Do you believe in a god?

[oddyager]

No.

It's as simple as that.

 

[eternalone]

Giving analogies between God and Teapots in space or God and spaghetti monsters is ridiculous, you cant give analogies of an Omnipotent God, that is the paradox. A God would be in everything in, everywhere, in nothing, beyond time, seen and unseen. A tea pot can only serve tea, in theory God is the Tea pot, the tea, the tea drinker, the earth, the space ,the void, everything and nothing.

You cant rule out or rule in his existence either way. That is the God paradox, understanding that is the only true freedom we have the only true knowledge and the only honest scientifically based conclusion. Everything else is a matter of faith, absolute thinking or wishfull thinking that atheist and fundamentalist like to engage in.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: eternalone
Giving analogies between God and Teapots in space or God and spaghetti monsters is ridiculous, you cant give analogies of an Omnipotent God, that is the paradox.

But my god is a spaghetti monster. Prove me wrong.

 

[Anubis]

no

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/religion2.jpg

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Anubis
no

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/religion2.jpg

Wait, AnandTech is the second link on your toolbar?

BAN!

 

[PlasmaBomb]

OH HAI.

Just stopped by to say, excessive quoting is excessive.

Someone PM me when TridenTBoy3555 gets banned for quoting 8 deep...

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
OH HAI.

Just stopped by to say, excessive quoting is excessive.

Someone PM me when TridenTBoy3555 gets banned for quoting 8 deep...

I never quoted 8. I maxed out at 7

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Anubis
no

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/religion2.jpg

That is probably one of the ugliest browsers I have ever seen in my life.. I hope god saves you.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: Anubis
no

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/religion2.jpg

That is probably one of the ugliest browsers I have ever seen in my life.. I hope god saves you.

ive never thought of a browser as ugly or not ugly, me thinks you have more issues then we allready know about.

its a 5 y/o SS either way

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/opera-ff.jpg

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: Anubis
no

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/religion2.jpg

That is probably one of the ugliest browsers I have ever seen in my life.. I hope god saves you.

ive never thought of a browser as ugly or not ugly, me thinks you have more issues then we allready know about.

its a 5 y/o SS either way

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/TheEvil1/opera-ff.jpg

Both are not that hot lookin'

Mine is sex.

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/3348/11940803bw6.jpg

 

[Anubis]

your image is blocked by work

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Anubis
your image is blocked by work

Hold on, I'll upload it to my website.

 

[TridenT]

...

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: Amused

Your opinion is just an exercise in futility. It's not geared on what you know, but on what you want to make others believe.

Why reach around your ass to get to your elbow? Because, in the end, the only answer is: Unknowable.

You can lay out all the lack of evidence on both sides of the argument, but in the end, that's all you have and you've accomplished nothing but wasting time and energy.

It really is better to just say "I don't know." Agnosticism is really the only logical and intellectually honest answer.

I feel leaving it at "I don't know" is intellectually dishonest. Yes, you don't know for sure, like I don't know for sure that you exist, but the evidence points one way or the other. By stopping at "I don't know" you might as well stop at "I don't know" for everything. Your view isn't logical at all.

I used to think the way you did actually. You say how it's amazing that people are resistant to thinking like you do now? I've already been there. I eventually found it to be intellectually lazy and meaningless, so I moved on. And I actually, even as an Atheist, have less of a problem with people believing in a religion after examining the evidence and seeing something there that guides them to believe as opposed to people who just say (as I used to) "I don't know."

 

[jonks]

The poll makes me feel nice and warm inside.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: jonks
The poll makes me feel nice and warm inside.

me too... a little cold though.. The Yes results disturb me still.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: jonks
The poll makes me feel nice and warm inside.

me too... a little cold though.. The Yes results disturb me still.

Why?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Amused

Your opinion is just an exercise in futility. It's not geared on what you know, but on what you want to make others believe.

Why reach around your ass to get to your elbow? Because, in the end, the only answer is: Unknowable.

You can lay out all the lack of evidence on both sides of the argument, but in the end, that's all you have and you've accomplished nothing but wasting time and energy.

It really is better to just say "I don't know." Agnosticism is really the only logical and intellectually honest answer.

I feel leaving it at "I don't know" is intellectually dishonest. Yes, you don't know for sure, like I don't know for sure that you exist, but the evidence points one way or the other. By stopping at "I don't know" you might as well stop at "I don't know" for everything. Your view isn't logical at all.

