try to PROVE God, you are not resorting to faith (not blind faith, which I despise), but are coming onto science's grounds. I am SURE God does NOT want to you try and prove him, but rather love him, or spread love to other people.

Yeah, i suppose that is true by definition. But not all evidence has to by hard science fact's does it?

From: Here
Though I am less perfect, I prefer my independence to his control of destiny. If God is portrayed as a human, who is able to make mistakes, yet follows the same rules as we do, I would be more likely to believe in him. With the state of the world, the latter seems more real.

Yes, I don't want anyhting to do with a God that want's to control me. But that's jsut the point. It's VERY obvious that god doesnt do this. It is becisary for any trial or test, and obvoiusly, on earth; for every person to have their own free agency. Thats so unbelievably necessary that God won't stop even the most evil of actions, because by doing so, he would be taking that away from someone. (Want proof, look at the world, he obviously doesnt stop bad things).

From: Here
thephanatik. I am amused at what you resort to.

Me too. It's a humiliating rebuttle.

From: lordgreggreg
Jesus in my opinion is the one with mercy. God doesn't use it because he doesn't really need to. Mabey some people really needed to see "Locusts up on ya azz". Perhaps by deciding to be a bit harsh was the most merciful thing he could do. Sure, mabey not on earth, but as a lesson that can help them thereafter. If you think of earthlings as his children, sometimes the parent needs to be merciful and forgiving, other times, it's time for a whooping. :)


Yes! Exactly! If it were so easy to prove his existence, then that would just defeat the purpose of testing people. It would remove any and all rewards of trust and faith! I don't think god will EVER do anything to prove his existence unless he KNOWS that people still won't believe. (exodus for example)



Well, as far as him making another universe, yeah, none. In fact, ive a good hunch that he already has… there are references to it in the bible.

Now, as far as forsaken this one? I have the bible saying that the earth is supposed to get really wiked and .. away from god.. as it can before he finally comes back (second comming). And I have my own personal revelations that force me to belive that he still, not only cares about what happens on earth, but has his hand in every little bit of it.

What proof do you have that he has forsaken this world?



I have never really read through their pamplets… but I agree with you, they are very nice people, who really believe in what they think. It's a good idea to not really try to prove god's existence, it's supposed to be hard, in fact, it's supposed to be impossible. The only thing that can prove someting like that is a personal conversion, whatever form that will take. (I belive that 90% of all god belivers, if not more, don't truly belive in him, because they have not had this… therefore they have no proof, and just have faith blindly).
This blind faith explains quite a few of the downfalls of most organized religion.




Yeah, i suppose that is true by definition. But not all evidence has to by hard science fact's does it?



Yes, I don't want anyhting to do with a God that want's to control me. But that's jsut the point. It's VERY obvious that god doesnt do this. It is becisary for any trial or test, and obvoiusly, on earth; for every person to have their own free agency. Thats so unbelievably necessary that God won't stop even the most evil of actions, because by doing so, he would be taking that away from someone. (Want proof, look at the world, he obviously doesnt stop bad things).


Me too. It's a humiliating rebuttle.

I've never thought of the merciful = wrath thing, and though it is brain food, I'm still skeptical. But it certainly provides a new view. Makes me think of the generic parent. In which this analogy makes perfect sense. I'll think about that. But sometimes, I don't think it applies, and can't help but think he's overdoing it (the flood again).

If God wanted people to know that he existed, then I wouldn't be disagreeing with thephanatik right now, because I would know he was there. But he doesn't make me. So no go either way.

Ok, I have as much proof as you have in this "forsaken" aspect, which is none. Maybe he has, maybe he hasn't. And the Revelations (no matter how violent they are) still support the opinion that he just might come back to rain judgment. In which case, I hope he's pretty lenient. Because if he does come back as a strict schoolteacher, I'm not going to be playing a harp (at least by the evangelist definition. I'm a good person at heart, I think).

Yes, most people only believe in God because their parents do, which provides me with a healthy dose of skepticism. But a personal commitment, or a true conversion, as you call it, should be kept to, and I will not try to argue the existence of God with someone who has had one. I keep my opinions to myself with those people, but try to discuss WHAT God does in his existence.

No, it doesn't, but it's hard for me to be a person of faith, so I tend to be a science-believer. A bit too much. Because religion had the same hold on people that science does now. Who knows, maybe something new will spring up in the next millennium that doesn't deal with central figures or laws of the universe.

In truth, as a Christian, I didn't believe in the existence of Hell. I believed in his infinite mercy upon all living things, no matter how cruel the person was in life. I don't know how that works out, but God himself doesn't work out in terms of human minds (as in, he's quite incomprehensible).

But we're probably just talking to ourselves right now. It seems as if the evangelist Christians/atheists have disappeared.

From: Here
I've never thought of the merciful = wrath thing, and though it is brain food, I'm still skeptical. But it certainly provides a new view. Makes me think of the generic parent. In which this analogy makes perfect sense. I'll think about that. But sometimes, I don't think it applies, and can't help but think he's overdoing it (the flood again).

Yeah, the flood is pretty interesting. Sucks that the only people to survive it really didn't know the details behind it.

From: Here
In which case, I hope he's pretty lenient. Because if he does come back as a strict schoolteacher, I'm not going to be playing a harp (at least by the evangelist definition. I'm a good person at heart, I think).

Yeah, just make sure you shuffle on into jesus's little line, you'll be fine I would assume. Thoughts are sometimes loader than actions (specially the heart type), if they are true thoughts, and if they are real feelings (although, ironicly, if they are, they almost always result in action).
I really dont think that god is going to get pissed at you for not realizing they exist, thats miniscule. JC is probably going to pull every string he has to get you into heaven.

From: Here
Yes, most people only believe in God because their parents do, which provides me with a healthy dose of skepticism. But a personal commitment, or a true conversion, as you call it, should be kept to, and I will not try to argue the existence of God with someone who has had one. I keep my opinions to myself with those people, but try to discuss WHAT God does in his existence.

Yeah, thats a fair judgement. It makes for poor arguments sake when all the proof is personal, lol. I really do enjoy talking about it though, I respect your opinions highly, and apreciate your thoughts. I think its good refinement / enlightenment for both of us.

From: Here
No, it doesn't, but it's hard for me to be a person of faith, so I tend to be a science-believer. A bit too much. Because religion had the same hold on people that science does now. Who knows, maybe something new will spring up in the next millennium that doesn't deal with central figures or laws of the universe.

That would sure be crazy. :) I think that I am science driven myself. There is nothing really wrong with it, and I think better scientifically rather than logically. (yes, i seperated them on purpose :P ) It is pretty amazing (looking back at feudal times) to see how much power a corrucp church could have over people. I really like you analogy, on how its flip floped seince then :). However, as this science stuff grows stronger, it seems to force religion to try to match it. I don't think the world has ever seen such close minded zealots as we have now.

From: Here
In truth, as a Christian, I didn't believe in the existence of Hell. I believed in his infinite mercy upon all living things, no matter how cruel the person was in life. I don't know how that works out, but God himself doesn't work out in terms of human minds (as in, he's quite incomprehensible).

Ok , EVERY BIT of what you just said, i agree with. And couldn't have said it better. I still don't believe in hell, in fact, I am almost positive that it doesn't exist. (or at least not a big and fire/brimstone idea) It gets complicated after this though, because I still believe that people will be rewarded for being good on earth, and that we arent going to be on the same level as some child rapest scum. (for give me for judging, but I think thats a legit comment, or at least one strong enough that you wont be able to argue very well that child rapers arent scum..)

From: Here
But we're probably just talking to ourselves right now. It seems as if the evangelist Christians/atheists have disappeared.

What a pitty. They are great for commic relief. Wait.. forgive me, but what's your definition of "evangelist" as you just used it?

Umm, I can only respond to two of your comments, as the other, you just agreed with (aww man… hehe).

As for child rapists, they are some of the lowest of the low. I have no disagreements. But I would place the mentally insane people as above the "scum" classification, though I still feel pain for their victims.

And as for evangelists, they are people who force their definitions of God and religion upon others. I would make a good one, I believe. Heh.

From: Here
Umm, I can only respond to two of your comments, as the other, you just agreed with (aww man… hehe).

Lol, sorry, it wasnt on purpose let me assure you, lol.

From: Here
But I would place the mentally insane people as above the "scum" classification, though I still feel pain for their victims.

I would too; however, I would only classify the true mentally insine people. I know that most people who have a "mental ilness" dont. Especially when they get into trouble, its an excuse, and it makes me mad how people get out of trouble wiht that. In my opinion, anyone who rapes some one is mentally insane by definition.

From: Here
And as for evangelists, they are people who force their definitions of God and religion upon others. I would make a good one, I believe. Heh.

Lol, Ok, thats what I thought you mean, I was just used to a different usage of the word. And yes, you would make a good one, you argue very effectively, and are very forcefully in your thoughts. With a little bit less thought, and more of a closed mind, you'd be perfect.

Edit: I just noticed that this post has almost nothing to do with this thread… Sorry!!!

From: lordgreggreg
Lol, sorry, it wasnt on purpose let me assure you, lol.

I would too; however, I would only classify the true mentally insine people. I know that most people who have a "mental ilness" dont. Especially when they get into trouble, its an excuse, and it makes me mad how people get out of trouble wiht that. In my opinion, anyone who rapes some one is mentally insane by definition.

Lol, Ok, thats what I thought you mean, I was just used to a different usage of the word. And yes, you would make a good one, you argue very effectively, and are very forcefully in your thoughts. With a little bit less thought, and more of a closed mind, you'd be perfect.

Edit: I just noticed that this post has almost nothing to do with this thread… Sorry!!!

About the mental illness thing, the TRUE ones are the ONLY ones I talk about when I say mentally ill. Otherwise, the others are scum. And I hope people don't take offense at my use of the word retarded. The word "retard" to me is someone who spouts their stupidity intentionally. The "other" "retard" I always call "mentally structured differently".

Damn, you guys wanna discuss this over PMs or IM?

From: lolpie
Damn, you guys wanna discuss this over PMs or IM?

Oh common, most people here could use the thought provoktion (not a word, get over it)

We already are half-discussing this over PMs. One step ahead, lolpie. No offense meant.

You guys make me feel stupid. Which I'm not. At least, I keep telling myself that. . .Eh, maybe ignorant would be a better term. I pretty much agree with both of you.

Only thing I can say is, if God doesn't exist then what's the purpose? Why should we bother living if there is no higher goal or. . .just anything after we die? We wouldn't be working towards anything. If I had full-blown proof that there was no God, I'd commit suicide on the dot. I don't believe in God (agnostic), at least not the way the Church wants me to, but I ask myself the above question a lot. There's something for you two to answer for me.

Lemme eat, then I'll answer you. Even girls eat.

Glad to hear it. I can't stand when girls say they're fat. . .I just walk away. I've got a few friends who worry me, as they NEVER eat.

From: Here
Even girls eat.

Lies.

If God doesn't exist then what's the purpose? Why should we bother living if there is no higher goal or. . .just anything after we die?

Yes, using your own logic. If there is nothing after you die, then thats a pretty good reason to keep on living, lol.

No higher goal you say? Sure there is. One thing that is pretty nifty about this earth is that you can set goals, and work on achiving them. Just because there isn't a goal as high as heaven, … well look. If you take heaven out of the picture (as you would by removing god), then goals such as say… making a wizzup quality script start looking alot better in perspective :).

Besides… what do you plan to do in heaven? Whats the purpose going to be in there? I don't think heaven is going to have a heaven to get to… so I would say that ..
Your goal on earth without heaven = your goal in heaven without a heaven heaven.

We wouldn't be working towards anything.

Well, thats a personal choice. I sure would be, I'd be working towards whatever made me happy. Besides, you still have those nice carnal instinks to rely on if theres no god? like, when god said "multiply and replenssh the earth" … that was just redundant for the instink all living things have. (the only reason he said it was to give a nice ironic situation when combined with "don't eat the apple" after she did.)

If I had full-blown proof that there was no God, I'd commit suicide on the dot. I don't believe in God (agnostic), at least not the way the Church wants me to, but I ask myself the above question a lot.

Something tells me your a teenager… yeah, I had the same stuff going on. It gets clearer / less of a problem as you get older and understand yourself more.

Oh, for the record, I am just playing devils advocate… but still.
There's something for you two to answer for me.

From: lordgreggreg

No higher goal you say? Sure there is. One thing that is pretty nifty about this earth is that you can set goals, and work on achiving them. Just because there isn't a goal as high as heaven, … well look. If you take heaven out of the picture (as you would by removing god), then goals such as say… making a wizzup quality script start looking alot better in perspective :).

- Yeah, but acheiving goals in this world don't really mean anything. Well. . .they do, but they have no real. . .purpose. I can't really explain what I mean. I have goals that I'd like to acheive, but only because they'd help people. I'd like to cure cancer. Most likely not going to happen, but I'll work on it until the day I die or am incapable of doing it anymore. But I mean that what's the point on trying to do anything helpful? I could just as easily make my goal to rob and kill as many people as I can. I believe that I'm a decent person at heart, so that's not my goal, but it just as easily could be.

Something tells me your a teenager… yeah, I had the same stuff going on. It gets clearer / less of a problem as you get older and understand yourself more.

- Figured that would give me away :( I hate being young. . .Alright, now I REALLY sound like a teenager.

Besides… what do you plan to do in heaven? Whats the purpose going to be in there? I don't think heaven is going to have a heaven to get to… so I would say that ..
Your goal on earth without heaven = your goal in heaven without a heaven heaven.

- Heaven isn't really defined extremely well in the Bible. So I can't honestly say. I'm just assuming being in God's presence would be about as high as you could get and that Heaven would be all that it's made to be.

Well, thats a personal choice. I sure would be, I'd be working towards whatever made me happy. Besides, you still have those nice carnal instinks to rely on if theres no god? like, when god said "multiply and replenssh the earth" … that was just redundant for the instink all living things have. (the only reason he said it was to give a nice ironic situation when combined with "don't eat the apple" after she did.)

- Yeah, but you can't be happy without being angry/sad/some other grim emotion first. Like you said about the whole "There'd be no good without bad" deal. And I would like my life to have a higher purpose than to have sex.

From: crossback7
You guys make me feel stupid. Which I'm not. At least, I keep telling myself that. . .Eh, maybe ignorant would be a better term. I pretty much agree with both of you.

Only thing I can say is, if God doesn't exist then what's the purpose? Why should we bother living if there is no higher goal or. . .just anything after we die? We wouldn't be working towards anything. If I had full-blown proof that there was no God, I'd commit suicide on the dot. I don't believe in God (agnostic), at least not the way the Church wants me to, but I ask myself the above question a lot. There's something for you two to answer for me.

Uh, the ideal life span is 80 years. That's a lot of time to try and live a successful and happy life. You should bother living that long because it's the only life you have, you don't get a second chance, so make the most of it.

From: lolpie
Uh, the ideal life span is 80 years. That's a lot of time to try and live a successful and happy life. You should bother living that long because it's the only life you have, you don't get a second chance, so make the most of it.

Try. Most people don't die happy.

From: crossback7
- Yeah, but acheiving goals in this world don't really mean anything.

Why not? why wouldn't they have a real purpose? They would, they have to almost by definition

From: crossback7
I can't really explain what I mean.

I dont think you know what you mean.

From: crossback7
I have goals that I'd like to acheive, but only because they'd help people. I'd like to cure cancer. Most likely not going to happen, but I'll work on it until the day I die or am incapable of doing it anymore.

Youre telling me that ALL of your goals are selfless? That you want to cure cancer on to help people, and not for the fame and fortune it would bring? How ideal, but sure.. for the sake of argument, I'll ride with it.

From: crossback7
But I mean that what's the point on trying to do anything helpful? I could just as easily make my goal to rob and kill as many people as I can. I believe that I'm a decent person at heart, so that's not my goal, but it just as easily could be.

Well, now your tlaking morality, and thats going to make this far to complicated. Most people set goals, becuase it is what makes them happy, or they in vision themself being happy completing it, for whatever reason (in yours, a happiness form helping people). The point on doing things helpful, It is the same, people do helpful things because it makes them feel good. And yes, your right, if there really is no heaven, then it defanitly lessens the argument against robbing a bank, but regardless, he would still have a goal, and a reason to live, without a heaven.

