Do you pray?

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by otaku
As soon as you said "I believe god exists"

Wrong. You're trying to speak for me again. I don't like that.

This idea that religion actually has any basis in fact is obviously false.

Prove it.

And you say you believe in this? and i have no right to question your intelligence?

Nobody who has as little respect for facts as you do has a right to question my intelligence.

and if your faith is blind faith, i have every right to sneer.

Why? Your beliefs are just as blind as mine. You adhere to a religious viewpoint, ie. that you believe there is no God, despite not a shred of evidence to back it up.

I sneer at your hypocrisy, your complete reliance on sophistry and double standards, your overbearing arrogance and your insistence that everyone except you should have to prove what they say.

Prove to me what you say is correct, and i will apologise.

In all fairness you ought to have to prove your beliefs as well.

 

[Yianni]

Originally posted by otaku
prove to me that god exists, and i will apologise wholeheartedly and without reservation

GOD

I'm waiting

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by skilts
It's not up to the non-believers to prove anything, they aren't making any claims. /B]

I suggest that they are making a claim that God does not exist.


As I see it a an athiest beleves that something can appear from nowhere. ie material just appeared. I believe that is illogical to the human brain which must believe at heart that material came from somewhere ie was created, therefore there must be a creator. I believe spiritual evidence confirms this.

 

[Katthawk]

Originally posted by Frodo
As I see it a an athiest beleves that something can appear from nowhere. ie material just appeared. I believe that is illogical to the human brain which must believe at heart that material came from somewhere ie was created, therefore there must be a creator. I believe spiritual evidence confirms this.

I still think that humans occasionally need to feel that there is always someone who knows more than they do and will offer advice, hence 'God'. But without judgement.

As for evidence, it cannot be proven since it can be equated to what the person thinks about. In other words, it is all subjective, dependant on conditions. A person who is upset with life will want to believe that 'someone out there' can change things. A person who is happy with life will have self confidence and can see that they have created those conditions.

But again some people need to feel that there is something else out there.

 

[evade28]

can i ask those who believe in god, do u also believe in the tooth fairy and the easter bunny? you will probably say no bcos they dont DO anything, but when you think about it, neither does your supposed god.

im with otaku on this one, god is a crock and until you can prove otherwise i'll continue to think that.

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
Wrong. You're trying to speak for me again. I don't like that.

well, try to be a little clearer then, and say what you mean

Prove it.

A book that cannot be backed up with ANY verifiable evidence is the ONLY basis for the christian religion. And you want me to prove that it is baseless? Look around you generalboyo.

Nobody who has as little respect for facts as you do has a right to question my intelligence.

I have a great respect for facts.

fact 1) you have no proof god exists. At all.

fact 2) to believe the word of someone who has no evidence of what he is talking about is considered demented at worst, gullible at best. If you read and believe the bible, then you fall into this catergory.

I have never gone aginst the facts. No proof of god, at all. Nothing. Nadda. Zip. Nix.

yet you stubbornly cling to the idea that there must be a god. Why is this? Do you need a father figure to look up to? Do you need a psycological crutch to help you through your miserable little life? Do you need the threat of punishment after death to keep you in line on this side?

Why? Your beliefs are just as blind as mine. You adhere to a religious viewpoint, ie. that you believe there is no God, despite not a shred of evidence to back it up.

Exactly - not a shred of evidence. Now, if something as supreme as god existed, wouldnt you think he would leave some evidence around? wouldnt you think that, somehow, somewhere, ther would be the most miniscule fraction of evidence that this being exists? hmm...there isnt? strange that - maybe becuase there is no god?

I sneer at your hypocrisy, your complete reliance on sophistry and double standards, your overbearing arrogance and your insistence that everyone except you should have to prove what they say.

sneer all you want. it is your only defense. my reliance on sophistry? HAH! how are my arguments false? how have i decieved anyone?

My arrogance : well, maybe you have me there. But when you talk to misguided, gullible idiots, you tend to get that way

In all fairness you ought to have to prove your beliefs as well.

life isnt fair - it is too late, and i am too ****ed to bother - maybe tomorrow

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by evade28
can i ask those who believe in god, do u also believe in the tooth fairy and the easter bunny? you will probably say no bcos they dont DO anything, but when you think about it, neither does your supposed god.

