|
|
#81 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Storm Sanctuary!
Posts: 255
|
If you happen to meet god and your visit goes well and god does actually give you those items, I might believe what you say (only if there is something unusual about the items that only a god could possess [or else I might suspect that you lied]). This visit would be the only way to convince me to think any different about gods and religion because it would be the Only evidence. As for if god happens to be one that you could talk to and meet, I will still hold my feelings against your friend god if he doesn't satisfy giving life, liberty, and property to those who deserve it.
Last edited by Master_of_the_Faster; 06-9-2007 at 12:07 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3
|
Of course there's a God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: TX
Posts: 3,639
|
Counter-logic:
God is said to be all good, all loving, all forgiving, etc. God created Hell, therefore God cannot be all good, and if God is not all good, God cannot be God. Therefore, God does not exist. More logicky logic at http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
You do see how that logic is nonsense though right?
God is said to be X, Y, Z..... Just because some people say that doesn't make it the case. The people saying that could just be -wrong- which woudln't invalidate the existance of God at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#86 | |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
Quote:
Einstein's theory of relativity opened the door to the concept of spacetime, where space and time merge into one dimension. It's high level theoretical physics, the likes of which I don't understand. But I know enough to know that Einstein would have made such an incorrect statement. Space, Time and Matter are important to use because those are the only three dimensions we are aware of and able to interact with. However, much of our understanding of the Universe has led many of todays top theoretical scientists to believe that there exist many more dimensions. Also, what's with this Einstein Infallibility? His theories are almost a century old. Our understanding of physics has greatly improved since then thanks to our advancements in technology. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#87 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Sep 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 4,189
|
Quote:
However I don't belive in Adam and Eve and other such stories. I don't even belive in heaven and hell, I belive when you die your mind in non-existing. There is quite a bit of thought provoking statments that some sort of God (creator or helper of the universe) exists. Look at the brain itself and how complex it is to allow us to sense and think. The workings of the mind is the most complex thing that we know of and I find it hard to belive it happend by dumb chance along with ecological cycles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 310
|
Evolution does NOT contradict the concept of God. Francis Collins is a scientist who led the Human Genome project but is also a very devout Christian. He came up with the concept of Theistic Evolution, something I strongly believe in, and this is how it goes, quoted from Wikipedia:
"1) The universe came into being out of nothingness, approximately 14 billion years ago, (2) Despite massive improbabilities, the properties of the universe appear to have been precisely tuned for life, (3) While the precise mechanism of the origin of life on earth remains unknown, once life arose, the process of evolution and natural selection permitted the development of biological diversity and complexity over very long periods of time, (4) Once evolution got under way no special supernatural intervention was required, (5) Humans are part of this process, sharing a common ancestor with the great apes, (6) But humans are also unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature." If you see this dude Collins in interviews and debates with atheist scientists, he usually kicks the other person's ass. I think Stephen Hawking wrote a paper once stating that black holes, in which the laws of physics no longer apply, can house a "heaven" and a "hell," and can very well be a base of operations for a God. Brain waves, emitted when we die, could travel to a black hole. He also stated that we can determine what happened up until the first 36th of a second using the Big Bang theory, but that tiny moment which would explain the origin of life can be attributed to God. I'm not sure about all that though, I only remember reading it from Scientific American but I don't know what issue and when it was written.
__________________
Every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lives here on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam. http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#89 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 66
|
Quote:
However, I wouldn't be so quick to jump to the simple solution. Even if science doesn't have a plausible theory about the absolute origin of our universe (before the Big Bang), it doesn't mean they won't have one in the future. Even if you tie the concept of creationism and theistic evolution in with science, saying "We can't understand it right now, so God must have done it" isn't the best idea. Finding a semi-plausible theory and declaring the case closing is just taking the easy way out. (But I still respect your religious openmindedness to science. No offence.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#90 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Well, his logic is inherantly meaningless, so elaboration on mistaken premesis will just make for more mistakes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
How is it meaningless?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Storm Sanctuary!