From: crossback7
Heaven isn't really defined extremely well in the Bible. So I can't honestly say. I'm just assuming being in God's presence would be about as high as you could get and that Heaven would be all that it's made to be.

God is in heaven. We are like God. We all have a drive for progress. We will have that same drive in heaven. I won't be happy sitting on a cloud playing a harp no matter who I am around.
Anyhow, thats off topic, the point is, it is NOT necessary to have a next higher plane, in order to have a purpose.

From: crossback7
- Yeah, but you can't be happy without being angry/sad/some other grim emotion first. Like you said about the whole "There'd be no good without bad" deal. And I would like my life to have a higher purpose than to have sex.

I don't see your point? Are you saying that there is nothing bad here on earth to contrast being happy? Because, um, there is.

And yeah, the sex part, me too, but the point is, ure going to have a goal, no matter what level of intelligence you are on.

Well, it's getting late for me, so I'm going to respond to a few select things that jumped out at me.

When talking about there only being one life, and only talking about heaven is disturbing, as it leaves out all the religions that have reincarnation as a basis. For them, it's the NEXT life they live for, and strive to do better in their current life to eventually work towards nirvana.

Next, there will never be an absolute proof against or for God. Whoever says they found it is completely bullshitting. As God is the Omnipresence, having a proof that he is there is on the same level as being him; his power is supposedly infinite, therefore knowing even a fraction of him would be in effect infinite. Think of a finite loop nested in an infinite one.

As for being a teenager, that is all a mind set. I for one am a teenager in age, but who here at these forums treats me like one? Uhm, I don't know for sure, but I am regarded as "one of the most eloquent people" (not trying to be condescending, but just quoting someone else). I have also graduated high school after 10th grade, so you can regard me as a dropout. I'll say that I don't believe in the current educational system in america. But I do have a diploma, and would've won valedictorian if not for my choice.

If there was a heaven, and it is what evangelists say it is, I'd rather let my soul dissipate. In Heaven, they say everyone is rid of carnal desires and all bad intentions. If so, I basically am stripped of choice and what humans were made to do.

Last thing, about sex, I don't believe it's a goal, but rather a drive. For example, put a hundred male monkeys in a cage, and a hundred females. Do they strive to get out? They'll eat once in a while, that's a necessity, but in time, they'll start having sex. Same with humans. At first, they'll want to get out. Next, they'll have sex like nothing else matters. Even scientists will, no matter if there's a lot of lab equipment in there with them, they'll do it. We don't know why, we just know that we live to reproduce.

From: Here
When talking about there only being one life, and only talking about heaven is disturbing, as it leaves out all the religions that have reincarnation as a basis. For them, it's the NEXT life they live for, and strive to do better in their current life to eventually work towards nirvana.

Oops! Very true!, I compeltly forgot! But it really doesn't change too much… if there is no God, then there would be no reincarnation either (eww, that was a bad connection… sorry, think god=religion here). It still removes the idea of a higher level to have a purpose for. (Nirvana, the next life, heaven, any life after death will qualify)

From: Here
Next, there will never be an absolute proof against or for God. Whoever says they found it is completely bullshitting. As God is the Omnipresence, having a proof that he is there is on the same level as being him; his power is supposedly infinite, therefore knowing even a fraction of him would be in effect infinite. Think of a finite loop nested in an infinite one.

Great analogy! This is true both logically, religiously, and mathematically! I love it!

From: Here
As for being a teenager, that is all a mind set. I for one am a teenager in age, but who here at these forums treats me like one?

Not I, don't worry. I was referring to him, because I could tell that he was in that mind set.

From: Here
If there was a heaven, and it is what evangelists say it is, I'd rather let my soul dissipate. In Heaven, they say everyone is rid of carnal desires and all bad intentions. If so, I basically am stripped of choice and what humans were made to do.

Lol, yeah, I completely agree.
Getting a little off topic, and a little bit into the religion of greg :P, I think in heaven, if your good enough and all… God wants us to become like him… and so mabey we get a change to make our own universe? And try our hands at this whole quantum thing… now ThAT! is some food for thought!.

From: Here
Last thing, about sex, I don't believe it's a goal, but rather a drive. For example, put a hundred male monkeys in a cage, and a hundred females. Do they strive to get out? They'll eat once in a while, that's a necessity, but in time, they'll start having sex. Same with humans. At first, they'll want to get out. Next, they'll have sex like nothing else matters. Even scientists will, no matter if there's a lot of lab equipment in there with them, they'll do it. We don't know why, we just know that we live to reproduce.

My point exactly. Except that I'm fairly confident that I wouldn't really break down to that level of carnal instincts really. But the drive would defanitly be there, and denying it is pure stupidity (unless you < puberty). It just happens to be a drive I choose to, and easy, can contol.

BED TIME NOW!

From: Here
As for being a teenager, that is all a mind set. I for one am a teenager in age, but who here at these forums treats me like one? Uhm, I don't know for sure, but I am regarded as "one of the most eloquent people" (not trying to be condescending, but just quoting someone else). I have also graduated high school after 10th grade, so you can regard me as a dropout. I'll say that I don't believe in the current educational system in america. But I do have a diploma, and would've won valedictorian if not for my choice.

10th grade? WTF! What was your GPA? I graduated normally this June but with a sexy Advanced Diploma which apparently doesn't do anything besides having silver stamps on your diploma

Btw, what college do you go to/will you go to?

Completely off topic, but if you wanted to know, my GPA was about 4.6.

Haha, mine was 3.0 (didn't even try senior year-senioritis), the valedictorian was 4.8. I don't understand how you can get above a 4.0? Isn't that a perfect score?

AP classes. And honors, for the schools that count them.

From: lolpie
Haha, mine was 3.0 (didn't even try senior year-senioritis), the valedictorian was 4.8. I don't understand how you can get above a 4.0? Isn't that a perfect score?

You can get higher than a 4.0 by taking ap classes, which are worth a little bit more. I think a b in a ap class= and a in a regular one. If you care, mine was a 4.7, but thats so long ago, it' irrelevant.

Edit: dang, here types faster than me!

I type shorter than you too.

By the way, for people that care, check the BBQ pit. It has a new thread.

From: lordgreggreg
Why not? why wouldn't they have a real purpose? They would, they have to almost by definition

Ok, they'd have a purpose, but it wouldn't matter what you did in your life on earth after you died if there was no Heaven, as life after death would then be nothing. Unless you believe in the whole Nirvana/Brahman thing that Here mentioned. I guess you'd just be leaving your mark.

I dont think you know what you mean.

I do, just suck at explaining it.

Youre telling me that ALL of your goals are selfless? That you want to cure cancer on to help people, and not for the fame and fortune it would bring? How ideal, but sure.. for the sake of argument, I'll ride with it.

Uh. . .actually I would like to cure cancer to help people. I've had some bad personal experiences with it. Can't say ALL of my goals are totally selfless, but I'd like to think at least most of them are. I wouldn't criticize a person's character until you at least know them either. . .

Well, now your tlaking morality, and thats going to make this far to complicated. Most people set goals, becuase it is what makes them happy, or they in vision themself being happy completing it, for whatever reason (in yours, a happiness form helping people). The point on doing things helpful, It is the same, people do helpful things because it makes them feel good. And yes, your right, if there really is no heaven, then it defanitly lessens the argument against robbing a bank, but regardless, he would still have a goal, and a reason to live, without a heaven.

Fair enough. I understand what you're trying to say a bit better now, and yes, I think I am talking a bit more about morals now.

God is in heaven. We are like God. We all have a drive for progress. We will have that same drive in heaven. I won't be happy sitting on a cloud playing a harp no matter who I am around.

How do you know we'll still have a drive for progress? And if we do, I believe he'd give us something to achieve or what not, rather just let us just sit there and twiddle our thumbs.

Anyhow, thats off topic, the point is, it is NOT necessary to have a next higher plane, in order to have a purpose.

My above comment pretty much agrees with that. . .I just don't think the same applies for earth as heaven.

I can tell you think I'm an idiot, but you're entitled to your opinion. Arguing opinions and aruging facts are two different things, and I seem to be pretty bad at aruging for my opinions.

@Here - Pretty amazing that you graduated after 10th grade. I too would be interested in where you are/will be attending college.

From: crossback7
Ok, they'd have a purpose, but it wouldn't matter what you did in your life on earth after you died if there was no Heaven, as life after death would then be nothing. Unless you believe in the whole Nirvana/Brahman thing that Here mentioned. I guess you'd just be leaving your mark.

Maybe if you want to look at it like that.
Point is, you asked me to prove if life would have a purpose without god, which I did, which you admitted.
Also, there is more things driving people to make &#8220;right&#8221; choices than just trying to get into heaven. I&#8217;m very religious, but I never do anything just to get into hell.

From: crossback7
Uh. . .actually I would like to cure cancer to help people. I've had some bad personal experiences with it. Can't say ALL of my goals are totally selfless, but I'd like to think at least most of them are. I wouldn't criticize a person's character until you at least know them either. . .
Sorry, I wasn&#8217;t judging or criticizing you, in fact, I even gave you the rare benefit of the doubt. I just wanted you to recognize that most goals are not as noble as yours,

From: crossback7
Fair enough. I understand what you're trying to say a bit better now, and yes, I think I am talking a bit more about morals now.

Cool beans.

From: crossback7
How do you know we'll still have a drive for progress? And if we do, I believe he'd give us something to achieve or what not, rather just let us just sit there and twiddle our thumbs.

Exactly :) We aren&#8217;t going to be twiddling our thumbs, there will be something to do, I am sure. Why am I sure we will still have a drive for progress? Because that drive is classically human, and we are made in God&#8217;s image, and therefore God has a drive for progress to (ignore the infinity perfection loop for the time being, if you have to.. perhaps god wasn&#8217;t always perfect.. but I&#8217;m not going to get into that, I have no grounds for it) and that God wants us to become like him (jesus style) therefore we will still have that drive. (forgive me for ignoring other non Christian religions.. im just not knowledgeable enough to know how it applies there)

I degrees, the point is, there will be a purpose in heaven, (not twiddling thumbs) and that in itself proves that there can also be a purpose on a earth that doesn&#8217;t have a heaven. (unless you think that heaven has a heaven&#8230;but to keep it simple, dont)

From: crossback7
My above comment pretty much agrees with that. . .I just don't think the same applies for earth as heaven.

No, you are right, the same things about earth and heaven will be limited. However, the whole &#8220;purpose&#8221; idea will remain the same, as you agreed.

From: crossback7
I can tell you think I'm an idiot, but you're entitled to your opinion. Arguing opinions and aruging facts are two different things, and I seem to be pretty bad at aruging for my opinions.

No, I don&#8217;t think you are an idiot. Forgive for pointing out the weaknesses in your argument, but that doesn&#8217;t make you an idiot. Remember, I am just playing devils advocate right here. I completely agree with you, just not for the reasons you have mentioned. Erm, well, I agree that there is MORE of a purpose for earth life if you believe in a heaven&#8230; but there is one regardless too.
Right now, we both have very little fact to go on. And arguing opinions is pointless too. If you look, my argument is based purly on logic. The only facts I really could (and did) use, were straight from what you told me, and my basic knowledge of common Christian belief (the whole&#8230; we are in god image stuff, and that heaven probly doesn&#8217;t have it own heaven). Those are enough (in the ways I wrote) to prove that purpose would still exist here on earth, even heaven less.

I guess we both saw pretty much the same thing, just in a bit different light. You argued very well though. Obviously outsmarted me :p

From: crossback7
I guess we both saw pretty much the same thing, just in a bit different light. You argued very well though. Obviously outsmarted me :p

when making a statement (especially a challenge) it is very important to make sure that you say it correctly, and don't exaggerate.
NO purpose is eons different than LESS of a purpose. (now that I think of it, I probably could formulate a pretty nice, psychological argument to even refute the "less" part, but lets just keep it here for now, lol)

From: lordgreggreg
when making a statement (especially a challenge) it is very important to make sure that you say it correctly, and don't exaggerate.
NO purpose is eons different than LESS of a purpose. (now that I think of it, I probably could formulate a pretty nice, psychological argument to even refute the "less" part, but lets just keep it here for now, lol)

Uh. . .Good idea :D

You guys wait…I'm taking metaphysics this fall so I'll be back on this thread with some kickass arguments :D

From: lordgreggreg
when making a statement (especially a challenge) it is very important to make sure that you say it correctly, and don't exaggerate.
NO purpose is eons different than LESS of a purpose. (now that I think of it, I probably could formulate a pretty nice, psychological argument to even refute the "less" part, but lets just keep it here for now, lol)

WRONG! Depending on who you are (the government, an advertising agency) you want to blow up your statement as big as possible. Exaggerate like there is no hell. But if you're in a scientific/mathematic forum like this, you might not want to exaggerate.

From: Here
WRONG! Depending on who you are (the government, an advertising agency) you want to blow up your statement as big as possible. Exaggerate like there is no hell. But if you're in a scientific/mathematic forum like this, you might not want to exaggerate.

Lol, yep, if you are the government, or a politicians, you want to blow your point up so much that it is bearly even unrecognizable! Then, as an extra treat, make it as all encompassing yet unspecific as possible so you never have to contradict yourself, and so no one can ever prove you wrong, lol.

I can bet you that most presidents were with the Roman Catholic Religion. Most were/are part of organizations that are tied with the Roman Catholic religion.

If a president was a true Christian, the leadership would be completely different. Every aspect would be completely different.

Also about the Flying Spagghetti Monster (How dare I misspell his name) is ridiculous. I have proof it was created by a human…
While the Christian religion wasn't created by a human, it does not even completely relate.
What they're doing with the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is just changing the names. Any idiot with a ph.D would know that.

From: Black J R
I can bet you that most presidents were with the Roman Catholic Religion. Most were/are part of organizations that are tied with the Roman Catholic religion.

I don't understand how that is even relevant or important, or something even worth noting. All it means is that by probably purre popularity force it happened… I don't see what point you are trying to make with this.

From: Black J R
If a president was a true Christian, the leadership would be completely different. Every aspect would be completely different.

Lol, well yeah! He would get assasinated withing the week, lol. Besides, its quite obvious that when you run a country made of thousands of religions, you have no right to try to run it based on one.

From: Black J R
Also about the Flying Spagghetti Monster (How dare I misspell his name) is ridiculous. I have proof it was created by a human…

Why do you care? Don't you realise that it is completly impossible to prove even this religion wrong? It can't be done, your argument is groundless.

From: Black J R
While the Christian religion wasn't created by a human

Say WHAT?! That's crazy! lol. Gee, who wrote your bible? human. Who was this christ character? Human. Who was rockin it out old testament style? Humans. Every piece of tangible evidence you have is Human made! From the very start!

Oooo.. so you mean Paul the apostle was "inspired" to write what he did in the bible, and he did it with gods power? K, sounds good, point is you have no proof that this college student didn't do it the same way.

From: Black J R
What they're doing with the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is just changing the names. Any idiot with a ph.D would know that.

Naw, it's even better than that, they are making it funny and ironic to prove a point.

From: Black J R
I can bet you that most presidents were with the Roman Catholic Religion. Most were/are part of organizations that are tied with the Roman Catholic religion.

If a president was a true Christian, the leadership would be completely different. Every aspect would be completely different.

Also about the Flying Spagghetti Monster (How dare I misspell his name) is ridiculous. I have proof it was created by a human…
While the Christian religion wasn't created by a human, it does not even completely relate.
What they're doing with the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is just changing the names. Any idiot with a ph.D would know that.

Oh, holy shiot, I have a lot of stuff to work with here. Either you were completely joking, or you're about as retarded as many other people I "talked" with. I'll continue with the latter case.

First, you must not understand the difference between the sects of Christianity. Because the Roman Catholic Church is Christian, the Protestant sect is christian… get me? Any religion that believes in Christ the Saviour is Christian.

Nothing would be different with a "true" Christian "leader". You're not allowed to bring religion into government, this country had that separation quite a while ago (though the govt still mingles them today, we're not under a theocracy here).