I've given it a lot of thought, and the way I see it is this: Since the very fact of the universe's existence contradicts every Conservation Law there is (energy cannot be created or destroyed, so why is there energy? ditto electric charge, angular momentum etc.), something outside the usual laws of physics and mathematics must exist. And I see the universe as being extremely well designed, therefore I think this "something" is an intelligent entity.

This begs the question, "If God made the universe, what made God?". I don't have an answer. I've got to just assume He's been there right from the start. Otherwide I'd have a real problem, rather than just making one unfounded assumption I'd have to accept the spontaneous generation of all four natural forces, energy, mass, momentum etc etc and blindly swallow the idea that it's random chance that they all mesh together so marvellously. You're asking me to make literally millions of leaps of faith, instead of just the one I have now.

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Mr Q

In reality we can't even prove a lot of what we call scientific Laws, as we prove things by experimentation, ie we do something 1000 times, and the results come out the same each time. By that we have reasonable evidence that that's how it will work in each case. But since we never did experiment 1001, we can't be 100% certain that that (or case 232,684,124,233 for that matter) would not have produced a result contrary to our theory.

science is a body of knowledge gathered together to answer questions. Nowhere is it stated that science is "The Truth". If an answer is thought up that fits the facts better, it is adopted into the scientic body of lore.

Religion is a body of Mythology. All it has are stories and sayings from other people. There is NO reproducibility in religion at all. Thereforee, like anything that consist totally of hearsay, it is unreliable (you can read this as incorrect/false/wrong whatever you like)

In my opinion, you are the deluded one to not allow in any way even the possibility of a God. Effectively you're a fundamentalist in another way. Your facts are nothing more than a lack of complete evidence (which of course you can never get). I could equally validly taunt you for not believing, however there is no proof that in belief I am right or wrong, so it is wrong for me to do so. The difference between you and me is that I actually allow the possiblity that I am wrong. You have closed your mind without proof.

lack of complete evidence? i think you wrote this wrong: a COMPLETE LACK OF EVIDENCE is a more accurate way of writing it.

you have stories and fables. I read Tolkien, doesnt mean i should believe in it.

If you can prove god exists, i will be happy to accept you conclusions. How is this being closeminded?

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Yianni
GOD

I'm waiting

DOG

you havent proven anything yet

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Frodo
I suggest that they are making a claim that God does not exist.


As I see it a an athiest beleves that something can appear from nowhere. ie material just appeared. I believe that is illogical to the human brain which must believe at heart that material came from somewhere ie was created, therefore there must be a creator. I believe spiritual evidence confirms this.

to quote an old and well worn argument:

who created the creator?

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
I've given it a lot of thought, and the way I see it is this: Since the very fact of the universe's existence contradicts every Conservation Law there is (energy cannot be created or destroyed, so why is there energy? ditto electric charge, angular momentum etc.),

However, it can be changed from one form to another (velocity into heat for example). There is no loss of energy.

something outside the usual laws of physics and mathematics must exist. And I see the universe as being extremely well designed, therefore I think this "something" is an intelligent entity.

this is called anthropomorphism. This is a very common behaviour.

This begs the question, "If God made the universe, what made God?". I don't have an answer. I've got to just assume He's been there right from the start. Otherwide I'd have a real problem, rather than just making one unfounded assumption I'd have to accept the spontaneous generation of all four natural forces, energy, mass, momentum etc etc and blindly swallow the idea that it's random chance that they all mesh together so marvellously. You're asking me to make literally millions of leaps of faith, instead of just the one I have now.

The same one assumption is made when talking about the scientific explanation of the universe. (if you consider the big bang theory) where did the matter come from to cause the big bang. No one knows.

There is "no million leaps of faith". Science has failed to answer many questions, but it is always progressing towards better and better explanations. However it is a long hard struggle.

Religion has instant answers (even though they are wrong). It is more seductive, easier, quicker. It is the Dark Side.

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by otaku
well, try to be a little clearer then, and say what you mean

I always try to make myself clear. Your inability to respond to what I actually said is not my responsibility.

