Do you believe there is a GOD?

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: moshquerade
Yes I do. Most people who don't believe in God seem to ask for him on their deathbed.

They are just playing the odds at that point. Afraid of dying and there being nothing else...which is pretty much the reason most people believe in god anyway.

Yes, it's something of a Pascal's Wager, and it shows an extremely weak intellect, and an even weaker resolve. That's my opinion anyway.

I'm of the opinion that decisive behavior should be derived from reason. I find those who derive from fear, or other emotions, to be quixotic and disingenuous in their actions.

A case for morality can be based on both social theory and on governing dynamics.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: Amused
Nor has anyone been able to prove there are NO god or gods.

This is because you can't prove a negative.

Which is why it is always on the onus of the person who claims something to prove their claim, not for other people to disprove their claim.

You can prove a negative.

If I were to say "there is an elephant in your fridge" you could easily prove there is not, correct?

The reason the negative, "there is no god" cannot be proven is because one cannot be in all places in the universe at the same time to prove it. Therefore making the statement, "there is no god/s" is a logically untenable position.

Everyone here ought to study the P vs. NP problem to understand this more fully, but I would like to provide further complexity to this issue:

God, at least according to those who believe in a God, exists outside of the realm of observable phenomena. There is evidence, however, that the universe has a common order as one dives deep into modern physics. The universe is infinitely interconnected on many levels, which suggests one common origin of every observable phenomenon. Mass and energy are the same thing. Forces are all the same at the highest energy level according to unified field theory. An instant after the big bang, quarks weren't even distinguishable from one another. According to the Pea Instanton Theory, even space and energy were once the same thing (if you could even call them a thing).

 

psalm 69 has the answer.

"fire! ... Blasphemer! ..... praise jesus! .. priase jesus! And now it's time for us, to give a little love back to god."

\m/

 

[xenocyd3]

i am christian. and i live on this verse



'' and on the other side of the river was the tree of life, the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations''
revelations 22.2

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Nik
What gets me curious is people who see evidence of a supreme being's existence, but refuse to believe it and find some other way to justify it some other way -people who will do absolutely anything to find a reason not to believe.

There is no evidence. That's the thing. I have yet to see one piece of empirical evidence suggesting a god or gods exist.

I have yet to see one piece of empirical evidence that proves the existence of whole numbers (without the complications of precision in measurements) or to prove that Newtonian physics work in an analog fashion.

I have come to use Quantum Mechanics in my daily beliefs. I am not certain of anything. I drive my car to work every day not knowing whether I will get into an accident, yet I make plans to be there. Nothing is certain. Everything is probability.

When I believe in God, I do so for reasons more deep than any English word can describe. My belief in God is the foundation of my view of the universe. Without a singular originating entity, the universe would break down according to my worldview. Without God, there can be no Newton's Laws, no Maxwell's Equations, no Einstein's Theories, etc. When one infinitely breaks down definitions in the universe, you will always end up with something that cannot be described.

In geometry, for example, a cube is a three-dimensional set of six polygons, consisting of twelve line segments, which in turn consist of eight opposing points. What is a dimension? What is a point? If you can somehow answer those in more basic language, you will either discover circular language that cannot be broken down into anything simpler, or you will be left with basic assumptions. This to me is proof of the existence of God. Eventually, you will break down the most basic level of the world in the most undefinable, simplest concept that no human can fully understand because there is in fact nothing to understand.

 

[element]

How about don't know do care (sometimes when I have nothing better to think about)

for us agnostics that aren't asshats.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: JeReMY
It is impossbile for there not to be a god if you think of the way everything has been designed on earth and in space so perfectly.

Backwards logic.

"intelligent design" is simply putting the cart before the horse. Are we designed to breath air? Or do we breath air because we evolved on a planet with air.

There are many imperfections in space and on earth. The problem is, they do not last long. Those things that fit, last and we see them. Some illogically deduce that these things were "designed" to fit rathar thean seeing that only those things that fit, survive.

This is the argument of the anthropic principles: Strong or Weak?