Oh, I thought FSM was the real God. How dare you say it was created by a human? [sarcasm over] You stooge of faith, nobody EVER thought the FSM was real. He was made with the intention of ridiculing other religions. In essence, it was created by atheists.

The Christian Religion was created by a human, or at least a human likeness, or else you haven't read the bible very well. Read Genesis over, especially the part where he makes Adam, then tell me why Adam looks like what he is.

Lastly, FSM does not change any names, IT IS A PARODY. It was MADE to poke fun at the people of blind faith, such as you, who are so narrow-minded not to realize that. And "idiot with a Ph.D" is an oxymoron. Maybe "sophomoric teenager" would work.

This arguement still going yet our poll died.. hmm anyway I don't even see the point of saying anything here everyone has there own opinions and I know yours is different to mine so thats that it should just be left at that

Prince. . .Please work on your grammer/typing skills. It'd make people take you a lot more seriously. As well as help people to understand what you're trying to say.

Prince, you just figured that out?

I think you don't understand what the forum is about… its not a f*cking spelling forum so stop saying i must use grammer blah blah if I wanted to i would but theres no point… the point is to get done as quick as you can so typing in short is much quicker you should try it ..and sorry but 12 year olds keep telling me to use grammer lol thats a good one sorry but im in university so you 12 year olds learn how to read internet short talk

From: ThePrince
I think you don't understand what the forum is about… its not a f*cking spelling forum so stop saying i must use grammer blah blah if I wanted to i would but theres no point… the point is to get done as quick as you can so typing in short is much quicker you should try it ..and sorry but 12 year olds keep telling me to use grammer lol thats a good one sorry but im in university so you 12 year olds learn how to read internet short talk

I bet you failed your English Comp class then :p And I'm just trying to help you out.

From: ThePrince
I think you don't understand what the forum is about… its not a f*cking spelling forum so stop saying i must use grammer blah blah if I wanted to i would but theres no point… the point is to get done as quick as you can so typing in short is much quicker you should try it ..and sorry but 12 year olds keep telling me to use grammer lol thats a good one sorry but im in university so you 12 year olds learn how to read internet short talk

Sure, spelling , grammer, and that link are ok to be sacrificed for speed.

ON ONE CONDITION

you have to remain easily readable! I should not have to struggle to understand your post!

Also, no one cares if you are in a university, especially if you don't act like it.

From: lordgreggreg
Sure, spelling , grammer, and that link are ok to be sacrificed for speed.

ON ONE CONDITION

you have to remain easily readable! I should not have to struggle to understand your post!

Also, no one cares if you are in a university, especially if you don't act like it.

i never said that anyone cared.. and if you cant read that lol you must be a bit stuffed up i type/read way harder/worse to you ppl messages… as on msn txts.. so you should learn how to do 12 yr old go back to scool plz

Ah Jesus. . .At least makes your posts legible, Prince. You're calling us twelve-year-olds, and even if we were, at least you can tell what we're trying to say. My three-year-old cousin is easier to understand than some of your posts. And I agree with LordGreg's post above. You don't have to be perfect, just take an extra five seconds and clean it up a bit.

From: ThePrince
i never said that anyone cared.. and if you cant read that lol you must be a bit stuffed up i type/read way harder/worse to you ppl messages… as on msn txts.. so you should learn how to do 12 yr old go back to scool plz

Just because you can read garbage doesnt mean that I should have to.

Yes, i can understand your posts, (obviously) but it makes you look immature and uncreditable when you don't even take the time to organize your thoughts INTO SIMPLE PUNCTUATION.

Look, you can't expect people to change how they read just for you. Your comments arent worth that. No ones are, and by writing like this, you are limiting your audiance, as well as making it very easy to mis-interpret what you say.

Damn flames… Someone should do something about these never ending flame festivals because some kids can't have an ordinary, politically correct discussion. Maybe this forum isn't the right place for a discussion forum for more mature and intelligent people.

Sooo…. about god. I believe that the universe is god. The big bang's seed was god. God exists for eternity - before the big bang, there was no time. Thus, division by nill = eternity. Problem solved. And just so you know - this is just tentative! One day, the universe will split! Into a good, and evil one, namely heaven and hell. End of discussion :p. JK, you can keep flaming if you want to. Have fun!

From: botmaster
Damn flames… Someone should do something about these never ending flame festivals because some kids can't have an ordinary, politically correct discussion. Maybe this forum isn't the right place for a discussion forum for more mature and intelligent people.

Sooo…. about god. I believe that the universe is god. The big bang's seed was god. God exists for eternity - before the big bang, there was no time. Thus, division by nill = eternity. Problem solved. And just so you know - this is just tentative! One day, the universe will split! Into a good, and evil one, namely heaven and hell. End of discussion :p. JK, you can keep flaming if you want to. Have fun!

That's a different theory. But which universe will earth end up in O_o

In the religion of Greg, Christ will come down, and save all the good people (at the end of the world) and then for 1000 years they will work with him cleaning the earth, and performing work for those unable to do it.
The earth was baptized in the flood (baptism by water) like humans. Humans also must be baptized by fire (holy spirit) and so will the earth. Completely engulfed in fire.
Heaven will be much like earth, in fact… I think heaven will be earth, a perfect earth.

Just so I don't sound like a raging visionary, the whole baptism by fire adn water, John the apostle talked about, and the end of the world stuff? Most of it is in revelations. The whole heaven part is abstractly mentioned, but I don't know exactly where.

In my religion, everyone dies a quick and painless death. End of story.

From: Here
In my religion, everyone dies a quick and painless death. End of story.

Kiss Principle :) I like it, lol. :D

From: lordgreggreg
In the religion of Greg, Christ will come down, and save all the good people (at the end of the world) and then for 1000 years they will work with him cleaning the earth, and performing work for those unable to do it.
The earth was baptized in the flood (baptism by water) like humans. Humans also must be baptized by fire (holy spirit) and so will the earth. Completely engulfed in fire.
Heaven will be much like earth, in fact… I think heaven will be earth, a perfect earth.

Just so I don't sound like a raging visionary, the whole baptism by fire adn water, John the apostle talked about, and the end of the world stuff? Most of it is in revelations. The whole heaven part is abstractly mentioned, but I don't know exactly where.

Amen to that.

From: Here
In my religion, everyone dies a quick and painless death. End of story.

that might work to less scary to think about but gregs probly got it right.

but theres also the possability of no life after death. I mean i belive in god but its also possible there is no after life. I mean i dont belive half the stuff in the bible, such as adam in eve , that would mean we are all related by blood and marrying anyone is just messed up.

But i do belive that if u die with un finished busines you will become a spirit. it may be a punishment if u didnt finish something you swore to do or sometin, im not completly sure but those are my theroys.

Personally, i believe that God does not exist, i think that the Bible is just something written as a fictional story. Flame me all you want, but that is what i believe.

From: itschris917
Personally, i believe that God does not exist, i think that the Bible is just something written as a fictional story. Flame me all you want, but that is what i believe.

well, its not really an argument at all. You give no reasons whatso ever. I supose ure entitled to you opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion and i agree the bible is mostly just a set of rules to folo it wasent intended to be real stories i dont belive its just guidelines for a religion. But i do belive god dose exist.

This pretty much summarizes everything I have said so far, idk if all facts are real so you can feel free to research and verify them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg

God…Real?..Or not? the question has been asked for many years. I have come to the conclusion that god is a man-made answer for everything that is to complicated for us to reason. Us as humans simply cant live without knowing why something is the way it is and the easiest answer to any question is because God wants it that way.:spot:

From: botmaster
And just so you know - this is just tentative! One day, the universe will split! Into a good, and evil one, namely heaven and hell. End of discussion :p. JK, you can keep flaming if you want to. Have fun!

What happens to those that have already died? Are they just waiting for The Big Split?

I am a Sunni Muslim and i believe that Allah (God) exists. I am certain to every extent that he has saved my life just a month ago. I will always praise Allah and know that he has cared for me. Before my near- death experience I was coaxed into believing, but know I believe.

My near death experience happened on a row boat. We where rowing on the beach getting quite a distance from the shore. Then we journeyed back and lifted the boat to shore. When lifting I cut my hand on the rusty exterior of the boat. I wasn't very concered but my aunt was. She was concerned that I had caught the Tetanus (Lockjaw) disease. I was certain that I had not taken the shot for Lockjaw as I remember my mothers words. "You don't need it. Its a blood related disease" But later my aunt calls my mother to ask if she has taken me to my shot. She said she did, but I know she didn't. That is why I concluded that Allah (God) was looking over me and had saved me.

yes i am religious :D religious wins the poll :D

no

i was not always religious…

and for those of you like me… who live in shit are given nothing and wish for their life to be better….live with hate and insanity weather your prents abandoned you or whatever your problems are yo can ovrcome them…

ive been christian for only a year now

and ive started to study the bible

as i study and wonder and question and pray to the lord ive asked him why shit happens all the time…. why did u give me this shit life and why dont you help me BUT…

i had a REVALATION

i cant quite explain the feeling of floating in an endless private chat witht he lord where every qustion comes to oyur mind is answered…

and oyu understand why shit happens or it did happen….

ive learned many of what was when and to be…

now i see what to do in my future…

i despised him now i love him

i ddint believe in him now i walk in his word

i may be young but ive gone through as much shit as you have

now trust me…. if you want it to come together adn reealise your calling

visit this ebsite and look around

http://theedgerock.web137.discountasp.net/

its what led me to the lord maybe it can help you….


BTW i can preach for hours sometimes :D

KTHXBAI

Why do people keep making topics about me?:rolleyes:

No idea. They hate you quite a bit over at TO though, I wouldn't go there :p

I believe in God/Jesus as role models and guidelines - more of ideas than physical things. I also wear a WWJD wrist bracelet (not right now - my last one broke. I've been through at least 3) and it's helped me a couple of times. Some of my peers ridicule me for it (dam atheist kids always think I'm extremely religious), but most weeks I don't go to church. To me it's like wearing something that says WWMD (What would macgyver do).

I don't completely believe in god. I think their just figment of imagination made by earlier generation, as something to rely upon in times of hardship, basically a place they got hope from, and nowadays its a moneymaking scheme in some places…That sucks.:(

no punt intended but omg that video was soo true i heard a person in a dennys not getting server because he was athiest and i think its fudges up…
and ppl wat does it matter how we got to this planet or any thing like that just enjoy life and dont think about if ther is a god.. statistics show that 243 hours of ur life are waisted thinking about who/wat/or if ther is a god/.. ppl that is a hell of alot time in that time u can do somthing better ..ne ways great thread and.btw ppl runescape rock and zezima is god.lol jk piece

Please forgive me for bumping this thread, as it is a little more than one month old, but frankly I see this as an exception. I was happy with the poll results (over 50% were religious) but I think that was most likely because many Christians such as myself felt that it was important to participate in it. I am, however, disappointed in the creator of this thread. I can give you plenty of good reasons as to why, but lets start with "Where did the big bang come on?" "Where did the bacteria that supposedly evolved into man come from? A collection of atoms with static electricity?" As Einstein once wrote, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
It's simple for me to understand, and IMO, it's kinda sad that so many people are so prepared to shout in your face that "MEN HAVE CREATED DREAMS SO THEY CAN LIVE WITH THEMSELVES!" And when it comes to that garbage, I get pretty angry - Why? Because you can't create life with science - You can make this weak imitation of it.

i didnt take time to read all 12 pages of this, but my stand is yes im a religious person, everything has to come from somewhere and that somewhere is god. i mean it took so much out of him to make everything that he had to rest after it was created…

and for the 1st post…no evidence? you think no evidence because you DONT KNOW anything about the religion and/or the bible. the bible (especially now days) says what is going on in the world. and how it will be.

if you would like to actually have a discussion on this i would be more than happy for anyone to ask me, cuz i have ALOT of explaining that would take up prolly a whole page of a thread

PS: Did you know the bible predicted the twin towers falling?

Isaiah 30:25 - On every lofty mountain and on every high hill there will be streams running with water on the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall.

and many bible scholars believe that the verse is refering to the twin towers, also the war in iraq is also predicted in the bible, and else a good FACT, jews will go back to Israel when the 'time on earth' is comming to an end, and let me tell you this…144,000 jews (12,000 from the 12 tribes) will flee back to israel, from the N,S,E,W from all parts of the world, and jews are starting to go back to 'homeland' israel from all parts of the earth but the west (which you guess) is the United States…

that may be hard to understand since i didnt really elaborate but yea you can always add me on msn for further explaining

Hyper, truly I respect you. Heres a link for some prophecies that have already been fulfilled
http://www.100prophecies.org/
Most of these concern other countries than the U.S., mind you.
Theres another interpretation, and frankly I don't believe this prophecy refers to the Twin Towers, because it speaks of "And on every lofty mountain and on every high hill there will be rivers and streams of waters, in the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall."
This would make perfect since, but I haven't heard about streams of water on 'Every lofty mountain and on every high hill' so I think that it meant the Tower of Babel, switching Slaughter with Destruction, that would make even more sense.
and also, in response to the creator of this thread and the creator of that video…

—
Lots of people generalize religion to be one big blob of goo. This is just one of the slime balls who think that religion was created out of man's insanity. They look at the theories, stamp it as good or evil, ignore all the history that is put into some of them, and then walk away, shaking their heads. This particular slime ball(Creator of this thread) agrees with some angry fool who thinks that his rights are being invaded for his being ignorant. Why am I calling him ignorant? Despite his not believing in God, he doesn't even seem to know America's history. America has a Christian Policy, for the most part, until lawyers come and screw things over. The reason they said something along the lines of it not being a Christian country, was because if they said it was, they would have the right to persecute anyone who is not of the Christian faith. Secondly, having "In God We Trust" is a tradition, that symbolizes that this country IS Christian. Don't get too worked up about it, I'm sure when fools like you take over, it will be along the lines of "In Science We Trust." That would be fine, that would only invade the rights of people who don't believe in Science. Thirdly, wmds…Religion doesn't build a wmd. 'Nuff said. Having a nutjob who believes that his being ruler is justification of his use of power is a coincidence (Kim Jong), the United States doesn't deal with wmds. Christianity does not support the use of wmds. Islam does not support the use of wmds. CULTISTS, who warp everything they hear and read (if they can), support the use of wmds, the creator of that video, and anyone who buys it, is a fool.

tower of babel…but the big thing there is 'towerS' so that is why scholars believe it to be the twin towers

How do we know that there wasn't another tower that fell with the Tower of Babel? The only way that it could be a prophecy about 9/11 would be if streams was referring to tears.

Let me quote some stuff off the top of my head from a pamphlet I read a while ago…nvm, I found it directly from the book:

So yeah…just read it.

Let's look at the same thought from another angle. If I were to make an absolute statement such as, "There is no gold in China," what is needed for that statement to be proven true? I need absolute or total knowledge. I need to have information that there is no gold in any rock, in any river, in the ground, in any store, in any ring, or in any mouth (gold filling) in China. If there is one speck of gold in China, then my statement is false and I have no basis for it. I need absolute knowledge before I can make an absolute statement. Conversely, for me to say, "There is gold in China," I don't need to have all knowledge. I just need to have seen a speck of gold in the country, and the statement is then true.

To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an absolute statement. For the statement to be true, I must know for certain that there is no God in the entire universe. No human being has all knowledge. Therefore, none of us is able to truthfully make this assertion.

If you insist upon disbelief in God, what you must say is, "Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that there is no God." Owing to a lack of knowledge on your part, you don't know if God exists. So, in the strict sense of the word, you cannot be an atheist. The only true qualifier for the title is the One who has absolute knowledge, and why on earth would God want to deny His own existence?

The professing atheist is what is commonly known as an "agnostic"–one who claims he "doesn't know" if God exists. It is interesting to note that the Latin equivalent for the Greek word is "ignoramus." The Bible tells us that this ignorance is "willful" (Psalm 10:4). It's not that a person can't find God, but that he won't. It has been rightly said that the "atheist" can't find God for the same reason a thief can't find a policeman. He knows that if he admits that there is a God, he is admitting that he is ultimately responsible to Him. This is not a pleasant thought for some.