A book that cannot be backed up with ANY verifiable evidence is the ONLY basis for the christian religion. And you want me to prove that it is baseless? Look around you generalboyo.

It is not the only basis for my faith, and as for the Bible containing no facts I think you'll find that most of the people and places mentioned actually exist(ed), and that the events in it actually took place (badly mangled and distorted if we're talking about the first half of Genesis). Certainly there is no evidence to prove that something else happened instead.

I have a great respect for facts.

No, you don't. You have no regard for the distinction between belief and fact. You have done nothing but claim your notions are the only truth.

fact 1) you have no proof god exists. At all.

You have no proof He does not. At all.

fact 2) to believe the word of someone who has no evidence of what he is talking about is considered demented at worst, gullible at best. If you read and believe the bible, then you fall into this catergory.

Look into the mirror. There is your gullible, demented idiot. You are expecting people to take your word for it when you have no proof of your ideas.

I have never gone aginst the facts. No proof of god, at all. Nothing. Nadda. Zip. Nix.

Neither have I. I don't have sufficient data to settle the issue one way or another, so I have my own theory. One that does not contradict any of the facts.

yet you stubbornly cling to the idea that there must be a god. Why is this? Do you need a father figure to look up to? Do you need a psycological crutch to help you through your miserable little life? Do you need the threat of punishment after death to keep you in line on this side?

I think what I think because it makes more sense than the alternative, in my opinion anyway. I don't need the threat of the Devil poking me in the arse with a pitchfork to make that conclusion.

Exactly - not a shred of evidence. Now, if something as supreme as god existed, wouldnt you think he would leave some evidence around? wouldnt you think that, somehow, somewhere, ther would be the most miniscule fraction of evidence that this being exists? hmm...there isnt? strange that - maybe becuase there is no god?

What evidence would convince you? A big billboard in the sky saying "I AM GOD, SO THERE"? A code built into our DNA spelling out His initials? Fireworks? I see the universe itself as proof. I know that won't convince you, but there it is.

My arrogance : well, maybe you have me there. But when you talk to misguided, gullible idiots, you tend to get that way

Well, that clears everything up. You're a fanatic. Something tells me you wouldn't be screaming nearly so loudly if the issue was, say, "Do aliens exist"? You seem to have a bug up your arse about this issue to be honest.

life isnt fair - it is too late, and i am too ****ed to bother - maybe tomorrow

Evasion. We'll see what you have to say tomorrow.

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by otaku
However, it can be changed from one form to another (velocity into heat for example). There is no loss of energy.

My point exactly. So if energy cannot be created, why is there energy?

this is called anthropomorphism. This is a very common behaviour.

Anthropomorphism actually means to give God human characteristics. I think you mean that I think the universe was built to accomodate human beings. Well, duh. That's what I have been saying all along. You can stick a label on me, that doesn't make me wrong.

Science has failed to answer many questions, but it is always progressing towards better and better explanations. However it is a long hard struggle.

I'll say it is given that, in the thousand years or so that there has been proper organized science, progress has been made in answering every question except for the old "Why is there something instead of nothing?". I simply don't think science can ever explain it.

Religion has instant answers (even though they are wrong). It is more seductive, easier, quicker. It is the Dark Side.

Well, it's up to you to prove they are wrong, isn't it?

 

[Katthawk]

Bloody hell Otaku and Generalissimo.

I did ask in another thread to not bring up the big bang theory again. Take it elsewhere please.

Unless you want to create your own thousand post thread.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by otaku
science is a body of knowledge gathered together to answer questions. Nowhere is it stated that science is "The Truth". If an answer is thought up that fits the facts better, it is adopted into the scientic body of lore.

However, you are stating that the facts as you know it support your hypothesis therefore you are correct without any possibility that you might be wrong. That is scientifically unsound

Originally posted by otaku
Religion is a body of Mythology. All it has are stories and sayings from other people. There is NO reproducibility in religion at all. Thereforee, like anything that consist totally of hearsay, it is unreliable (you can read this as incorrect/false/wrong whatever you like)

History is stories and sayings from other people. Doesn't mean that it is all mythological - nor does it mean that its all true.