Personally, I find no conflict in your chicken/egg paradox. At the very same time, I see humans who are designed to breathe air and evolved on a planet with air. Why? I'm a strong believer that evolution cannot possibly conflict with an intellectual religious viewpoint. If a religion conflicts with observation, it should be abandoned. I believe God started evolution.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Dear God by XTC

Dear God,
hope you got the letter, and...
I pray you can make it better down here.
I don't mean a big reduction in the price of beer
but all the people that you made in your image, see
them starving on their feet 'cause they don't get
enough to eat from God, I can't believe in you
Dear God, sorry to disturb you, but... I feel that I should be heard
loud and clear. We all need a big reduction in amount of tears
and all the people that you made in your image, see them fighting
in the street 'cause they can't make opinions meet about God,
I can't believe in you
Did you make disease, and the diamond blue? Did you make
mankind after we made you? And the devil too!
Dear God, don't know if you noticed, but... your name is on
a lot of quotes in this book, and us crazy humans wrote it, you
should take a look, and all the people that you made in your
image still believing that junk is true. Well I know it ain't, and
so do you, dear God, I can't believe in I don't believe in
I won't believe in heaven and hell. No saints, no sinners, no
devil as well. No pearly gates, no thorny crown. You're always
letting us humans down. The wars you bring, the babes you
drown. Those lost at sea and never found, and it's the same the
whole world 'round. The hurt I see helps to compound that
Father, Son and Holy Ghost is just somebody's unholy hoax,
and if you're up there you'd perceive that my heart's here upon
my sleeve. If there's one thing I don't believe in
it's you... Dear God.

Great friggin' song!!!!

It's not an option but I'd be iin the "don't know - not religious" group. I do have my doubts. If religion is the practice of praising God then why is it also the reason for so much oppression, hatred, and bloodshed? One thing I find odd is so many of the "good christians" I know are hypocrites because they are often racists and/or homophobes. I guess that's okay though... :roll:

 

[Shawn]

Yes, but not a christian god.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: Slikkster
Look, this is something that's not even arguable. The human mind cannot comprehend certain things.

For instance, and this is a big one: How did the universe come into being? And what was there before that? And before that, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. The human mind, thinking in linear terms (as in a beginning and an end) is not equipped to ever answer that question. It cannot be answered.

That is to say that there are truths and knowledge that far exceed our capabilities to understand, and to ever understand. Now, call it what you will, but science is not able to come close to explaining this.

The big bang? Come on...there had to be matter, energy, and space before the big bang occured. So, what was it? Where did it come from? Where did it...begin? And what was there before that?
And before that???? How does the universe...expand? Expand into what?


See? These questions are not answerable.

Now, does that prove a GOD? No. But it does prove the limits of our intelligence and ability to think outside what we accept as normal parameters.

I believe in a God, whatever that is. But I have many, many issues with religion. I was baptized a Christian. I tend to view the bible as allegorical; morality plays, if you will. But one HUGE bugaboo I have with Christianity is the line that reads "no one goes to the father but through me" (paraphrasing).

My God would never exclude most of the earth's population, and there's no way I, humble me, could be more compassionate than this Christian God. But, that one line makes me so. And that one line prevents me from embracing that religion.

So, that's me. Science? Sure, it's good for some things. But the be all and end all of question answering?
Hardly, and it never will be.

I'm a weird philsophy geek, and here's what I say: The universe didn't have to be created in the beginning. I believe that the universe is being created as it goes. The future does not exist, nor does the past. The laws of physics work because God continually wills it. Yes, it's unprovable, but it's what I think.

Concerning your issue with that line: I was raised Catholic myself, and I too believe the Bible to be allegorical and full of morality plays, but I do believe that the Son of God came to the earth. (Whether the Gospels recount his actions PERFECTLY is another thing, but I won't go there too much.) Anyway, I believe that your quote, too, is not to be taken literally. Jesus said He is the "Way, the Truth, and the Life." Well, if someone follows that Way, that Truth, and that Life, without necessarily attaching to them the identity of some ancient Jew, then by all means I think they know what's up. To explain this more fully I have to draw a little Plato into the fold.

Plato described two radically conflicting realms that rely upon eachother for their coexistence: the world of Form and the world of Idea. In Christianity, we have the Trinity: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirity. The Father exists purely in the world of Idea, and the Holy Spirit is the Guardian of the world of Form. Jesus, for Christians, is the bridge between the two worlds. Jesus is both fully human and fully divine, and being the master of the two realms, he is that gate keeper through which the humans who are stuck in this existence called life (which dwells in the world of form) may get to the world of Idea (also known as the realm where Heaven and Hell exist). The Council of Nicea hinted at this, I believe, when it said, "Through Him all things were made."

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: rayray2

Originally posted by: Slikkster
But one HUGE bugaboo I have with Christianity is the line that reads "no one goes to the father but through me" (paraphrasing).

My God would never exclude most of the earth's population, and there's no way I, humble me, could be more compassionate than this Christian God. But, that one line makes me so. And that one line prevents me from embracing that religion.