It is said that Mussolini (the Italian dictator), once stood on a pinnacle and cried, "'God, if you are there, strike me dead!" When God didn't immediately bow to his dictates, Mussolini then concluded that there was no God. However, his prayer was answered some time later.

God Doesn't Believe in Atheists

Yeah, that right there just owned this thread.

From: HyperSecret

PS: Did you know the bible predicted the twin towers falling?

Isaiah 30:25 - On every lofty mountain and on every high hill there will be streams running with water on the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall.

give me a break. dont be an idiot. 9.9

i mean i supose if you are LOOKING for where the bible talk about the twin towers, ud think u found it, like on a test or something.

but thats just stupid. compared to the stuff predicated in the bible, thw twin towers are nothing.

dont be a zealot.

dont belive everyhting you hear.

else your no longer chrisitan, you are an idol worhsiper.

From: HyperSecret
PS: Did you know the bible predicted the twin towers falling?

Isaiah 30:25 - On every lofty mountain and on every high hill there will be streams running with water on the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall.

Heh, even I don't believe that. But the Bible predicts a lot of things. Believe it or not, things the Bible has predicted are comming true all the time. One thing, Israelites are comming back to Israel at the same time people are able to see things happening on the other side of the world thanks to that useful box that everyone adores :(h):. And all those signs marks the arrival of…well you know who…

yes… the one thing i dislike about bible bashers(not a flame, more of an endearment) is the way that if there is something in the bible that happens in real life, no matter how abstract it is from the actual bible reference, they will immediately jump on it and say "hey look, heres proof"
with a 2000+ page book, written >2000 years ago(old testament as well) there are bound to be some consistencies if you look hard enough.

the United States doesn't deal with wmds. Christianity does not support the use of wmds. Islam does not support the use of wmds. CULTISTS, who warp everything they hear and read (if they can), support the use of wmds, the creator of that video, and anyone who buys it, is a fool.

OH???? america doesnt deal with WMDs????
so they have the worlds largest stockpile of WMD's for decoration?
they spend more then any other country in the world on funding to research new ways of making/producing(NOT defending against) WMD's?

america doesnt need to have the stance of "pro-WMD", because of the well known fact that they will use them without hesitation if they need to. if anyone takes a step back and looks at the situation objectively, you will see that america is exactly the type of country that uses WMD's

i dont think there is a single islamic country with a WMD of its own…
http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm
nope, i was wrong…
ok, there are less then 4 countries with WMD's
compared to easily more then 15 christian countries.

I can give you plenty of good reasons as to why, but lets start with "Where did the big bang come on?" "Where did the bacteria that supposedly evolved into man come from? A collection of atoms with static electricity?" As Einstein once wrote, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

einstien said that only because at the time, the church funded most scientific research. so what he said was actually correct. without the churches funding, science was lame(i.e. could not move foward)
where did the big bang come from?
i would direct you to google, but i think i better explain this one myself.
before the big bang, time did not exist. therefore, there is no "before" the big bang, in much the same way that you christians believe that before the earth, only god existed, and there is no "before" god existed.
where did bacteria come from?
again, you could have quite easily googled this.
there are 2 theories as to the original developement of life, as i have a biology exam in three hours, both are still pretty fresh in my mind.
the first theory is chemical evolution.
this states that 3.5-4BYA, the gasses in the atmosphere, combined with the huge lightning storms at the time, produced amino acids(google "urey and miller experiment" for evidence), amino acids eventually formed nuclei(a singular nucleus) and after that a cell membrane
hence prokaryotic cells were formed.
interesting things to google on this topic:
urey and miller experiment
oparen and haldane(oparen might not be the right spelling)
archaea

second theory:
as there was no ozone layer at the time of formation of the first cells(3.5 BYA) there were alot of meteors crashing into the earth(for evidence, look at the moon, you notice alot of meteor craters? notice the moon has no ozone? 1 + 1 = 2)
in the 1970's several tests were done on meteors that had recently hit earth, it was found that the meteors actually contained biologically viable(i.e. could eventually form into cells under the right conditions) amino acids.

From: elementalelf
yes… the one thing i dislike about bible bashers(not a flame, more of an endearment) is the way that if there is something in the bible that happens in real life, no matter how abstract it is from the actual bible reference, they will immediately jump on it and say "hey look, heres proof"
with a 2000+ page book, written >2000 years ago(old testament as well) there are bound to be some consistencies if you look hard enough.

OH???? america doesnt deal with WMDs????
so they have the worlds largest stockpile of WMD's for decoration?
they spend more then any other country in the world on funding to research new ways of making/producing(NOT defending against) WMD's?

america doesnt need to have the stance of "pro-WMD", because of the well known fact that they will use them without hesitation if they need to. if anyone takes a step back and looks at the situation objectively, you will see that america is exactly the type of country that uses WMD's

i dont think there is a single islamic country with a WMD of its own…
http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm
nope, i was wrong…
ok, there are less then 4 countries with WMD's
compared to easily more then 15 christian countries.

einstien said that only because at the time, the church funded most scientific research. so what he said was actually correct. without the churches funding, science was lame(i.e. could not move foward)
where did the big bang come from?
i would direct you to google, but i think i better explain this one myself.
before the big bang, time did not exist. therefore, there is no "before" the big bang, in much the same way that you christians believe that before the earth, only god existed, and there is no "before" god existed.
where did bacteria come from?
again, you could have quite easily googled this.
there are 2 theories as to the original developement of life, as i have a biology exam in three hours, both are still pretty fresh in my mind.
the first theory is chemical evolution.
this states that 3.5-4BYA, the gasses in the atmosphere, combined with the huge lightning storms at the time, produced amino acids(google "urey and miller experiment" for evidence), amino acids eventually formed nuclei(a singular nucleus) and after that a cell membrane
hence prokaryotic cells were formed.
interesting things to google on this topic:
urey and miller experiment
oparen and haldane(oparen might not be the right spelling)
archaea

second theory:
as there was no ozone layer at the time of formation of the first cells(3.5 BYA) there were alot of meteors crashing into the earth(for evidence, look at the moon, you notice alot of meteor craters? notice the moon has no ozone? 1 + 1 = 2)
in the 1970's several tests were done on meteors that had recently hit earth, it was found that the meteors actually contained biologically viable(i.e. could eventually form into cells under the right conditions) amino acids.

Hahaha. Ok, first of all, define Christian countries. The US? No way. Israel? Obviously not. UK? No.. Germany? Still no. Then what?? You tell me. And all those chemical and acids stuff is apparently just completely random stuff repeated over and over again.

Seriously…..I mean if there was no god how was the universe created??? ok ur gonna tell me some thing else created it….but what created that other thing? we can go on and we will only find out some 1 created this. or will w8 for death ;)

You can get angry at me for not being an atheist that hides behind the words of scientists, but really now. America has only used two wmds, and it's been ages. You can give me these ridiculous theories, but I am not changing my mind. The Holy Bible had things inside of it that scientists didn't learn about for thousands of years, and in my opinion, people like you, elemental, make science out to be a religion by itself. And yes, the predictions in the bible, supposedly 'Man will never know when the beast is coming' and something along the lines of 'Man will never understand the predictions.' Theres no telling, except that it is something completely beyond us. It isn't like I'm some special Saint or Apostle that can tell you what the predictions mean. Even they couldn't do that. And what gets me is that when something new is uncovered, a mistranslation, something along those lines, you people always jump up thinking it's some kind of proof that we're frauds.

If you ask me, you people are just overly frightened by his judgment considering the way you hound us, calling us fools, liars, hypocrites and the such. We aren't perfect, we just believe in Jesus Christ. I hate to say it, but I think the real reason the poll scored 50 percent religious was we were offended. Kind of a good thing, in my opinion.

From: JackLKrawl
You can get angry at me for not being an atheist that hides behind the words of scientists, but really now. America has only used two wmds, and it's been ages. You can give me these ridiculous theories, but I am not changing my mind. The Holy Bible had things inside of it that scientists didn't learn about for thousands of years, and in my opinion, people like you, elemental, make science out to be a religion by itself. And yes, the predictions in the bible, supposedly 'Man will never know when the beast is coming' and something along the lines of 'Man will never understand the predictions.' Theres no telling, except that it is something completely beyond us. It isn't like I'm some special Saint or Apostle that can tell you what the predictions mean. Even they couldn't do that. And what gets me is that when something new is uncovered, a mistranslation, something along those lines, you people always jump up thinking it's some kind of proof that we're frauds.

If you ask me, you people are just overly frightened by his judgment considering the way you hound us, calling us fools, liars, hypocrites and the such. We aren't perfect, we just believe in Jesus Christ. I hate to say it, but I think the real reason the poll scored 50 percent religious was we were offended. Kind of a good thing, in my opinion.

Why be angry m8? the quran stated lots of things to that scientists didnt kno about 1400 years ago. And tell now they are learning off it. If you need proof search google. Now the bible and the guran or gospel and what ever they arn't fake no 1 1400-3000 years ago could've known this stuff with out todays technology. That means one thing, that their is a god above us whatching.

From: Eugeniu
Hahaha. Ok, first of all, define Christian countries. The US? No way. Israel? Obviously not. UK? No.. Germany? Still no. Then
what?? You tell me. And all those chemical and acids stuff is apparently just completely random stuff repeated over and over again.

a christian country is a country where the majority of the population is christian.
US: yes way
israel: jewish, not christian.
UK: yes
germany yes.

did you actually take my advice and google this stuff?
urey and miller experiment showed the theory to be plausible.
the problem alot of bible bashers have with evolution is they dont understand the concept of time. the time it took for this to happen was billions of years.
1 billion from having a barren wasteland without an ozone layer to the first heterotrophic prokaryotic cells. another 2 billion from then to the first eukaryotic cells. another 1 billion from that to the formation of amphibians.
it was based on random events, but these random events had millions of years to happen, so something that was once a 1 in 1000000 chance becomes 1 in 2, or 1 in 1 1/2

Why be angry m8? the quran stated lots of things to that scientists didnt kno about 1400 years ago. And tell now they are learning off it. If you need proof search google. Now the bible and the guran or gospel and what ever they arn't fake no 1 1400-3000 years ago could've known this stuff with out todays technology. That means one thing, that their is a god above us whatching.

i thought it was agreed that god did not write the bible, but that men wrote it, and even then, nobody within religious circles can agree on who wrote what.
most christians/jews believe that moses wrote the pentacost, however the differences in writing styles in each of the books is so varied that its next to impossible that this could have happened.
and what stuff could we not have "known" 1400-3000 years ago? that MAYBE, some time in the next 100, 000 years, 2 buildings might fall down at the same time? this isnt divination, its a fairy tale that just happened to tell of something which, if twisted the right way, resembles an occurance which happened recently.
does this mean that if someone sees a turtle walking past a sleeping rabbit, aesop is god?
how about if a geologist predicts an earthquake happens and it does, should we worship him?

You can get angry at me for not being an atheist that hides behind the words of scientists, but really now. America has only used two wmds, and it's been ages.

so why do they still produce them? why not destroy ALL their WMD's in a sign of peace? have you ever heard the saying "a threat is often more terrifying then the thing itself"
america doesnt need to actually launch WMD's, the mere fact that they have them is enough to make most countries fall in suit.
but this is getting away from the topic

You can give me these ridiculous theories, but I am not changing my mind. The Holy Bible had things inside of it that scientists didn't learn about for thousands of years, and in my opinion, people like you, elemental, make science out to be a religion by itself.

the difference between science and religion is that science relies on evidence.
all scientists will be happy to convert to christianity as soon as there is some evidence that it is correct.
look back to about 100-400 years ago, when the church funded most scientific projects, all scientists were christian, however as soon as evidence was discovered that god probably does not exist, they stopped believing
science is all about what is the most probable theory.
as soon as someone proves god exists, ill follow religion

And yes, the predictions in the bible, supposedly 'Man will never know when the beast is coming' and something along the lines of 'Man will never understand the predictions.' Theres no telling, except that it is something completely beyond us. It isn't like I'm some special Saint or Apostle that can tell you what the predictions mean. Even they couldn't do that. And what gets me is that when something new is uncovered, a mistranslation, something along those lines, you people always jump up thinking it's some kind of proof that we're frauds.

and yet when a mistranslation occurs which predicts something such as the twin towers, even if it is an extremely abstract connection, you christians jump on it and purport it as absolute irrefutable evidence that god exists.

If you ask me, you people are just overly frightened by his judgment considering the way you hound us, calling us fools, liars, hypocrites and the such. We aren't perfect, we just believe in Jesus Christ. I hate to say it, but I think the real reason the poll scored 50 percent religious was we were offended. Kind of a good thing, in my opinion.

you are offended that people could possibly have a different opinion to you? how conservative of you.
for the most part, athiests only want to be left alone as far as their religious choices are concerned. we dont walk around with personal charms which show us to be athiests, like you do with a cross, usually hung around your neck.
if jesus(provided he WAS the son of god) came back as told in the bible, dont you think the last thing he would want to see is a reminder of the most painful thing he ever had to experience as a human?
i think the reason the poll scored 50% was because about 50% of people here are christians. that was the purpose of the poll, and therefore, one can only conclude that that is an accurate result.
i for one, am NOT scared of any judgement passed(provided a theistic god exists) for these reasons:
note: i am making these reasons on the pretext that god DOES exist
-god made this world so complex so that we would be intrigued enough to observe it in the most minute detail
-god gave us brains capable of reasoning so that we would question everything. if he gave us brains, and expected us to follow blindly, then he is obviously a very sadistic being.
-god made me the way i am, he made me in such a way that i would attempt to find flaws in every arguement in order to better my understanding of the world.
EDIT:

From: kingarabian
Seriously…..I mean if there was no god how was the universe created??? ok ur gonna tell me some thing else created it….but what created that other thing? we can go on and we will only find out some 1 created this. or will w8 for death ;)

i have already addressed this in a similar thread on sythe.org, however i will reiterate here.
im sure most of you are familiar with the theory of the big bang.
if you are familiar with the DETAILS of it, you will know that the theory states that time as a dimension was created when the big bang occurred.
therefore, there was no "before" the big bang, only an "after" as "before" as a concept did not exist.
its hard for most to understand, and next to impossible if you dont understand evolution, which is pretty evident by your stance toward it.
as for why the big bang occurred…
if there is no time, then anything that has any chance of happening, even if its 1 in infinity minus one(not a real number) WILL happen, because, if you study probabilities, you will know that the more times something occurs, the more chance it has that the random event happens.
there was an infinitely small chance that the big bang would occur, however there was still a chance, and therefore, it did.

I have one thing to add to this…Please correct me if anyone has said this

The big bang - Scientist believed it to a be a tiny universe with a whole lot of packed energy in the middle and then it suddenly it exploded, expanding the universe…

this was just a solution for all the helium in the sun and universe…Scientist found it impossible for the sun to produce that much helium, so one man…forgot his name came up with this theory…

There is evidence to support this theory to…There was a giant ear piece like thing that was owned by the government to pick up radiation sounds to find dence parts of the universe…As they heard crackly radio signals which showed dence parts of the universe they sometimes they got a almost perfect, clear, buzzing sound…They believe this to be because of the Big bang.

So for all you atheists out there, don't try disprove god if you can't make up for all the helium in the universe…

I am only 13 and am worst when it comes to debating these things…please correct me if I have said anything wrong…This information was completely off the documentary "ATOM"…About quantum physics of course…My brother whos finishing his HSC was watching so I just joined in coz I was bored and there was nothing better to do…

From: WhAcK
I have one thing to add to this…Please correct me if anyone has said this

The big bang - Scientist believed it to a be a tiny universe with a whole lot of packed energy in the middle and then it suddenly it exploded, expanding the universe…

this was just a solution for all the helium in the sun and universe…Scientist found it impossible for the sun to produce that much helium, so one man…forgot his name came up with this theory…

There is evidence to support this theory to…There was a giant ear piece like thing that was owned by the government to pick up radiation sounds to find dence parts of the universe…As they heard crackly radio signals which showed dence parts of the universe they sometimes they got a almost perfect, clear, buzzing sound…They believe this to be because of the Big bang.