You however are confusing religion with religious texts; there is a relationship, but the two are not identical. The religious texts provide a framework upon which the religion is hung.

In fact worse, you are mixing up religion with the status of the existance of God. If you think about it, every single religion on the planet could be false, yet there could still be a God - just not the one that any of us believe we know.

Originally posted by otaku
lack of complete evidence? i think you wrote this wrong: a COMPLETE LACK OF EVIDENCE is a more accurate way of writing it.

No, you have a lack of complete evidence. How can you be certain that there isn't a big signpost pointing to God somewhere out there in the Universe.

For you to make the claim that there is a complete lack of evidence would require you to know and understand everything that exists, existed and will exist in the entire universe. Of course, should that be true, you yourself would have to be God, so your hypothesis would be disproven by your own existance.

Originally posted by otaku
you have stories and fables. I read Tolkien, doesnt mean i should believe in it.

Tolkien never once claimed that the story he told was true either. Again, you are mixing up religious texts with religion.

Originally posted by otaku
If you can prove god exists, i will be happy to accept you conclusions. How is this being closeminded?

It is being close minded; you believe that because within the portion of the Universe you know, you have seen no evidence of God, you have extrapolated that to the entire Universe (see argument above). What this means is that you have closed off the entire rest of the Universe from your experimental basis, restricting your laboratory to the sum of human knowledge. Since nearly every scientist on the planet will tell you we don't know everything, you have effectively closed your mind to all things that we are yet to discover. One of those things might (or might not) be God.

In the meantime, it is quite fair for you not to believe in God, but without evidentiary proof you cannot make the claim that the subset of the Universe that you know of disproves the existance of God. Of course, you cannot ever prove the non-existance of God as that requires proving a negative.

 

[Mr Q]

I just thought I would bring this to this interesting discussion on the existance of God.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Babel Fish

The Babel fish... is small, yellow and leechlike, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on the brainwave energy received not from its own carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centers of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish.

Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed at the next zebra crossing.

Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his best-selling book, 'Well That About Wraps It Up for God.'

Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.

- from The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy by David Adams
----------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by Mr Q

- from The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy by David Adams

Amusing story, but I think you mean Douglas Adams

 

[jim boy]

The evidence for god is all around. The earth exists. The stars are in the sky. We are roaming this land. Morality abounds. People actually designated by God rule. There is a heaven and a hell. The seasons exist. The volcanos erupt.

Of course all of the above was evidence enough for the existance of god only a couple of hundred years ago. But as science progresses and we understand more about life and the very nature of the universe, then the tide of ignorance is receding.

The argument used to be of the infallibility of the bible, now it's merely delivering a gist. Creationism has been largely thrown out the window only to see it's exponents try and shore up behind the argument of Intelligent Design. God used to run every factor of our lives, now he does sod-all.

At what point do people lose their religion?

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by Katthawk
Unless you want to create your own thousand post thread.

Don't like it, don't read it.

That said, I think only one side of this debate is interested in talking sense and that's Mr. Q. I was going to shut up anyway.

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by Mr Q

In the meantime, it is quite fair for you not to believe in God, but without evidentiary proof you cannot make the claim that the subset of the Universe that you know of disproves the existance of God. Of course, you cannot ever prove the non-existance of God as that requires proving a negative.

Mr Q:

Of course this is the truth.

Why do you think i havent been trying to prove god doesnt exist. I cant. Never could. You cant prove the non-existance of something. As i have said before in this thread: WMD anyone?

I have been lettnig Generalissimo try to prove the presence of god. which is also impossible to do (unless god actually comes down and talks to us).

How about this :

Based on what we know, there is no god. If we havent found any evidence related to him so far, and he doesnt actually do anything to our lives, why should we pray to him?

In my view )) it is merely a psychological crutch for people. Someone to blame when things go wrong. Someone to call for help frmo. Someone to give meaning to their lives.

And a lot of my ideas still hold true for me. Why pray to something that a) cant help you, b) wont help you c) doesnt care to help you?

I was using religios text and ideas interchangably, becuase one is the teachings (in written form) of the other. That is close enough for this type of argument.

