Do you believe in God?

[Jam930]

NO MORE RELIGION THREADS... PLEASE.


They're just so messy and involves more arguing than resolving, you dont get anywere, and creativity is out the window. They're all the same, and we've seen them before.

See when someone makes a religion thread, EVERYONE has some kind of opinion on religion. So then everyone dives into this and says either "god doesn't exist" or "god does exist" and I am very positive you CAN'T prove it either way simply because of the stated "impossible nature" of god's existence.

Let's not waste time here ladies n gentlemen.


I realize some of you might simply tell me a "You don't like it, get out" kind of line. As there is always some idiot who tries to shoot down the one that's trying to help people.

[pxbluesoul]

This is a debate forum. Theology is one of the more entertaining topics to discuss. If you consider it to be a waste of time then that's fine. Entering a discussion intent on stopping it isn't. How you intend to help people by avoiding the conversation is familiar. I've heard of it before. But I couldn't study it very well because I don't speak German.

Okay, so that's an exaggeration. Nevertheless, I think people are enjoying it, nobody's trying to actively convert anyone, and those who do will most likely be deemed foolish.

No hard feelings, I wasn't offended by being labeled an idiot so hopefully you won't be offended my me calling you a Nazi. Nyah. :P

1. Either God can create a stone which God cannot lift, or God cannot create a stone which God cannot lift.

2. If God can create a stone which God cannot lift, then He is not omnipotent (since He cannot lift the stone in question.

3. If God cannot create a stone which God cannot lift, then He is not omnipotent (since He cannot create the stone in question).

Therefore,

4. God is not omnipotent. (1), (2), (3)

Source: University of Rochester
Opinions?

[evilbutterfly]

actually, i have a way to kinda half prove it. it'll be shaky evidence, but it's worth a shot.

ok, so u put an add for a scientific test in the newspaper, and say u need people to test on to examine their dreams, which will be partially true. now, when they get the lil paper with all the warnings about what harm may befall them during the test, one of the warnings will say "Possibility of DEATH" but there will always be some morons who dont read the contract and just sign it. this way u cant get sued for killing people because they knew of the risk.

ok, so after u get your test subjects, u get them to go to sleep. now, u need to make sure that they are NOT thinking about religion or anything like that. just tell them to relax and sleep, and give them books that have nothing to do with religion so that they can read and get bored and fall asleep. now, after they are asleep, u shut off their brain. after a while (just before there would be any permanent damage), jumpstart their brain to revive them. then have them describe their dreams to u. oh, and during their time as a corpse, make sure to have very detailed conversations about things they would not know ANYTHING about (i'll explain why later).

and before u go saying thats dumb, yes, it is possible to shut people's brains off and "kill" them temporarily. of course, that's just the legal definition of dead, so u can bring them back. i saw a special on TV one time, and the lady who had to go thru brain surgery said she saw her dead mom and a bright light and all this stuff. thing is, they told her she'd be legally dead, and people tend to have dreams like that when they go through near-death experiences. she also said she heard the doctors saying things and could see her body on the table and them doing things. later, she identified what all they were using to do what (i'm not sure if she got it all right or if it was very many things, i cant remember).

now, the counterpoint is that in the milliseconds before her brain completely shut off, she'd still be dreaming. also, since our brains are so fast, her millisecond-long dreams could seem like lifetimes for her. thus, some people will always say that such proof of God is just a dream they had because of their beliefs and their knowledge of being legally dead. also, the things she said they were saying may have been reutine stuff that was repeated before and after she "died" and that she just recalled it in her death dream (which is understandable).

that's why we need to make sure they dont know what we're doing. we kill them without them knowing, and talk about things they wouldnt be able to guess at. and if most people are able to describe things from an out of body POV then we know that there is an afterlife. also, if alot of people see a bright light or a God person, then we can guess that God exists at least in our minds after we die.

also, we could ask each person their religion and stuff afterwards. that way, if all of a certain religion recounted images of Hell and bad stuff, we'll know not to follow that religion. such a test may not be enough to convince some people, but it sure would convince me more than any of the semi-ridiculous comments that come up in the usual religion battle.

[pxbluesoul]

What I'm wondering about in regards to your plan is this. It's fairly well thought out but remember the body runs on bioelectric energy, which would enable them to hear things, possibly not understand them, but hear it all the same. This might not seem like much but I think that most likely what happens is that these sounds are transmitted like they always are through synapses and whatnot, still being actively converted into the energy signatures that the brain can process, down the ear and meeting the brain. But if the brain is shut down, the energy has no place to go, correct? I don't believe so. Energy cannot be destroyed, and probably cannot travel back the way it came, and will most likely enter the brain anyway. Remember that the primary function of sleep is to process the thousands of sensations you experienced while awake, be they auditory, visual, olfactory, and whatever else I'm not remembering off the top of my head. Once the brain is reactivated the sounds that were heard while brain dead can be processed in the normal fashion. Your body hard at work.

The solution? Headphones. If the phenomena is indeed religious in nature, they shouldn't contaminate the experiment. And if putting on headphones eliminates "false positives" then they should be employed.

One other thing. I don't think shutting down the brain entirely is possible; there are still autonomous reflexes like respiration and circulation that are at too deep a level to "shut down". I don't know, this could also mean that your auditory senses are also not subject to "deactivation". Just a thought.

[evilbutterfly]

well, u might be thinking of people in comas, but when somebody's brain is shut off, it's shut off. gone. i'm not sure how they shut down and reboot (hehe) people's brains, but it works somehow. still, we must remember that braindead is only our legal definition of death. back in the day they thought no heartbeat meant death, and people in comas would be buried alive. of course, we've far advanced since then, but there's always room for human error.

and yeah, maybe headphones is a good idea. that is, if what u say is true. it sounds true, but not true at the same time.

i need to stop thinking about this crap too much...