So for all you atheists out there, don't try disprove god if you can't make up for all the helium in the universe…

I am only 13 and am worst when it comes to debating these things…please correct me if I have said anything wrong…This information was completely off the documentary "ATOM"…About quantum physics of course…My brother whos finishing his HSC was watching so I just joined in coz I was bored and there was nothing better to do…

you are 13, meaning you havnt done basic physics yet.
to make a helium atom, get a hydrogen atom, and add a proton and neutron.


the buzzing sound is leftover radiation from matter/antimatter collisions

the big bang wasnt a "tiny universe" it was a singularity.

stars dont produce helium, they convert hydrogen to helium through fusion.

maybe you should have asked your brother to explain it to you if there were parts you didnt understand :)

sure. ill give you that.

scientist dont know where the helium cam from.

and you have no idea where your god came from.

From: elementalelf
you are 13, meaning you havnt done basic physics yet.
to make a helium atom, get a hydrogen atom, and add a proton and neutron.


the buzzing sound is leftover radiation from matter/antimatter collisions

the big bang wasnt a "tiny universe" it was a singularity.

stars dont produce helium, they convert hydrogen to helium through fusion.

maybe you should have asked your brother to explain it to you if there were parts you didnt understand :)

Okey…from what ive heard….correct me if im wrong…there are 100 to the power of 70-80 atoms in the world…now if the universe was 10m by 10m and you placed 1 atom inside it…the hole universe would implode…that just tells you what an empty vacume the universe is…Now when a super nova occurs…The radiation is not as powerful as it extends out and disperses and then fades away over time…So when you say "the buzzing sound is leftover radiation from matter/antimatter collisions" your basically saying that there is always high activity going around in the universe…an antimatter collisions wouldn't cause hardly enough radiation to spread a great distance…Thats why when a large amount of empty vacume is found a clear sound is found instead of the rough one…And scientist can only guess where it comes from…

Im gone a stop posting on this thread now…Im making my self look like a real dumb ass who knows nothing…

Oh yer…I really need to talk to my brother about this to understand it properly…

From: WhAcK
Okey…from what ive heard….correct me if im wrong…there are 100 to the power of 70-80 atoms in the world…now if the universe was 10m by 10m and you placed 1 atom inside it…the hole universe would implode…that just tells you what an empty vacume the universe is…Now when a super nova occurs…The radiation is not as powerful as it extends out and disperses and then fades away over time…So when you say "the buzzing sound is leftover radiation from matter/antimatter collisions" your basically saying that there is always high activity going around in the universe…an antimatter collisions wouldn't cause hardly enough radiation to spread a great distance…Thats why when a large amount of empty vacume is found a clear sound is found instead of the rough one…And scientist can only guess where it comes from…

Im gone a stop posting on this thread now…Im making my self look like a real dumb ass who knows nothing…

Oh yer…I really need to talk to my brother about this to understand it properly…

the problem is that you are underestimating the power of antimatter. there is no antimatter left, it all dispersed in the first 1/100 of a second of the universe. however the energy, and subsequent radiation from said explosion was enough to push everything in the galaxy to its present day position, that will sorta tell you how powerful it is.
i dont get the 10x10 thing, it makes no sense.
nor the clear/rough sound, sounds dont have texture…

From: elementalelf
the problem is that you are underestimating the power of antimatter. there is no antimatter left, it all dispersed in the first 1/100 of a second of the universe. however the energy, and subsequent radiation from said explosion was enough to push everything in the galaxy to its present day position, that will sorta tell you how powerful it is.
i dont get the 10x10 thing, it makes no sense.
nor the clear/rough sound, sounds dont have texture…

Ok this is my final post…

The 10x10 thing has basically all to do with gravity…nvm…Watch the documentary and you will find out…

rough - because of certain dencities…

Clear - coz I guess it runs through the entire universe idk…don't ask me im just someone 13 year sharing what I heard on a documentary…

Supernova - Common…how often do you think they really happen in the universe… and what the chance of someone constantly hitting one area where they happen…

I believe in god and im happy to have some form of law…I am comfortable living the way I am and plan to live always as a Greek orthodox…

i thought it was agreed that god did not write the bible, but that men wrote it, and even then, nobody within religious circles can agree on who wrote what.
most christians/jews believe that moses wrote the pentacost, however the differences in writing styles in each of the books is so varied that its next to impossible that this could have happened.
and what stuff could we not have "known" 1400-3000 years ago? that MAYBE, some time in the next 100, 000 years, 2 buildings might fall down at the same time? this isnt divination, its a fairy tale that just happened to tell of something which, if twisted the right way, resembles an occurance which happened recently.
does this mean that if someone sees a turtle walking past a sleeping rabbit, aesop is god?
how about if a geologist predicts an earthquake happens and it does, should we worship him?

The bible nor the quran never stated anything about 2 towers falling down. they just stated some scientistical things that science never knew about tell recently. also the quran and bible arn't books about when natrual disasters are to occur. open them up and you will see what they state. god did make the bible and he did send it down with prophet jesus. however after a few hundred years after jesus was risen to the sky, some men started messing up with the bible.

The bible nor the quran never stated anything about 2 towers falling down. they just stated some scientistical things that science never knew about tell recently. also the quran and bible arn't books about when natrual disasters are to occur. open them up and you will see what they state. god did make the bible and he did send it down with prophet jesus. however after a few hundred years after jesus was risen to the sky, some men started messing up with the bible.

i bolded your spelling and punctuation mistakes… and i refuse to answer any questions until you take the debate seriously enough to use spellcheck.

I know that lots of us are scripters, and technically/computer inclined, so lets take an approach from a scientific perspective.

Consider entropy. Okay, it basically means that things degenerate over time if untouched. It's like your room - you don't clean it, it will ONLY get messier or stay the same. You smash a bottle easily, though fixing it to its perfect original state is almost impossible. Building a good SCAR script takes days. Deleting it requires a few keystrokes. You get what I mean.

But look at the life all around us.. it grows, multiplies, and adapts to an ever changing environment. If you leave a building to the elements, life will generate within that building. Roots and leaves will push up through the concrete, and naturally "take over" without any effort what man had worked so hard to build. Life defies this main scientific rule. Which raises another question - where does life come from?

Scientifically, life can only come from other life forms. Read your biology book. The only conclusion we can draw right now is that some power somewhere put life into existence, because obviously life couldn't have sprouted out of nowhere. (There have been experiments done to "create" simple cells in test tubes, but only produced various biological acids and proteins)

From a physics perspective.. the Big Bang had to be perfect to create the universe as we know today. The chance of creating exactly the universe we know it is one in a couple quadrillion (i won't go into details). Also, it is now discovered and confirmed that the Big Bang came from one point in space. Now think about it. One point in space is nothing. NOTHING. Mathematically zero. So it is scientifically impossible, yet PROVEN that all space, time, energy, matter, and distance came from a single, one-dimensional point from nowhere.

Obviously there is alot more to this universe than people could ever possibly imagine. Even Einstein said that his work was a little baby wading in a vast ocean of knowledge. Although not entirely religious, he strongly opposed atheists.

Anyways, speaking religiously, Most Buddhists/Hindus/Confucians refer to this great, unmistakable, mysterious power as the Zen, Dao, Dhiyama, or Karma. Christians refer to this power as God, or as the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Muslims refer to this power as Allah, and also take Mohammed as a prophet. North American natives refer to this power as the Great Spirit, creator of all things. None of these views are wrong - they are just of different cultures and different beliefs.

I'm not saying that you should be religious, or atheist.. but the pure fact that science can never answer all our questions, and only serves to create more questions, while creating infinite solutions to our problems, and creating infinite problems at the same time should be taken into account.. as well as the fact that radical fundamentalists often turn into suicide bombers or "flat-Earthers" and hate science and freedom for women etc etc.

(no pushing on my part to make you religious here) Personally, I am a Christian by faith - because it offers hope, salvation, and love to those in need and because I believe that God, this power has taken care of me and made miracles in times of dire need. But how exactly God works - I have no idea. But if I were to give you personal advice - it would be: Be open, questioning, and always ready to receive new ideas and perspectives about everything. Remember: Drop your sword and shield because human ideas in this world are neither right, nor wrong because every single one of us is different. And although the truth will never be known to us, and could be different for every one of us, we can choose to pursue it and receive enlightenment.

(Pursuing the truth can be done through faith, religion, tradition, university, truck driving, SCAR scripting, art, music.. pretty much everything) :)

Elemental I don't think I like you very much. Everything you say is filled with sarcasm and cruelty, as if you are talking down to us. Need I remind you that we are a part of the same community? We aren't enemies shouting at each other on a battlefield, and I don't know why you're acting like we are. This is a matter over 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' switched with 'Which came first, god or science?'

If you have ten cents worth of logic in there, the correct answer would be 'god' because god cannot created out of some crackpot imitation of life that you fools are so excited about. You cannot disprove the existence of god, so stop trying.

Ever since you came to this thread you have been insulting us, you have been picking on us, you have been trying to start things. You have tried to convince people to throw away their beliefs based on teenager spelling. Get over yourself, this is the internet. No one said that there was a prophecy 'absolutely 100%ly' referring to the twin towers, we were just saying that there was a prophecy that MAY refer to the twin towers. The only reason we would do that is because it may refer to current events, which can act as reassurance. We aren't saints, we have our doubts - letters on pages won't always be enough, and sometimes we have to relate them to what is happening now.

phoenixlament gets it, why can't you Elemental? Are you, as I said, too frightened to admit, that your science is too limited and always shall be to answer everything? You can come up with all these theories and say google is your proof, but that doesn't prove anything. All it means is that someone came up with just another theory.

Some people say that religions are theories. They are not completely wrong, until they are proven, they will remain just that. Just like your sciences that you can't even prove, even with such a high level of arrogance. (Cruelty on) Obviously since you don't have a brain you can get science to clone one from Hillary Clinton for you. Maybe then you will have enough to get a job in the waffle business.

If you have ten cents worth of logic in there, the correct answer would be 'god' because god cannot created out of some crackpot imitation of life that you fools are so excited about. You cannot disprove the existence of god, so stop trying.

and if YOU had ten cents of logic, you would realize that you cant prove god. so stop trying.

From: lordgreggreg

If you have ten cents worth of logic in there, the correct answer would be 'god' because god cannot created out of some crackpot imitation of life that you fools are so excited about. You cannot disprove the existence of god, so stop trying.

and if YOU had ten cents of logic, you would realize that you cant prove god. so stop trying.

fine fine fine…explain death. what happens to every one when they die. the soul what happens to it? science has nothing to do with death now, so dont give me any science crap, cause let me tell you science ain't everything.

i bolded your spelling and punctuation mistakes… and i refuse to answer any questions until you take the debate seriously enough to use spellcheck.

And does it look like if i care that my grammar is bad? no. you know why this whole thread was started about no god? you know why You are saying there is no god? its because you give no respect to what ever you have. its because you think church is a waste of time. its because you sit on the comp all day maybe or hang out with your friends to much or w/e and do not take religion seriously. You cant take one day just ONE day to go to church on sunday while we muslims we go to the masjid or church every day and we pray. one thing to all you non-god believers open up the bible or quran once and start reading. Have fun and maybe you will get some sense.

From: kingarabian
fine fine fine…explain death. what happens to every one when they die. the soul what happens to it?

look, im hardcore christian.

my pooint is that its just stupid triyng to prove or disporve god. i hop in here and try to strighten out people who give weak arguments is all.

death. you die. your body crumbles, returns to the earth , energy of it gets eaten and trasphomred into something else. like anumals.

the soul? there is no soul. you just want there to be one.
(like i said, not my belifes, just a rebuttal)

From: lordgreggreg
look, im hardcore christian.

my pooint is that its just stupid triyng to prove or disporve god. i hop in here and try to strighten out people who give weak arguments is all.

death. you die. your body crumbles, returns to the earth , energy of it gets eaten and trasphomred into something else. like anumals.

the soul? there is no soul. you just want there to be one.
(like i said, not my belifes, just a rebuttal)

Seriously? ok since your a christian, christians know that after a person dies he/she goes to heaven or hell.

And about the soul part, take it like this. when you were inside your mother's tummy you were depending on your mom to give you food. you were still forming. Now the soul we muslims believe is what controls your body. so when you came out of your mother, what had let you take control so you can start moving around. what started your brain to function? what started your heart to beat so blood moves around? something had to start it. now also have you ever see a person die before? ok if you want and you know some one close to death, go by him/her whatch as they near death. they will open up their mouths for the soul to come out. if you whatch 3 people die you will see they all do the same thing.

Gregg this has a poll, that means you get to say what you believe - this is the place where no one can prove/disprove, as you have said. Everything here is assumed, except for when elemental goes into politics about wmds, and I make jokes about waffle houses. Just like we can't say who wrote the bible, the scientists can't agree on which theory they like most.

This my friends isn't a very good thread, it turned people into enemies. I wish it closes down. Anwayz i hope i made my point clear. sorry if ive been mean to any one or hurt any one. im out.

From: kingarabian
Seriously? ok since your a christian, christians know that after a person dies he/she goes to heaven or hell.

yeah, im not arguing or explaning my belifs right now, i know i bleive in a soul, and god, and all that jazz. i just dont like weak points.

From: kingarabian


And about the soul part, take it like this. when you were inside your mother's tummy you were depending on your mom to give you food. you were still forming. Now the soul we muslims believe is what controls your body. so when you came out of your mother, what had let you take control so you can start moving around. what started your brain to function? what started your heart to beat so blood moves around? something had to start it.

sure. at a certain point in develpoment there is some sort of timer that begins to kick start everything. just like you can have a computer turn itsself on at a certian time. and a human body is MUCH more complex than a simple computer. it could even recive a signal from the mother.

there is some patern that embryos folow as they develop, perhaps hard coded into the dna, and this timer would just be part of it.

From: kingarabian

now also have you ever see a person die before? ok if you want and you know some one close to death, go by him/her whatch as they near death. they will open up their mouths for the soul to come out. if you whatch 3 people die you will see they all do the same thing.

so you are telling me that because dead pelople open their mouths… its to let the soul out? your saying the soul just couldnt go through the nose? or straight through the body? you are saying that the mouth opening isnt just your muscels relaxing?

bad argument. there is no proof in that. all though i do belive what you say.

You expect way too much if you think anything will be proven here gregg.

From: JackLKrawl
You expect way too much if you think anything will be proven here gregg.

dont worry jack, have you read what i said? i know nothing will be. i just dont like the zealot people who think they have the answer and that they can prove it. and i hope to make them relize that religon isnt ssomething that can be proven, or disproven.

So you're saying it's bad to believe in god? No one can prove god exists. You said it yourself.

From: JackLKrawl
So you're saying it's bad to believe in god? No one can prove god exists. You said it yourself.

no, ofcourse not, lol. I DO :p

but its bad to belive that you can prove it to others.

oh, btw, its greg, not gregg, if you care, (i dont)

=/ ok gregg, but don't be surprised if I go berserk on elemental.
P.S.
I'm playing CS and replying to this thread with a terrier locked up with me. I'm not going to be thinking and I'm going to be frustrated anyway.

i shall start off by saying that everything i say here stays in this thread as far as i am concerned. I dont voice my religious opinions(or lack thereof)inthe general forums, and i would never hold a grudge against anyone because of their religious beliefs.
HOWEVER: kingarabian: i will not take ANY religious discussion seriously when the grammar is so appalling that entire paragraphs could have their meaning mistaken for something else. take pride in your argument, use a spellcheck.
to see where i have rebutted your post, just scroll down to the heading with your name on it.



PHOENIX LAMENT

From: phoenixlament
I know that lots of us are scripters, and technically/computer inclined, so lets take an approach from a scientific perspective.

Consider entropy. Okay, it basically means that things degenerate over time if untouched. It's like your room - you don't clean it, it will ONLY get messier or stay the same. You smash a bottle easily, though fixing it to its perfect original state is almost impossible. Building a good SCAR script takes days. Deleting it requires a few keystrokes. You get what I mean.

not exactly what entropy is… entropy refers to probabilities. it states that after an infinite amount of time, everything will be broken down to its simplest form, if the simplest form is mess, then so be it.