Posts: 255
|
Exactly. People may be wrong about what they say about a god, but that doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist. It means that the people are at fault for their beliefs. For example, some people expect god to be righteous and yet they make god to look like an evil dictator that makes them serve in a church for so long as well as some people who believe that god created hell. If you pray to such a religion that does this, wouldn't that mean that you pray to a dictator who created mischief? Perhaps I wouldn't care if you prayed to something evil or unjust, but if it's a population of people that thinks that this god (if god really was an evil dictator) is righteous, prayer contradicts their personal beliefs of righteousness. Just because everyone thinks that god has to be righteous and yet god might do bad things doesn't mean that god doesn't exist. Over all, what I mean to say is that even though certain parts of a religion may be able to be proven false, that doesn't automatically give evidence that everything else must be false.
Last edited by Master_of_the_Faster; 06-9-2007 at 04:53 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#94 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 411
|
Quote:
The second way that you said is invalid, and considered blasphemy in my religion. You expect me to bring forth a celestial being down onto earth when he is not supposed to interfere with humans? Ha, nice try smart one. Not going to happen. Why don't we actually act smart and put forward some intelligence people? And by the way, wikipedia is a COMMUNITY based encyclopedia. You have to actually look. Me? I have to study, so I will return later to see if anyone intelligent actually did something.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#95 | |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Well, as he said:
Quote:
Premise two: God created hell (Implicit in this is that hell is not good) Conclusion: God cannot be Good Corollary: Since God -is- Good, and God cannot be Good, God cannot be God Conclusion: Therefore God does not exist I find premise one faulty: Just because "some people" say that God possesses those characteristics doesn't mean he does. As a statement, it is unsupported hearsay, and since the statement doesn't represent provable truth, proceeding on the basis of its veracity seems foolish. (Argumentum Ad Populum: 'Everybody knows God is good') I find premise two faulty: God is in fact -only said- to have created hell, and any definition we have as to what hell is like, and whether it is good or bad is also hearsay, even more unsupported because nobody has ever provably gone to hell and come back to make a valid report. (Argumentum Ad Populum again: 'Everybody knows hell is bad') The first conclusion, that since God is good, and hell is bad, God cannot be good: I find that reasoning faulty. Even on earth, we see cases where people are punished "for their own good" and do not condemn their parents/lawgivers etc etc as evil simply because they've engaged in an action that the recipiant finds -undesireable- if I don't like eating vegetables, being forced to eat vegetables seems 'not good' to me, but clearly my dietary needs strongly reccomend I do so, and so being made to do so is actually to my benefit even though I personally disagree with the directive. The corollary to the conclusion: Since god is good (not proven by this logic) and god cannot be good (not proven by this logic) god therefore cannot be god is faulty because it rests on unproven premesis. The final conclusion that therefore, God does not exist is faulty. It requires us (In the midst of a proof of the nonexistance of God, no less) to simply -grant- that God is good simply because people say so, that Hell is bad simply because people say so, and that it is impossible for a good god to do a not good thing, simply because people say so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#96 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
If he's not supposed to interfere with human affairs, then explain the concept of miracles to me. And tell me what your comment on Wikipedia has to do with any of this. You can read Wikipedia and still be as dumb as a bad hammer. Go ahead. Prove us wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#97 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 411
|
Quote:
In other words, even though Jesus was a part of god, Jesus sought wisdom through god, which would clarify on the father to son relationship. God did not completely control Jesus, otherwise he wouldn't of had to seek wisdom through god. And Pure, who's "us"? Not everyone in the forums believes the same beliefs you do, or fully agrees with you. So "us" is invalid. Oh, and the miracles were performed by the power of god given to Jesus. Jesus would pray to god to help him perform these miracles, and in Jerusalem, the stories of the miracles still remain there. It's obvious that it is not propaganda, because many of the bloodlines have people that had seen the miracles performed. And for the person that said that since god created hell, he is not entirely good... Thats a lie. He created hell because the archangel Lucifer wanted his own heaven and even attempted to overthrow god.
__________________
Last edited by hayatewillown; 06-9-2007 at 05:17 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#98 | |||
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#99 | ||
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
Quote:
And you still haven't explained to me how your friend proves the presence of a higher calling using Einstein's theory. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#100 | |||||
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|