[pxbluesoul]

I've never heard of a brain being completely shut down, aside from being thoroughly dead, you know? Rigor Mortis, Habeas Corpus as Zero Cool would say. That's fairly interesting though, I'm not sure how the brain would be "rebooted" as you put it. :P

Edit: Thinking about it I seem to remember that the longest a brain can be inactive before it begins to degrade is around 30 seconds. I don't remember where I heard this but it makes sense.

[RajginKisaragi]

Re: Grrr

in the phone book, there are over 30 differnt churches, most different denominations.(sp?)

This is how we know that religion is too much time and money. They're already advertising, and then next get sponsered my Microsoft or some s***.

[DracIV]

pxbluesoul: Within a few seconds of 4 minutes before serious damage occurs. Anything before that will regenerate quickly, but after that damage will start to occur that is severe enough that doctors give up on trying to revive someone after 4 min of no heart reaction. It's the lack of blood flow that damages the brain.

[Jam930]

No hard feelings, I wasn't offended by being labeled an idiot so hopefully you won't be offended my me calling you a Nazi. Nyah. :P

Well you didn't HAVE to be an idiot, I guess you saw the position open and lept for it. I didn't mean for anyone to be an idiot.

It's like me saying that anyone who rubs their tummy while rubbing their head is an idiot. And then you do it, and get mad at me for calling you an idiot.

Well... Either...

1. Don't call me something for absolutely no reason what so ever. Nazi? Why would I be a nazi. That's just stupid to insult me for no reason.

2. If you're referring to my appearance... what a mistake. How hipocritical. It's not exactly nice to make discriminating comments simply based on one's appearance. Which is what the nazi's did.

Calling someone a nazi is very offensive, just don't do it.

[Pennybags]

Re: Grrr

Perfection in God's eyes = It don't matter what you say or do, you're saved.

So what about those who believe "he"has a set list already of who goes where? And if we are all saved, what is the point of anything religous?

What about them? All is an inclusive word. It includes Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, Agnostics, Christians, Catholics, add endum. It could be said that he does have a list. It just has everyone's name on it. As for your other question... well, if someone had saved you from eternal damnation, wouldn't you want to know? If someone had made it so you didn't have to do anything to obtain salvation, wouldn't you want to know? Its good news! Why wouldn't you want to hear some good news?

I'll go kill some motherfuckers then.

Edit: For the purpose of surprise, I'm not naming names either.

"Everything is permissible"–but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"–but not everything is constructive.

In other words, go ahead. You will not be punished by God because you killed someone. However, that doesn't mean that you won't face consequences here on earth.

[CalibreneGuru]

I don't believe in God, but at one point in my life I sincerely tried to. When talking about the Big Bang most people ask where the materials necessary for it came from. Well, where did God come from? People say he has always been around. If he has always been around, couldn't you also say that the materials needed for the big bang have always been around too?

[pxbluesoul]

That was really thoughtful of you to ignore me saying "Okay, that's an exaggeration." And then calling me a hypocrite.

[NeoDarkHeart]

GOOD GOD I WAS READING ALL THIS CRAP AND GOING INSANE WAITING TO PUT IN MY THOUGHT!


so here i go.

https://www.infidelguy.com

THERE YOU GO.


specifically, a download he had on his site a while back. a debate between a minister and an ex-minister on the existence of god. they used scientific facts, logic, and reasoning, and THE EX-MINISTER WTFWHOOPED UP ON THE MINISTER'S HOLY ASS! seriously, the minister was stuttering the whole god damned time not knowing what to say to LOGIC.

if anyone wants this file (it's kinda big) i can send through AIM or MSN.

AIM: xdarkxkusanagix
MSN: guardiankusanagi@yahoo.com

i'm hardly ever on AIM anymore, though. gimme a PM to get on if need be.



so, in conclusion: logically, there's no god. illogically, stfu and do what you're told, and dont mind pastor richards over there with johnny. they're playing.


EDIT: OH AND BTW. for all you pro-religious guys 'n gals out there... what about the people who are blind and deaf, and possibly mute? ever see the movie "tommy"? if they can't understand god or anything else, how would they be "saved"? would they burn in hell because god made them disabled!? hm. interesting, eh? if they burned in hell because they couldnt learn about god because god made them that way... god would have to have made them burn in hell! that's not love.

[Laharl]

NO MORE RELIGION THREADS... PLEASE.


They're just so messy and involves more arguing than resolving, you dont get anywere, and creativity is out the window. They're all the same, and we've seen them before.

See when someone makes a religion thread, EVERYONE has some kind of opinion on religion. So then everyone dives into this and says either "god doesn't exist" or "god does exist" and I am very positive you CAN'T prove it either way simply because of the stated "impossible nature" of god's existence.

Let's not waste time here ladies n gentlemen.


I realize some of you might simply tell me a "You don't like it, get out" kind of line. As there is always some idiot who tries to shoot down the one that's trying to help people.

Agreed.

I believe this EXACT same topic has come up hundreds of times, and one reason I didn't really feel like arguing it is because I've done so, with the same people that come here time and time again, to argue. It's just constantly going in circles.

@ Evil Butterfly: If you've got enough time to make a post as long as you did, you've got enough time to type coherently. "u" does NOT mean "you". When I see "u" written, I pronounce it "ooh" because when the letter is left alone, when you're reading, it's supposed to come out like that. I often, to this day, still thing "what the hell..? Oh, you. Right. Fucking preschoolers can't type. *sigh*"

Just a hint.

[Jam930]

Think you were a bit hard on butterfly. But thanks for the support.