But look at the life all around us.. it grows, multiplies, and adapts to an ever changing environment. If you leave a building to the elements, life will generate within that building. Roots and leaves will push up through the concrete, and naturally "take over" without any effort what man had worked so hard to build. Life defies this main scientific rule. Which raises another question - where does life come from?

Scientifically, life can only come from other life forms. Read your biology book. The only conclusion we can draw right now is that some power somewhere put life into existence, because obviously life couldn't have sprouted out of nowhere. (There have been experiments done to "create" simple cells in test tubes, but only produced various biological acids and proteins)

please, before using an argument like this, first read your biology book.
amino acids were formed by early earth gasses(ammonia, methane, water, co2) via chemical evolution. i.e. the chemicals tended to survive longer if they bonded together, therefore after a few billion years, there were LOTS of bonded chemicals.
amino acids became "alive" when they started forming nuclei of cells. variations of the urey and miller experiment have proven that this theory is plausible.

From a physics perspective.. the Big Bang had to be perfect to create the universe as we know today. The chance of creating exactly the universe we know it is one in a couple quadrillion (i won't go into details). Also, it is now discovered and confirmed that the Big Bang came from one point in space. Now think about it. One point in space is nothing. NOTHING. Mathematically zero. So it is scientifically impossible, yet PROVEN that all space, time, energy, matter, and distance came from a single, one-dimensional point from nowhere.

i used to have a video that would have explained this perfectly.
what it did was showed you 2 dice, 1 with the 6 on the topside, one with a 3.
it said "the chances of this dice rolling exactly like this is 1 in (whatever)
HOWEVER, it then rewinds the video to before the roll, and, sure enough, when its played foward, the guy rolls 6 and 3.
when looking retrospectively, sure, its a 1 in a couple quadrillion chance, but think about it in terms of rolling a dice, rather then simple inprobabilities.

Obviously there is alot more to this universe than people could ever possibly imagine. Even Einstein said that his work was a little baby wading in a vast ocean of knowledge. Although not entirely religious, he strongly opposed atheists.

he also strongly opposed christians:

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being." 

he only opposed atheists because of their "crusading spirit"… hmm, i wonder where he got the word "crusade" from?

Anyways, speaking religiously, Most Buddhists/Hindus/Confucians refer to this great, unmistakable, mysterious power as the Zen, Dao, Dhiyama, or Karma. Christians refer to this power as God, or as the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Muslims refer to this power as Allah, and also take Mohammed as a prophet. North American natives refer to this power as the Great Spirit, creator of all things. None of these views are wrong - they are just of different cultures and different beliefs.

none of them are wrong, there is nothing wrong with feeling comfortable, its when you start pushing your beliefs on others that people start getting angry.
i never push my belief(or lack thereof) onto others, i only engage in religious debate because it is the best subject to debate

I'm not saying that you should be religious, or atheist.. but the pure fact that science can never answer all our questions, and only serves to create more questions, while creating infinite solutions to our problems, and creating infinite problems at the same time should be taken into account.. as well as the fact that radical fundamentalists often turn into suicide bombers or "flat-Earthers" and hate science and freedom for women etc etc.

im not quite sure what you are saying here… that relgious extremists become suicide bombers? i have never heard of an atheistic suicide bomber. and what does this discussion have to do with the FES

(no pushing on my part to make you religious here) Personally, I am a Christian by faith - because it offers hope, salvation, and love to those in need and because I believe that God, this power has taken care of me and made miracles in times of dire need. But how exactly God works - I have no idea. But if I were to give you personal advice - it would be: Be open, questioning, and always ready to receive new ideas and perspectives about everything. Remember: Drop your sword and shield because human ideas in this world are neither right, nor wrong because every single one of us is different. And although the truth will never be known to us, and could be different for every one of us, we can choose to pursue it and receive enlightenment.

so… god gave us the ability to question, but the tells us not to?
or maybe we just are not allowed to question him?

(Pursuing the truth can be done through faith, religion, tradition, university, truck driving, SCAR scripting, art, music.. pretty much everything) :)

you have a very good philosophy on life, whilst i dont agree with your theistic views, i cant fault your morals.



JACKLKRAWL

Elemental I don't think I like you very much. Everything you say is filled with sarcasm and cruelty, as if you are talking down to us. Need I remind you that we are a part of the same community? We aren't enemies shouting at each other on a battlefield, and I don't know why you're acting like we are. This is a matter over 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' switched with 'Which came first, god or science?'

atheists argument is that god did not come at all… remember who you are debating against please
also, we are not enemies, im quite happy to help you out in your scripting endevours, but i enjoy debating religion.

If you have ten cents worth of logic in there, the correct answer would be 'god' because god cannot created out of some crackpot imitation of life that you fools are so excited about. You cannot disprove the existence of god, so stop trying.

crackpot imitation of life? how is LIFE a crackpot imitation of life?
anyways, the onus is on you to prove the existance of god. you cant prove that i dont have a fluffy pink crow in my room with the powers of speech and sentient thought, so stop trying!

Ever since you came to this thread you have been insulting us, you have been picking on us, you have been trying to start things. You have tried to convince people to throw away their beliefs based on teenager spelling. Get over yourself, this is the internet. No one said that there was a prophecy 'absolutely 100%ly' referring to the twin towers, we were just saying that there was a prophecy that MAY refer to the twin towers. The only reason we would do that is because it may refer to current events, which can act as reassurance. We aren't saints, we have our doubts - letters on pages won't always be enough, and sometimes we have to relate them to what is happening now.

if the twin towers were not refered to via "bible predicts stuff" arguments, then why is it in the thread at all?

phoenixlament gets it, why can't you Elemental? Are you, as I said, too frightened to admit, that your science is too limited and always shall be to answer everything? You can come up with all these theories and say google is your proof, but that doesn't prove anything. All it means is that someone came up with just another theory.

coming up with a theory is better then saying "Well, that looks like it could work, so lets get 2 billion other people to say it DOES work"

Some people say that religions are theories. They are not completely wrong, until they are proven, they will remain just that. Just like your sciences that you can't even prove, even with such a high level of arrogance. (Cruelty on) Obviously since you don't have a brain you can get science to clone one from Hillary Clinton for you. Maybe then you will have enough to get a job in the waffle business.

i thought you religious folk purported your superior morals learnt from the bible? you just succeeded in degenerating this debate to right wing name calling. if anyone could have furthered the cause of the atheists, it is you, thanks!





KING ARABIAN

fine fine fine…explain death. what happens to every one when they die. the soul what happens to it? science has nothing to do with death now, so dont give me any science crap, cause let me tell you science ain't everything.

[/quote
what is there to explain? death is death. nothing else.
science isnt everything, yet it is the best explanation we have, and therefore, the one i will believe.
it is backed up by relevant and accurate proof.







i will answer all your other posts once i get back from my legal studies exam

KING ARABIAN

fine fine fine…explain death. what happens to every one when they die. the soul what happens to it? science has nothing to do with death now, so dont give me any science crap, cause let me tell you science ain't everything.

[/quote
what is there to explain? death is death. nothing else.
science isnt everything, yet it is the best explanation we have, and therefore, the one i will believe.
it is backed up by relevant and accurate proof.







i will answer all your other posts once i get back from my legal studies exam

One thing to you. jahenem warrack. if you want the good go for the good if you dont hell with you. we try to explain but you just come up with something. and guess what i dont give a damn about my spelling. alright you win? have fun? i have more then 1 proof to prove their is a god. if you want ill show you. ill show you all. but i predict that you guyz are just gonna say its fake or something. but ill be happy to show.

From: elementalelf

i shall start off by saying that everything i say here stays in this thread as far as i am concerned. I dont voice my religious opinions(or lack thereof)inthe general forums, and i would never hold a grudge against anyone because of their religious beliefs.
HOWEVER: kingarabian: i will not take ANY religious discussion seriously when the grammar is so appalling that entire paragraphs could have their meaning mistaken for something else. take pride in your argument, use a spellcheck.
to see where i have rebutted your post, just scroll down to the heading with your name on it.



PHOENIX LAMENT




Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixlament View Post
I know that lots of us are scripters, and technically/computer inclined, so lets take an approach from a scientific perspective.

Consider entropy. Okay, it basically means that things degenerate over time if untouched. It's like your room - you don't clean it, it will ONLY get messier or stay the same. You smash a bottle easily, though fixing it to its perfect original state is almost impossible. Building a good SCAR script takes days. Deleting it requires a few keystrokes. You get what I mean.
not exactly what entropy is… entropy refers to probabilities. it states that after an infinite amount of time, everything will be broken down to its simplest form, if the simplest form is mess, then so be it.
Quote:
But look at the life all around us.. it grows, multiplies, and adapts to an ever changing environment. If you leave a building to the elements, life will generate within that building. Roots and leaves will push up through the concrete, and naturally "take over" without any effort what man had worked so hard to build. Life defies this main scientific rule. Which raises another question - where does life come from?

Scientifically, life can only come from other life forms. Read your biology book. The only conclusion we can draw right now is that some power somewhere put life into existence, because obviously life couldn't have sprouted out of nowhere. (There have been experiments done to "create" simple cells in test tubes, but only produced various biological acids and proteins)
please, before using an argument like this, first read your biology book.
amino acids were formed by early earth gasses(ammonia, methane, water, co2) via chemical evolution. i.e. the chemicals tended to survive longer if they bonded together, therefore after a few billion years, there were LOTS of bonded chemicals.
amino acids became "alive" when they started forming nuclei of cells. variations of the urey and miller experiment have proven that this theory is plausible.
Quote:
From a physics perspective.. the Big Bang had to be perfect to create the universe as we know today. The chance of creating exactly the universe we know it is one in a couple quadrillion (i won't go into details). Also, it is now discovered and confirmed that the Big Bang came from one point in space. Now think about it. One point in space is nothing. NOTHING. Mathematically zero. So it is scientifically impossible, yet PROVEN that all space, time, energy, matter, and distance came from a single, one-dimensional point from nowhere.
i used to have a video that would have explained this perfectly.
what it did was showed you 2 dice, 1 with the 6 on the topside, one with a 3.
it said "the chances of this dice rolling exactly like this is 1 in (whatever)
HOWEVER, it then rewinds the video to before the roll, and, sure enough, when its played foward, the guy rolls 6 and 3.
when looking retrospectively, sure, its a 1 in a couple quadrillion chance, but think about it in terms of rolling a dice, rather then simple inprobabilities.
Quote:
Obviously there is alot more to this universe than people could ever possibly imagine. Even Einstein said that his work was a little baby wading in a vast ocean of knowledge. Although not entirely religious, he strongly opposed atheists.
he also strongly opposed christians:
Code:

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist…. I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being."

he only opposed atheists because of their "crusading spirit"… hmm, i wonder where he got the word "crusade" from?
Quote:
Anyways, speaking religiously, Most Buddhists/Hindus/Confucians refer to this great, unmistakable, mysterious power as the Zen, Dao, Dhiyama, or Karma. Christians refer to this power as God, or as the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Muslims refer to this power as Allah, and also take Mohammed as a prophet. North American natives refer to this power as the Great Spirit, creator of all things. None of these views are wrong - they are just of different cultures and different beliefs.
none of them are wrong, there is nothing wrong with feeling comfortable, its when you start pushing your beliefs on others that people start getting angry.
i never push my belief(or lack thereof) onto others, i only engage in religious debate because it is the best subject to debate
Quote:
I'm not saying that you should be religious, or atheist.. but the pure fact that science can never answer all our questions, and only serves to create more questions, while creating infinite solutions to our problems, and creating infinite problems at the same time should be taken into account.. as well as the fact that radical fundamentalists often turn into suicide bombers or "flat-Earthers" and hate science and freedom for women etc etc.
im not quite sure what you are saying here… that relgious extremists become suicide bombers? i have never heard of an atheistic suicide bomber. and what does this discussion have to do with the FES
Quote:
(no pushing on my part to make you religious here) Personally, I am a Christian by faith - because it offers hope, salvation, and love to those in need and because I believe that God, this power has taken care of me and made miracles in times of dire need. But how exactly God works - I have no idea. But if I were to give you personal advice - it would be: Be open, questioning, and always ready to receive new ideas and perspectives about everything. Remember: Drop your sword and shield because human ideas in this world are neither right, nor wrong because every single one of us is different. And although the truth will never be known to us, and could be different for every one of us, we can choose to pursue it and receive enlightenment.
so… god gave us the ability to question, but the tells us not to?
or maybe we just are not allowed to question him?
Quote:

(Pursuing the truth can be done through faith, religion, tradition, university, truck driving, SCAR scripting, art, music.. pretty much everything)
you have a very good philosophy on life, whilst i dont agree with your theistic views, i cant fault your morals.



JACKLKRAWL
Quote:
Elemental I don't think I like you very much. Everything you say is filled with sarcasm and cruelty, as if you are talking down to us. Need I remind you that we are a part of the same community? We aren't enemies shouting at each other on a battlefield, and I don't know why you're acting like we are. This is a matter over 'Which came first, the chicken or the egg?' switched with 'Which came first, god or science?'
atheists argument is that god did not come at all… remember who you are debating against please
also, we are not enemies, im quite happy to help you out in your scripting endevours, but i enjoy debating religion.
Quote:
If you have ten cents worth of logic in there, the correct answer would be 'god' because god cannot created out of some crackpot imitation of life that you fools are so excited about. You cannot disprove the existence of god, so stop trying.
crackpot imitation of life? how is LIFE a crackpot imitation of life?
anyways, the onus is on you to prove the existance of god. you cant prove that i dont have a fluffy pink crow in my room with the powers of speech and sentient thought, so stop trying!
Quote:
Ever since you came to this thread you have been insulting us, you have been picking on us, you have been trying to start things. You have tried to convince people to throw away their beliefs based on teenager spelling. Get over yourself, this is the internet. No one said that there was a prophecy 'absolutely 100%ly' referring to the twin towers, we were just saying that there was a prophecy that MAY refer to the twin towers. The only reason we would do that is because it may refer to current events, which can act as reassurance. We aren't saints, we have our doubts - letters on pages won't always be enough, and sometimes we have to relate them to what is happening now.
if the twin towers were not refered to via "bible predicts stuff" arguments, then why is it in the thread at all?
Quote:
phoenixlament gets it, why can't you Elemental? Are you, as I said, too frightened to admit, that your science is too limited and always shall be to answer everything? You can come up with all these theories and say google is your proof, but that doesn't prove anything. All it means is that someone came up with just another theory.
coming up with a theory is better then saying "Well, that looks like it could work, so lets get 2 billion other people to say it DOES work"
Quote:
Some people say that religions are theories. They are not completely wrong, until they are proven, they will remain just that. Just like your sciences that you can't even prove, even with such a high level of arrogance. (Cruelty on) Obviously since you don't have a brain you can get science to clone one from Hillary Clinton for you. Maybe then you will have enough to get a job in the waffle business.
i thought you religious folk purported your superior morals learnt from the bible? you just succeeded in degenerating this debate to right wing name calling. if anyone could have furthered the cause of the atheists, it is you, thanks!





KING ARABIAN

fine fine fine…explain death. what happens to every one when they die. the soul what happens to it? science has nothing to do with death now, so dont give me any science crap, cause let me tell you science ain't everything.

[/quote
what is there to explain? death is death. nothing else.
science isnt everything, yet it is the best explanation we have, and therefore, the one i will believe.
it is backed up by relevant and accurate proof.

I just figured I'd flip through and correct your post like you've been correcting ours. Please, in the future, use a grammar book, as I don't really want to fix your posts. I've gone over this, we aren't saints. We just believe in Jesus Christ, do sue us for it. You cannot expect us to be our usual kind selves when you insult us so deeply. Please, give us 'accurate proof' that even one of your theories are correct.

P.S.
I didn't mean to "further the cause of atheism" by calling you arrogant. Do forgive me for not being a pacifist, but Christianity does not teach or support that by any means. And by crackpot imitation of life, I was referring* to your clones, which so far is the only creation that you have really succeeded in doing, except maybe bacteria under very special circumstances? Assuming that your theory of evolution from bacteria is correct, and that man did evolve from apes, then we would probably find human-ape fossils somewhere. Maybe you people evolved from apes, but I know for sure we didn't.