My opinion is that if god did create us: why the mumbojumbo? why not walk amongst us? why not be a visible part of our lives?

To me religion had been perverted to be a contrling force for the people throughout the ages. It still is to a certain degree. That means you should put no faith in it.


When you mentioned being close minded Mr Q, and i said "If you can prove god exists, i will be happy to accept you conclusions. How is this being closeminded" i was meaning that i donot automatically jump to the conclusion that god exists becuase there is something i cannot answer.

A lot of people reach the stumbling block of "how was the universe created" there is no plausible explanation yet. So it becomes "gods will". To me, the fact that there is no answer that we can see, does not automatically mean there is a supreme creator. merely a reason that is beyond us (at the moment).

When i say "show me proof" i am meaning that, unless you have an answer that satisfies the majority of the question, dont parade it as the truth. That is what religion does. It creates and answer that has no basis in fact. (the creation of the world, the creation of man/wmoan, the original sin, etc )

Sometimes, it weaves in things that may have happened. This is a common trick of any good story writer to make his story more believable. (for example : the great flood, the cities of the old testament etc). This doesnt mean that this is proof however.




Generalissimo (rather than use two posts ):

If energy can neither be created nor destroyed

1) where did god come from?
and 2) where di he get the energy to create stuff from?

Anthropomorphism: Attribution of human characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.

such as order to the universe. I mean, to make it more presentable to our minds, we link characteristics that we understand to the way we percieve things.

Why would we need the whole bloody universe for mankind to live in? we do quite well on one planet. Seems a bit of overkill eh? Isnt it more likely that we were simply an accident, rather than the culmination of a plan by someone bigger, better, stronger, faster than us? Or does this destroy you sense of self value and worth?

The knowledge that we really dont meant anything, that there is no grand purpose to our lives, does this bother you? to the point of having to have something to buffer that knowledge? To the point of making something up to believe in?

"progress has been made in answering every question except for the old "Why is there something instead of nothing?". I simply don't think science can ever explain it."

people said science couldnt understand why we live, couldnt make us fly, couldnt do this, couldnt do that. It will (if we exist as a species for long enough) answer ( put forth a substantial theory ) on all questions


"Well, it's up to you to prove they are wrong, isn't it?"

I can prove religions are (mostly) based on incosistancies and errors. I cannot, and havenot tried to prove there was no god. I have always said "there is no proof". It was you reading my relies as there is no god. Fair enough, it was what i wanted you to try to answer. read my reply to Mr Q up top.

 

[Katthawk]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
Don't like it, don't read it.

That said, I think only one side of this debate is interested in talking sense and that's Mr. Q. I was going to shut up anyway.

Ah! I just see people starting to bring in scientific mumbo-jumbo which I don't understand and my eyes glaze over.

It's a good debate so far.

 

[Generalissimo]

Originally posted by Katthawk
Ah! I just see people starting to bring in scientific mumbo-jumbo which I don't understand and my eyes glaze over.

It's a good debate so far.

Yes, now that Otaku and I have stopped calling each other names , which is really all I was going for. I have no problems with other peoples' beliefs, or lack thereof, as long as they don't laugh at mine.

As for the mumbo-jumbo, I do try to keep that to a minimum but sometimes I forget. Now why can't there be a Science & Philosophy forum?

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by evade28
you will probably say no bcos they dont DO anything, but when you think about it, neither does your supposed god.

Not for you maybe but certainly for me and millions of others

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by otaku
to quote an old and well worn argument:

who created the creator?

GOD is the unmoving mover. He is creation itself. GOD is a force we cannot understand, in fact we still can't understand the human brain, which God made, so how do we stand a chance of understanding God.
And if we did then perhaps our purpose on earth would become redundant.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
God used to run every factor of our lives, now he does sod-all.

At what point do people lose their religion?

Man used to run our lives with their chrches of Religion which were and are material and not spiritual. Neither Jesus, Mohammud or any other spiritual leader belonged to a church.

Finding God is as hard as it has ever been, the churches have rarely helped in that direction.

Religion is generally brainwashed into us from birth but that practice has decreased immensely over the past century.