I used to think the way you did actually. You say how it's amazing that people are resistant to thinking like you do now? I've already been there. I eventually found it to be intellectually lazy and meaningless, so I moved on. And I actually, even as an Atheist, have less of a problem with people believing in a religion after examining the evidence and seeing something there that guides them to believe as opposed to people who just say (as I used to) "I don't know."

It's not lazy, it's honest. You want to twist and turn something into something it's not. You want to influence others rather than admit the facts.

The fact is, it's unknowable and you don't know. Anything beyond that is a waste of time and energy and is usually an attempt to make it appear as though you do know.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Amused

Your opinion is just an exercise in futility. It's not geared on what you know, but on what you want to make others believe.

Why reach around your ass to get to your elbow? Because, in the end, the only answer is: Unknowable.

You can lay out all the lack of evidence on both sides of the argument, but in the end, that's all you have and you've accomplished nothing but wasting time and energy.

It really is better to just say "I don't know." Agnosticism is really the only logical and intellectually honest answer.

I feel leaving it at "I don't know" is intellectually dishonest. Yes, you don't know for sure, like I don't know for sure that you exist, but the evidence points one way or the other. By stopping at "I don't know" you might as well stop at "I don't know" for everything. Your view isn't logical at all.

I used to think the way you did actually. You say how it's amazing that people are resistant to thinking like you do now? I've already been there. I eventually found it to be intellectually lazy and meaningless, so I moved on. And I actually, even as an Atheist, have less of a problem with people believing in a religion after examining the evidence and seeing something there that guides them to believe as opposed to people who just say (as I used to) "I don't know."

It's not lazy, it's honest. You want to twist and turn something into something it's not. You want to influence others rather than admit the facts.

The fact is, it's unknowable and you don't know. Anything beyond that is a waste of time and energy and is usually an attempt to make it appear as though you do know.

It's unknowable if there are invisible men telepathically cracking jokes about your attire hiding in the room with you, but you wouldn't call yourself "agnostic" to the claim, would you?

Stop the special pleading for god.

 

[ForumMaster]

No

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Amused

Your opinion is just an exercise in futility. It's not geared on what you know, but on what you want to make others believe.

Why reach around your ass to get to your elbow? Because, in the end, the only answer is: Unknowable.

You can lay out all the lack of evidence on both sides of the argument, but in the end, that's all you have and you've accomplished nothing but wasting time and energy.

It really is better to just say "I don't know." Agnosticism is really the only logical and intellectually honest answer.

I feel leaving it at "I don't know" is intellectually dishonest. Yes, you don't know for sure, like I don't know for sure that you exist, but the evidence points one way or the other. By stopping at "I don't know" you might as well stop at "I don't know" for everything. Your view isn't logical at all.

I used to think the way you did actually. You say how it's amazing that people are resistant to thinking like you do now? I've already been there. I eventually found it to be intellectually lazy and meaningless, so I moved on. And I actually, even as an Atheist, have less of a problem with people believing in a religion after examining the evidence and seeing something there that guides them to believe as opposed to people who just say (as I used to) "I don't know."

It's not lazy, it's honest. You want to twist and turn something into something it's not. You want to influence others rather than admit the facts.

The fact is, it's unknowable and you don't know. Anything beyond that is a waste of time and energy and is usually an attempt to make it appear as though you do know.

It's unknowable if there are invisible men telepathically cracking jokes about your attire hiding in the room with you, but you wouldn't call yourself "agnostic" to the claim, would you?

Stop the special pleading for god.

The hilariously sad thing is that you think the intellectually honest stance of agnosticism is a "special pleading for god."

Ladies and gentleman, this is a fine case of the paranoia the us vs them mentality I spoke of earlier leads to. He has a classic case of "commies under the bed" syndrome. He's seeing believers where none exist. Anyone who does not emphatically deny god is a believer who must be outed and shamed.

Sorry, SO. I make no case for, or against a god or gods. I have no evidence to support either claim and neither do you.

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: TridenTBoy3555

Originally posted by: jonks
The poll makes me feel nice and warm inside.

me too... a little cold though.. The Yes results disturb me still.

Why?

Because many people interpret the texts in religion to mean things such as gay people equal bad people. It doesn't mean that agnostics or atheists won't do the same, but it is just far less likely IMO. Also atheists/agnostics tend to be more scientifically inclined, at least from what I see.

 

[KeithTalent]

Nope, but I can't say I'd be all that surprised if God/a god existed.

KT

 

[TheInternet1980]

No. Only Jimi Hendrix exists. And Canadian Mounted policemen.

 

[KeithTalent]

Originally posted by: TheInternet1980
No. Only Jimi Hendrix exists. And Canadian Mounted policemen.

You better watch out, I'm coming for you!

KT