From: JackLKrawl

From: elementalelf

I just figured I'd flip through and correct your post like you've been correcting ours. Please, in the future, use a grammar book, as I don't really want to fix your posts. I've gone over this, we aren't saints. We just believe in Jesus Christ, do sue us for it. You cannot expect us to be our usual kind selves when you insult us so deeply. Please, give us 'accurate proof' that even one of your theories are correct.

P.S.
I didn't mean to "further the cause of atheism" by calling you arrogant. Do forgive me for not being a pacifist, but Christianity does not teach or support that by any means. And by crackpot imitation of life, I was referring* to your clones, which so far is the only creation that you have really succeeded in doing, except maybe bacteria under very special circumstances? Assuming that your theory of evolution from bacteria is correct, and that man did evolve from apes, then we would probably find human-ape fossils somewhere. Maybe you people evolved from apes, but I know for sure we didn't.

i have not been "correcting your mistakes" i have been asking you to make BASIC grammatical rectifications of posts that dearly need it.
With a post as long as mine, there will invariably be some grammatical errors that will be overlooked, but surely for a 3 line post, one could look over it for a few seconds just to make sure it makes sense?
I do this with my posts before i post them, every single time.

As for my proof, accuracy is subjective, so what i take to be accurate, you may discard due to either limited understanding, or conflicting religious beliefs.(The latter almost certainly being the case)
However i will explain it regardless.
Firstly: It is widely held that in science it is impossible to prove anything, only to disprove all other rational possibilities.
Also, your post shows that you are not well versed in the subject with which you are arguing. Almost all remains of the various ancestors of the homo genus are still in a solid form, i.e. Bones have been found.
Human to apes:
Homo Habilis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Homo_habilis.jpg
homo Rudolfensis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1470f.jpg
Homo Erectus
http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=79508&rendTypeId=4
Homo Antecessor
Note: this is only parts of the jaw, yet it is so similar to Homo sapien jawbones that the MOST(note: not only) logical conclusion is ancestry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Homo_antecessor.jpg
Homo Neanderthalensis:
Note: this is not an ancestor of Homo Sapien, more like a cousin, they both evolved from Homo Erectus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis.jpg

To be honest i really don't understand why this has become an empathetic issue, this is a debate, not a place for personal insults. I have tried to keep the conversation as civilised* as possible while proving my point, and whilst my debating methods may be seen by some as uncouth, or even downright hostile, know that i have alot of respect for someone that will staunchly follow something in the face of ridicule, i do, however, have even more respect if that same person can make an interesting and strong argument as to why they believe.
For the most part, you have done that. You have stood by your personal beliefs while i attempt to tear them apart, and for that, you are to be commended. Just because i have a love of debate, does not mean i don't respect my opponents.

*Please don't correct me on this word, i live in Australia, that is the correct spelling here.

OK =/ no hard feelings elemental, I just misunderstood your approach. This is one of my problems, one of my parents is a teacher, the other is an engineer - both obsessive over my mistakes and very keen in correcting them. It's kind of driven me insane when people correct me/others. Just imagine yourself living with extremely eccentric people, eventually it rubs off on you.

I won't say they are or are not related to humans, but it does not stamp anything out. We know that from colonial times, people have become a good bit taller. For centuries Jesus has been depicted as a normal man, no ape-hair. (<_< Man that would be freaky.) Jesus is said to have been alive at the same time as Julius Caesar, as he once said to his apostles that he wished to meet him. Assuming Jesus existed, he was crucified in Rome. Honestly, I do not know how to argue against the pictures, all I can say is that I don't think that they prove what they are meant to prove. This is something interesting in the bible. They found possible evidence of Lot's wife being turned to salt. Jerusalem today is still having issues from Jacob. These things are curious because there were little people able to write so long ago.

The bottom line is, that we cannot say for sure. Throwing all faith aside, anyone can see that. I don't think this thread should be here, but it is, and it is amazing that SRL hasn't been crumbled by some Jihad from it.

I don't think this thread should be here, but it is, and it is amazing that SRL hasn't been crumbled by some Jihad from it.

I second that lets hope a nice mod comes and closes it.

From: JackLKrawl
OK =/ no hard feelings elemental, I just misunderstood your approach. This is one of my problems, one of my parents is a teacher, the other is an engineer - both obsessive over my mistakes and very keen in correcting them. It's kind of driven me insane when people correct me/others. Just imagine yourself living with extremely eccentric people, eventually it rubs off on you.

I won't say they are or are not related to humans, but it does not stamp anything out. We know that from colonial times, people have become a good bit taller. For centuries Jesus has been depicted as a normal man, no ape-hair. (<_< Man that would be freaky.) Jesus is said to have been alive at the same time as Julius Caesar, as he once said to his apostles that he wished to meet him. Assuming Jesus existed, he was crucified in Rome. Honestly, I do not know how to argue against the pictures, all I can say is that I don't think that they prove what they are meant to prove. This is something interesting in the bible. They found possible evidence of Lot's wife being turned to salt. Jerusalem today is still having issues from Jacob. These things are curious because there were little people able to write so long ago.

The bottom line is, that we cannot say for sure. Throwing all faith aside, anyone can see that. I don't think this thread should be here, but it is, and it is amazing that SRL hasn't been crumbled by some Jihad from it.

Thanks for that, and i do apologize for the earlier bits about grammar. I do get very annoyed by bad grammar, its just one of my bugbears.
I found the Lot's wife story interesting actually, and, you being a religious person, would probably be the best person to direct this question to.
I would like to note that this is not meant to be having a go at your religion, its actually an honest question with no sarcasm intended.
From what i can see, Lot's wife was turned was turned to salt because she felt pity for those dieing at soddom. my question is, what was the biblical reason behind turning Lot's wife into salt? Was it only because she looked back as the city was being destroyed?

Here's a sub issue to discuss:

How many people had religious parents and were taken to church/etc, and grow up and became atheist/agnostic on their own?

How many people had non religious parents and then became religious on their own?

How many religious people had parents of the same religion?

You ruin the fun of senseless arguing Boreas…:p

Does anybody want me to join and argument and blow y'all down with my piercing intelligence and my method of pointing out flaws in other peoples logic? Or do you want to keep it nice and simple without venturing into the Bible, that is, if you haven't done so already.

And quick point Boreas, what do you mean by religious in your questions? Like a church-going religious, or a let's skip church and open Christmas presents religious?

-Dunce

I mean as in believing in a god, celebrating christmas for the birth of jesus. (Whereas non religious would be celebrating just because it's nice to give and receive to others, family closeness, etc.)

Hey Boreas. Just to answer your question.

I don't really think you will find a good correlation. Well, at least not for people who think on their own (now that I think about it, a surprising minority)

I know that there have been studies done concerning a parent’s politics, and their child’s, that found a very strong correlation.

I would assume this to be the same as religion goes too.

I grew up catholic, my parent weren’t really hardcore or anything and we went to church. I had my little bible class thing, and I basically knew the scriptures up and down, and understood it better than most people.
and how, I got sick of catholic stuff that I didn’t agree with.

for instance, personally, I am strongly against drinking any sort of alcohol, don’t know why, but it’s just like a engrained trait of mine that transcends religion.

So I decided that catholic stuff really wasn’t for me. there were some other reasons too, basically the people in the church didn’t really believe in it, and were in it for social reasons, which made it pointless to me, because I generally hate people, and being social as well.

so then I kind of had no religion other than my own, no church (it wasn’t too hard to talk my parents out of that)

I believed in god, but not very strongly, I was a very, down to earth, physical proof guy, I believed in god only because I did originally, and couldn’t find any proof against it to change my mind.

Then some Mormon missionaries came to my house and started trying to teach me. They were kind of zealots, and pissed me off really bad. I decided right then and there that I would be atheist just so I could prove them wrong. (And I gave better arguments than we have seen here).

anyhow, that boiled down to them asking me to just, for once, say I good pray to god asking if he existed, and if Mormonism was good stuff or not.

And I got the worst answer I could ever have received, and it kind of changed my life, and still pisses me off now. SO I become Mormon, baptized my family, and basically became a Mormon guru similar to how I was a catholic guru earlier (5 years) in life.

So yeah, that was all fine and dandy, till girls started getting involved. See, Mormonism was great for me, they have a wonderful moral basis that echoes along with mine nearly perfectly, actual scriptural guidance "don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t have sex before marriage". So I was happy, but then we also had Mormon zealots. They were so crazy they make other church's zealots look like atheists. Anyhow, they get really popular, publish a book, high up people say they like it, and all of a sudden what they think, and how they interpret the books, becomes Mormon law.

and so they started telling me that I shouldn’t do XYZ in my relationships, and that I shouldn’t have just one girl, because it would make her more than a friend, and lead to sex. And I can agree with that to an extent, for the majority. But not for me. So people started looking down on me, allot. I didn’t really care, I was able then to really see the character of some of these "great Mormons" and allot of them are just lies, fakes, etc.

This absolutely discussed me when I learned that my church was being run by hypocrites. It all boiled down to them wanting me to go on a two year mission. Now, I thought long and hard about this, I had UNBELIVABLE pressure making me go, I had people paying for all my expenses, everything. But I just didn’t want to go. I had talks with bishops (very unnerving) and basically it came down to "pray if you want to go" I did, and it was that I shouldn’t go.

So then people assumed I was the devil, and people started to actually shun me, it was amazing. I mean, I really don’t want to spend 2 years of my life having to do what some Mormon Sais, especially when I know how corrupt they are. Spending 2 years doing god’s will, sure, doing a person’s will, no way.

So I went to college, and decided that I would just practice my religion by myself, I’m still hardcore Mormon, and believe in it, specially the morality parts, but I only read the actual books, nothing else. And I’m very happy with that.

And so back on topic Boreas. I don’t think my parent’s views on religion had any effect on me at all. I am very religious today, but I don’t think my parents had one bit of influence on it.

MY parents were muslim and so am I =D.

i haven't read all pages in this thread.. read a few.. but ive decided that i really need help. is there anyone here who can help me understand the things that im thinking about inside my head… im starting to get confused and scared… i have had a long and slow road to depression for things in my life, and started to think about death, then religion, point of human existence… and i don't really know what to think.. i feel as if im not even living inside my body anymore. thinking about such things as i do everyday makes me feel sick inside the stomach and im starting to question my mental health. this has been going on a few months now. the last week has been really bad.

if anyone can help me. please add my MSN -> its in my sig

hmm… usually i would say that this is just a young teenager type thing, but then i noticed you were 17.
i suggest you go to your GP about it, they are good people to talk to.

Well to sum it up, scientists will never figure out everything and neither will religious people. Go too far on either end and you'll end up elemental or become a suicide bomber. Simple as that.

Man is stupid, futile, often blind, and has a strong tendency to prove that he himself is right, and that the other man are more stupid, more futile, and even more blind. This is the leading cause of everything from fistfights to world wars.

That's why God created women. No penis, no problem. :p

(Or if you are an atheist, you would say that gender differences occurred in relatively early life forms as a result of the evolution of sexual reproduction evolved, leading to the XX, and XY chromosomes. The high levels of testosterone amongst adolescent human males cause more irrational, argumentative, and high-ego behaviour relative to their female counterparts.)

From: elementalelf
hmm… usually i would say that this is just a young teenager type thing, but then i noticed you were 17.
i suggest you go to your GP about it, they are good people to talk to.

no way am i talking to anyone face to face about my thoughts…. i just thought that maybe if someone religious can explain things better to me.. maybe i could live a bit happier i hate being uncertain

you would be surprised how much it helps talking to someone face to face… but it is your decision, and even if you are happy, you are still uncertain.
as they say, there are only 3 certainties in life:
life
death
taxes

yes, i know. but its depressing me to the point where its impacting on my life big time

From: Czepa
yes, i know. but its depressing me to the point where its impacting on my life big time

read my post above?

There is only ONE way to prove that god, religion, whatever exists.

And that is to pray, and find out for yourself.

Now, unfortunatly telling someone you prayed and got/didn't get an answer, normally inst a strong argument, BUT at least it is a strong argument for you.

It's a pretty good failsafe too, I think every major religion has something in it like "if you pray and ask god with a sinceere heart he will talk to you", so I sujest you give that a try.

Let me know how it goes, and then you can go place your vote on this forum.

Now as far zas depression goes, well, look. Religion sometimes helps with depression, but not really. I found this. If you feel depressed, do stuff really really nicde for people that makes them happy. You will start feeling happy yourself almost imidiatly. This goes for athiest, agnostics, and religious zealots alike.

Good luck.

Edit: ok, and if you really want solid definative answers on where you are going to go when you die, whats the purpose of life, etc. You probably should be come religious, lol. However, if you really think about it,thoese really don't matter too much right now anyhow. Just make people happy. Oh, nad if you don't have a moral guidline, religion is pretty good at suplying you a cookie cutter one of those too. But then again, a utilitarian view will get you one as well. religion isnt required to be a good person, or to be happy. (although i find it helps)

thanks greg, im undecided about religion, but its beneficial to say yes for me i think, but im not easy to convince. since i got back from boarding school halfway through year 11 (got expelled from the boarding house) i realized that i had pissed alot of people off, and done no good at all. so i decided to try let god forgive me, by not saying that X doesn't exist or X does exist but confronting it like this:
going through life doing good things for people trying to be respectful and show forgiveness to anyone as long as they are willing to accept it and really make sure that on judgment day… god can weigh up.. well he didn't believe in me fully and wasn't convinced, but on the other had didn't commit many sins/was kind.

i think for the time being ill keep it like that, but try to not think about the "whatif"s about it not being true, then what is the point of my existence. thats whats setting me off i think

what do you think?

From: Czepa
thanks greg, im undecided about religion, but its beneficial to say yes for me i think, but im not easy to convince. since i got back from boarding school halfway through year 11 (got expelled from the boarding house) i realized that i had pissed alot of people off, and done no good at all. so i decided to try let god forgive me, by not saying that X doesn't exist or X does exist but confronting it like this:
going through life doing good things for people trying to be respectful and show forgiveness to anyone as long as they are willing to accept it and really make sure that on judgment day… god can weigh up.. well he didn't believe in me fully and wasn't convinced, but on the other had didn't commit many sins/was kind.

i think for the time being ill keep it like that, but try to not think about the "whatif"s about it not being true, then what is the point of my existence. thats whats setting me off i think

what do you think?

Well, i think youve got a decent head on you, you will be fine. Religion, not only is it dificult to convince, its imposible. And i belive it is meant to be imposible to convince someone about religion.

So like i said, pray, if you actuayl get and aswer yourself, well, that is pretty convincing, lol.

But yeah, it doesnt matter either way.

i have met some AMAZING people, who were absolutly wonderfull people, because they had no religion.

i have also met AMAZING people, who were amazing becuase of their religion.

It really all boils down to you really.

About the what ifs, yeah, dont worry about them. Even the religious answers arent very satisying, lol. Just try to be the best you can, make the most out of your life, thats the same view for both athiest, chiristian, muslum, you name it.

also, if you are going to want to belive in god. dont bother unless you are complelty convinced. its just a waste of time otherwize, and will just piss you of.

if you are convinced, i supose you could ask me my personal view points on any religious issues, and ill give you my two cents.

good luck bro.

I am a protestant brought up by protestants. In my own opinion though gregg, your views can be dangerous for a nation. There is only one answer, as all religions conflict with each other. (and science is considered a religion in my mind.)

From: JackLKrawl
I am a protestant brought up by protestants. In my own opinion though greg, your views can be dangerous for a nation. There is only one answer, as all religions conflict with each other. (and science is considered a religion in my mind.)

Ok, im not really sure i knwo what your talking about.

at first, i thought that you were trying to say , that me believing in God in gerneal was bad, because all religion leads to war.

But then decided that this couldn't be your point, because that would make you a hypocrite, as you said, you were protestant,. and last time i cheched, they belived in god.

So. what belifs are you talking about? Mabey read more than one of my posts to really get a better feel on what I believe.