So you're preventing yourself from living the Christian life because Christianity says there is only one way to heaven? And because you would allow everybody to go, that somehow makes you more compassionate than God? You're forgetting that God is not only loving and compassionate, but He is also holy and just. He cannot allow sin to go unpunished; it must be dealt with. You can either deal with it by repenting and accepting Jesus Christ as a substitutionary sacrifice for your sins, or you can choose to pay for them yourself by spending an eternity in Hell. I chose the former.

I've always had a problem with this concept of a "substitutionary sacrifice." This would somehow imply that God Himself is subject to Kharma. Couldn't God just forgive your sins without having to do anything special for it? He is above Kharma because He made it, right?

I prefer the "Lamb of God" philosophy. In ancient times, lambs were used in convenental promises to say "I'd rather die like this lamb than break my promise." I believe Jesus is the Lamb of God. The Crucifixion was His sign of love for us. Rather than that very act forgiving our sins, I believe that it serves as proof that God IS Love.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: rayray2

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: rayray2
The fool has said in his heart, there is no God.

-Psalm 14:1

And a car salesman will tell me I'm a fool for not buying the undercoating or extended warranty.

All sales people will tell you you're a fool for not buying. Using the bible as evidence to prove it's own claims is called "circular logic."

That's not a very good analogy. Car salesman are notorious for being dishonest. The Bible, on the other hand, is the most historically accurate book in existence. Nothing in the Bible has ever been disproven, so what reason do I have not to believe it?

so rabbits chew cud? The world was created in seven days? I think you need to read it again. The Bible even conflicts ITSELF.

 

[Maximin]

Questions of God

Don't wanna read?

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: grrl
Don't know, but can't say I don't care. However, if there is a god, I highly doubt he/she/it supports any of the world's major religions and the idea that there is ONE way to live and believe. Only humans could take an idea like religion and f*ck it up so badly.

I like your Dogma quote.

Where did this idea that only one religion is correct originate? Some people see obvious conflicts between them, but I see those conflicts as complexities of the very same worldview. If you put all the world's religions together, I think you'd find a very true picture of the world with many bumps and scratches but without any outright conflicts.

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: aplefka
Why are these threads in existence? It's just gonna be a never-ending circle of arguments.

because they're FUN!

 

[rasholianmon]

The Truth about X-mas...

 

[Tab]

Why Noah's Ark Never Happened

According to Panda.org (http://www.panda.org/downloads...lephant_factsheet.pdf), which is part of the WWF, there are two types of elephants: the Asian and the African. Obviously if we believe the Bible, there would have to be at least four elephants on the ark (unless after the flood, one pair of elephants evolved into two different species, which is another flame war). Let's also assume that its only one pair of animals and not seven pairs of clean animals and birds (Gen 7:2-3).

The Asian elephant eats around 300kg of fodder per day (see above source), while fully grown African elephants eat up to 200kg of food/day http://www.wwf.org.hk/eng/pdf/...sheets/factsheet47.PDF.

Now, we know from Gen 6:21 that Noah was commanded to take food for all the animals and his family, thus nullifying a possible miracle explanation for not needing to bring food. However, in the interest of being conservative, lets assume that Noah had younger elephants and thus needed less food than a full grown adult (although growing children need their vegetables!!!). So lets assume that the elephants needed half of their adult counterparts.

Therefore, collectively, the Asian and African elephants would need approximately 500 kg of food/day. Thats 1,102.31 pounds a day!! In the interest of simplicity and being conservative in our estimates lets just say 1,000 pounds of food/day. For the (approximate) year that they were on the ark, that would mean NoahCo. Would have needed 365,000 pounds of food just for the elephants!!! This is 1,825 tons, which will be important later.

Next step, calculating how much space was in the ark. This has been done repeatedly so I hope there is little contention here. Gen. 6:15 says, "The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits (aprx. 450 feet), the breadth of it 50 cubits (aprx. 75 feet), and the height of it 30 cubits (aprx. 45 feet-ed.)." This is 1,518,750 cubic feet. Lets also assume for the sake of simplicity and being conservative that the ark was a perfect box with these dimensions (i.e., no space lost at the front or back due to needing to actually float, no need for going through sea/waves, no keel, etc). Also for the sake of simplicity and conservatism, lets assume by some miracle that there was no need for floors, which would take up even more space. This means the area of the ground floor would have been 33,750 sq. feet and that the total interior cubic feet are as stated above.

Next we need to know approximately how much space the food for the elephants would have taken up (and ignoring the fact that most of it would have gone bad eventually in a hot damp environment--remember there was only one door and a small window). This also assumes that the food for only the elephants is being stored on the ground floor, and also ignoring the fact that many animals are carnivores. That would mean that many more than just a pair of many types of animals were brought aboard that also would have to be fed during the year until the chosen pair could eat them. Of course the fact that these "feed" animals also needed to be kept alive, many of which were carnivores also, which meant that even more animals would have bee needed. Its a geometrically unsolvable problem for such a situation.