(also, my religon is a religon of peacve and acc3eptance, anyone that doesnt pervet it wont start any wars, dont worry.)

I'm Atheist I do not believe in god I find there is much more evidence against the existance of god than for it. Though I also believe it's impossible to say that there is not a god with out any doubt. Truth is no one knows though I decide to base my opinions on science and do not believe in gods existence do to the lack of evidence. So what I'm pretty much saying I don't believe a god exists but I'm not saying it's impossible.

but here's this Video which greatly shows what I believe for the most part (at least towards evolution anyways) and this guy can word it way better than I could hope to but I hope it can shed some light on things. Clarifying the Various Human Species

Flaws in evolutionism: Irreducibly complex organisms, flaws in carbon dating, theories on the origins of life are impractical and highly unlikely, decent with modification has never been proven to work (though it is likely it somewhat does), BASED ON FAITH etc…

Flaws in Creationism: Not enough past evidence, no present evidence (unless u hear/experience it from others or yourself) BASED ON FAITH.

I'm a "Christian" and a Biology major and I understand both sides. Point is, there are flaws in both aspects. I personally don't believe that God works in the world directly as of now, but he got it started because it's hard to contemplate the beginning of life without a God, but it casts doubt on life with a God (i.e who created God?). Both require faith to believe. Just choose the one that you feel would make you…idk…happy.

From: jcjcjc
but here's this Video which greatly shows what I believe for the most part (at least towards evolution anyways) and this guy can word it way better than I could hope to but I hope it can shed some light on things. Clarifying the Various Human Species

I'm apatheistic!

That's a nice theory and all, but where are the transitional fossils between each relative? I mean, you're putting your faith into this belief that this is real, the same exact reason you dislike theist beliefs.

Also, 5 year grave-dig. New record??

I'm a rational person, and I do not believe in god.

I find people who believe in god to be unintelligent and irrational.

There's a reason the statistics show that the more education you recieve, the less likely are you to be religious.

But I support the teachings of most religions. But no, there's no "god"

My religion are my beliefs about reality, ie my worldview. I am religious because I am devoted to those beliefs. IMO it's silly to say that only people who believe in a God are religious and athiests/agnostics are not.

did anyone else notice the 4+ year grave dig?

haha yeah as soon as I posted :/

From: footballjds
did anyone else notice the 4+ year grave dig?

It's not like religions have changed that much overtime :p It's not an annoying grave dig.

From: masterBB
It's not like religions have changed that much overtime :p It's not an annoying grave dig.

it's an annoying grave dig cause topics like this RARELY stay open…

however, i accidentally clicked atheist and that's def not true about me…

God has to be in your heart :)

Well, nobody probably cares about my opinion, but i'm going to say it anyways.

I choose to be Atheist/Agnostic simply because I am a logic man. But this doesn't mean I completely throw out the idea of god. I ponder on the fact that we will never ever really know what created us, and what really is out there in the universe. I mean, if you think logically for both the religious and atheist side, something had to have come before "god" came or the big bang.

I kind of have the slight belief that there actually is a god, but people just give him much to much credit for how much interaction he actually has with the human race and earth, because something had to have created the mass amount of galaxy's, nebulas, and stars in this vast, vast universe.

People should also start thinking about how lucky we actually are to be alive, not trying to be one of those people that say embrace everyday, but just simply think of the odds of this whole "universe" we live in being a possibility, and what could have come before all of this. Also think about how many other "universe's" could possibly be out there in addition to ours, because there is a huge possibility there is more than one "universe"

From: shadowmarkus
I'm a rational person, and I do not believe in god.

I find people who believe in god to be unintelligent and irrational.

Really? I'm a rational person too, and in my observations I've found it to be opposite. Atheists are uneducated and ignorant and are just stuck in the rebellious stage of their life.

Hopefully you will notice my sarcasm and that I'm making the same generalizations that you are. Come up with some more supporting evidence, and hopefully better reasoning to why you believe what you believe.

I agree with the OP, however I do respect other's opinions about religion.. I'm sort of forced to as I attend a Lutheran college.

I don't feel like having this debate for the 5000000th time right now..maybe later.

Anyway, I voted atheist.

From: josh81193
I'm apatheistic!

That's a nice theory and all, but where are the transitional fossils between each relative? I mean, you're putting your faith into this belief that this is real, the same exact reason you dislike theist beliefs.

Also, 5 year grave-dig. New record??

but the thing is that that's probably the best solution as of now, and unlike the belief of a theist if that theory is proven wrong then I accept it's wrong and move on to what is currently the most accurate theory. I am putting my faith into this theory, but it changes as new facts and studies are found. a true theist who believe his/her text to be the absolute truth doesn't adapt even if the studies found are proven to be 100% accurate they won't accept it. Of course there are religious people who do put science first and it's impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a god. Though I can assure you all of the religions currently existing to day that have a text or some other type of religious stories they are all wrong because to be a part of that religion you must believe every single detail of the religion if you don't you're technically not part of that religion which is ok I guess because it's impossible to disprove a belief you make up unless it contradicts things that have been proven. either way just saying science changes to what is most accurate as new things are discovered, but religion does not.


,and yeah that was a pretty big grave dig lol I didn't look at the dates. I just searched religion in the search bar and this was what came up. There was another one which came up first but it was locked.

From: jcjcjc
but the thing is that that's probably the best solution as of now, and unlike the belief of a theist if that theory is proven wrong then I accept it's wrong and move on to what is currently the most accurate theory. I am putting my faith into this theory, but it changes as new facts and studies are found. a true theist who believe his/her text to be the absolute truth doesn't adapt even if the studies found are proven to be 100% accurate they won't accept it. Of course there are religious people who do put science first and it's impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a god. Though I can assure you all of the religions currently existing to day that have a text or some other type of religious stories they are all wrong because to be a part of that religion you must believe every single detail of the religion if you don't you're technically not part of that religion which is ok I guess because it's impossible to disprove a belief you make up unless it contradicts things that have been proven. either way just saying science changes to what is most accurate as new things are discovered, but religion does not.

I can assure you, it's NOT the best solution. I would also like to ask for some sort of examples of what you're talking about, I don't quite understand.

Macro-evolution is as much of a theory as Creationism. The problem that I have with the theory of evolution of species is that it's being taught as completely TRUE, when it's far from it.

Usually people misrepresent or confuse macro and micro evolution, and come up with the conclusion that creationists are dumb because they don't believe in micro-evolution, when they in fact do believe in it, they just don't believe in macro-evolution. Macro-evolution is the THEORY that species turned into other species through a series of genetic mutations, which has never been observed and there is no fossil evidence for. Micro-evolution is the scientific fact that species go through natural selection, leaving the best genes of that species to thrive, but does not turn that species into another species (ape into human).

But if there's a mix of white foxes and black foxes in a snow-filled environment, let's say Antarctica, then eventually all of the black foxes will die off, because they are killed and eaten by other animals. The white foxes will continue to survive because they suite better to the environment.

There is no genetic-mutation going on in that fox example, the black foxes aren't mutating into a different species of foxes over time, it's just that they died off and only leaving the white foxes to survive in that environment. This is an example of natural selection and micro-evolution.

As for macro-evolution, species turning into different species, there is no scientific evidence for it at all, no transitional fossils between species, etc.

Then you have the question, where did life come from? Well, atheist evolutionists believe that it formed from something non-living. So far no one has been able to replicate this in a laboratory, and the only logical explanation to bringing something non-living into something living would be by the works of a God, or something of that nature.

People that say they believe in Evolution because they are logical, reasonable people and would prefer believing in facts rather than faith, actually have no idea why they believe what they believe. They were just told to believe it.

I need someone religious to explain this to me…

Why can't the Earth & the Universe with it just 'exist' much like you believe God does?
Why does the existence and creation of the universe need an explanation but you don't need one for God?

I'm neither of the 3 choices…

From: Borland
I need someone religious to explain this to me…

Why can't the Earth & the Universe with it just 'exist' much like you believe God does?
Why does the existence and creation of the universe need an explanation but you don't need one for God?

If you're Christian, you aren't guessing that God created the universe, he told them through the Bible that he created everything. They aren't asking for an explanation, they were told how it happened and defending their beliefs.

Example: You own a computer, your computer was built in China. You could care less where it was put together, but you know for a fact is was put together in China because it says "Made in China".

From: josh81193
If you're Christian, you aren't guessing that God created the universe, he told them through the Bible that he created everything. They aren't asking for an explanation, they were told how it happened and defending their beliefs.

Example: You own a computer, your computer was built in China. You could care less where it was put together, but you know for a fact is was put together in China because it says "Made in China".

Yes but then that same curiosity and desire for knowing that got you asking how the Universe came to be should now focus it's attention on how God came to be.

Why is it that they can believe without needing an explanation that God exists but crave an explanation for the Universe, why can't it exist in the same way God does, "just does".

From: Borland
Yes but then that same curiosity and desire for knowing that got you asking how the Universe came to be should now focus it's attention on how God came to be.

Why is it that they can believe without needing an explanation that God exists but crave an explanation for the Universe, why can't it exist in the same way God does, "just does".

I don't understand what you're asking?

They don't crave to know where the universe came from, they already know where it came from. As for explaining how/what God is, it's impossible because he is not limited to our physical senses, our natural world. God is a supernatural being and will forever be impossible to prove or disprove his existence because he is not limited by our senses.

From: josh81193
I don't understand what you're asking?

They don't crave to know where the universe came from, they already know where it came from. As for explaining how/what God is, it's impossible because he is not limited to our physical senses, our natural world. God is a supernatural being and will forever be impossible to prove or disprove his existence because he is not limited by our senses.

I'm just questioning the reason why they need a reason why the Universe is here (ergo God) but at the same time they don't have the need to know how God exists.

When I talk with religious people they ALWAYS say "Well then, how do you suppose the Universe came to be". Although I don't actually believe in this answer, I give it just to see what they say, "I believe the Universe just exists and it always has, it was never created and will never end, exactly how you think of God". They always look at me like that is such a preposterous notion. Even though it's the same notion they apply to God.

Why is this thing called "God" - which "just exists" - needed to explain the reason for the Universe being here when you could just use the "just exists" theory directly to the Universe itself and cut out the middle man.

Too much to read on the first page, was gruesome O_O. Here's my argument. What is God? Define it. Throughout history God(s) have been everywhere. I think people use the word God to describe something they don't understand, natural powers, any powers really, emotions, ideals, the list goes on etc. Maybe your God doesn't represent anything, well then it could represent nothing, but for some reason you're thinking about that God, and you associate something with it. Idk what, you don't really have to associate anything. That God is something you think about, you know his name or whatever you call it/him/her, so really God is a thought? Could be, could be an emotion, yadadadada etc.

So if a flying spaghetti ball falls from the sky the size of a city, and starts talking to me. I would consider that God-like. So it could be considered in my thoughts as a God because it can fly around, and talk despite being a floating city sized ball of meat.

ergo - http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/files/2007/11/flying-spaghetti-monster.jpg

So, lets say I don't think of anything as a God.

Once I think that nothing to me could be considered to me a God, then that makes me an Atheist, because I will never consider anything a God.

For agnostic its like the flying spaghetti ball thing, sure if one comes I might consider it a God, but until then I don't know.

So if you think there is a rationalization, explanation, scientific hoopla, for everything and you would never consider a flying spaghetti ball as God-like, you might say something like: Its an alien with sulfur composition that mated with a monkey but was born in a butcher's meatball tada! Then your Atheist :D

So its all about what you associate the word GOD with. :stirthepot:

I believe in Guthix.Case closed.

From: Borland
I'm just questioning the reason why they need a reason why the Universe is here (ergo God) but at the same time they don't have the need to know how God exists.

They choose to believe in it because they don't want to spend eternity in hell, because they believe that it exists and it is a real possibility for them.

From: Borland
When I talk with religious people they ALWAYS say "Well then, how do you suppose the Universe came to be". Although I don't actually believe in this answer, I give it just to see what they say, "I believe the Universe just exists and it always has, it was never created and will never end, exactly how you think of God". They always look at me like that is such a preposterous notion. Even though it's the same notion they apply to God.

The problem with that though, if the past is infinite, and the future is infinite, how did we get to here? There had to be a beginning and with that, there will have to be an ending. If there is an infinite amount of people in a room and I started counting to find out which number I am… Well… I would never get there.

From: josh81193

The problem with that though, if the past is infinite, and the future is infinite, how did we get to here? There had to be a beginning and with that, there will have to be an ending. If there is an infinite amount of people in a room and I started counting to find out which number I am… Well… I would never get there.

This is exactly what I'm getting at. I'm explaining the Universe as religious people explain God. Every religious person I know thinks of God as always being here, never created and never dies. So that's logic that they have accepted as true.

I'm now asking why you can't apply that same logic they've already accepted as true to God, to be true to the Universes existence.

Yes this:

The problem with that though, if the past is infinite, and the future is infinite, how did we get to here? There had to be a beginning and with that, there will have to be an ending. If there is an infinite amount of people in a room and I started counting to find out which number I am… Well… I would never get there.

Doesn't make sense but that hasn't stopped religious people believing God existence being such.

So I'm wanting to know what arguments they can have against the Universes existences being the same as God's without voiding their belief of how God exists.

Hope I'm making sense here.

From: Borland
This is exactly what I'm getting at. I'm explaining the Universe as religious people explain God. Every religious person I know thinks of God as always being here, never created and never dies. So that's logic that they have accepted as true.

I'm now asking why you can't apply that same logic they've already accepted as true to God, to be true to the Universes existence.

Yes this:
Doesn't make sense but that hasn't stopped religious people believing God existence being such.

So I'm wanting to know what arguments they can have against the Universes existences being the same as God's without voiding their belief of how God exists.

Hope I'm making sense here.

Oh I understand, you're saying how can they not apply the same concept as God have always being existed… When they turn around and say they turn around and say it's logically impossible for the universe to have always existed.

I don't know, I've never thought of that.

Ooo I love religious discussions. It's sad that both atheists and Christians can usually only remember the dumbest people 'on the other side'. While in fact some Christians might have more in common with free minded atheist, than a narrow minded Christan (and the other way around!).

I'm both Atheist and Agnostic. Atheist in that I don't believe in god, but Agnostic because IF it could be proven scientifically, I might have more reason to believe it. Was baptized and confirmed Catholic prior to my current beliefs.

From: eXoTiK
I'm both Atheist and Agnostic. Atheist in that I don't believe in god, but Agnostic because IF it could be proven scientifically, I might have more reason to believe it. Was baptized and confirmed Catholic prior to my current beliefs.

It doesn't make sense to prove God exists, he is a supernatural being not bound by our natural, physical world. You can't give his body a temperature, can't locate his house on a map… If he was to be proven scientifically that he existed, then he wouldn't be a God. He's not limited by our senses, so how can we measure him with them?

I personally do not believe in god, there are many many religions and every one of these religions think there god(s) are the only god(s) when most of them are different, how can this be possible? does god discriminate people to people and there are 100s of gods that watch over people on the tiny spec called earth? i think not, and if there was a god there wouldnt be so much suffering and destruction in the world.

From: pown otto
I personally do not believe in god, there are many many religions and every one of these religions think there god(s) are the only god(s) when most of them are different, how can this be possible? does god discriminate people to people and there are 100s of gods that watch over people on the tiny spec called earth? i think not, and if there was a god there wouldnt be so much suffering and destruction in the world.

God isn't there to just fix everyone's problems and let everyone live happily ever after. It takes all kinds to make the world go round, and the economy is no different.

But think about it- Would you rather live your life not believing in God, and then when you die, you find out there is? Or vice versa. Me, most catholics, and most Christians? It's opposite. Yes, our beliefs are based on faith. But things happen in my life and in others lives and sometimes they are just too perfect to just be a coincidence.

I'd rather live my life being a good person for God and then if there isn't a God when I die? If that's the case, and when we die it's over, no more thoughts, no more anything, you would have never known. The other way around, jeez, that would be heartbreaking and I'd feel so dumb for not having faith.

Anyway, I live my life believing very strongly in God, and I think it also makes me a much better person as a whole.

Closed thread. 4 year gravedig and this topic always arouses flame wars.