Given that, Elephants are vegetarians; so lets assume that they were fed hay for the entire year (again ignore the monumental task of growing, harvesting, and storing of such an immense amount of hay by one family). According to this website (http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/en...neer/facts/88-052.htm) "Regardless of bale size and stacking method, any building with 16' sidewalls will accommodate at least 1 ton of hay in every 20 square feet of floor area." This means one ton of hay needs 320 cubic feet of storage. But it does say 'at least', and of course this is assuming ideal conditions. So again for simplicity and conservatism, lets assume one ton of hay needs 300 cubic feet of storage. That means the 1, 825 tons of hay needed for just the 4 elephants alone would have take up 547,500 cubic feet!! Thats about 36% of the space available on the ark, again assuming ridiculously conservative (and sometimes impossible, i.e., no floors) conditions. If we have adult elephants that eat twice as much (again at a very conservative estimate) thats 72% of the space in the ark for just 4 animals!!!! There is no physical possibility that Noah's ark ever happened. I really would like to see anyone who can prove the math that it did.

I didn't write, this, but I have a friend who did.

 

[JavaMomma]

Originally posted by: Slikkster
Look, this is something that's not even arguable. The human mind cannot comprehend certain things.

For instance, and this is a big one: How did the universe come into being? And what was there before that? And before that, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. The human mind, thinking in linear terms (as in a beginning and an end) is not equipped to ever answer that question. It cannot be answered.

That is to say that there are truths and knowledge that far exceed our capabilities to understand, and to ever understand. Now, call it what you will, but science is not able to come close to explaining this.

The big bang? Come on...there had to be matter, energy, and space before the big bang occured. So, what was it? Where did it come from? Where did it...begin? And what was there before that?
And before that???? How does the universe...expand? Expand into what?


See? These questions are not answerable.

Now, does that prove a GOD? No. But it does prove the limits of our intelligence and ability to think outside what we accept as normal parameters.

The problem with that argument is that it can be applied in reverse. Where did God come from? Who created his universe, dimension, exisitance? Who created God? How did God come to be? What was there before God?

You are right in that the human mind currently has difficutly understatanding the nature of this problem. However, it wasnt that long ago that scientists theorized the world was round and yet they were unable to prove it. I am sure they argued as we do. The common person at that time had problems comprehending how you would not fall off the planet if you walked to far or how the ground below us "pulled" you down.
However, we now "understand" how gravity works and we all accept the fact that the the Earth is a round sphere and that we are not riding on the back of a turtle. It is no longer a difficult problem for our minds. In a couple thousand years humans will probably understand how the universe was created and laugh at us.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: moshquerade
Yes I do. Most people who don't believe in God seem to ask for him on their deathbed.

They are just playing the odds at that point. Afraid of dying and there being nothing else...which is pretty much the reason most people believe in god anyway.

I'm not afraid to die, and I believe. However, I am afraid of extreme pain that accompanies unfortunate deaths, but I'm not afraid to die. I figure that once I'm dead, why would I be afraid, especially since I'm not conscious of the fact that I'm dead since I'm already dead. Doubt that made sense.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Somehow, I'm sure that even if it was "proven" that God existed, that most of you would still not believe.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Somehow, I'm sure that even if it was "proven" that God existed, that most of you would still not believe.

How can you be sure if most believe in a God even though there isn't any evidence he/she/it actually exists?

 

[Kasper4christ]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Somehow, I'm sure that even if it was "proven" that God existed, that most of you would still not believe.

*cough* amen...
of course I belive, just look at the name...

uh, Red Dawn,
people belive because they see enough evidence.
plain and simple

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Somehow, I'm sure that even if it was "proven" that God existed, that most of you would still not believe.

Not very likely, but nice assumption.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Kasper4christ

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Somehow, I'm sure that even if it was "proven" that God existed, that most of you would still not believe.

*cough* amen...
of course I belive, just look at the name...

uh, Red Dawn,
people belive because they see enough evidence.
plain and simple

People see what they want, then believe because they WANT to. Anthropological studies of polythesitic and spirt worshipers that exist today validate that. We are a weak species with a new found ability in the evolutionairy change to question our own existence. That questioning leads to conclusions that the individual will find most comforting, not that which is most logical or is even the semblence of truth. The "evidence" of god is fabricated by the mind to reinforce the emotional belief that the believers uses to comfort themselves over the harshness of existence.

 

[imported_JeReMY]

look at this

http://watchtower.org/library/...03/12/1/article_02.htm