God - BF2S Forums

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Poll

Question About God

God doesn't exist	87%	87% - 42
God exists, but just doesn't listen to people's prayers	12%	12% - 6
Total: 48

2008-04-16 04:48:39

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

bakinacake wrote:
God exists because millions upon millions of people believe he does, he has given us so many things, and that he has helped millions of people. I mean for goodness sake, his son died for us, would you let your son die for the world, and their sins? If people choose not to accept that he loves them, and is there, you can have a chat about that when you die.

God as an abstract concept is what exists when millions of people believe in him. You would not be extolling the virtues of Xenu or The Flying Spaghetti Monster if millions of people believed in them.

I don't discount god, thought it may seem that way. I take exception to people applying god to science. Religion needs to keep out of science, because I don't remember Father Thomas talking about blackbody radiation in his sermons. I suppose I will have to answer for that when I die, right?

2008-04-16 04:51:54

bakinacake: HA HA; +383|6288|Aus, Qld

SenorToenails wrote:
bakinacake wrote:
God exists because millions upon millions of people believe he does, he has given us so many things, and that he has helped millions of people. I mean for goodness sake, his son died for us, would you let your son die for the world, and their sins? If people choose not to accept that he loves them, and is there, you can have a chat about that when you die.
God as an abstract concept is what exists when millions of people believe in him. You would not be extolling the virtues of Xenu or The Flying Spaghetti Monster if millions of people believed in them.

I don't discount god, thought it may seem that way. I take exception to people applying god to science. Religion needs to keep out of science, because I don't remember Father Thomas talking about blackbody radiation in his sermons. I suppose I will have to answer for that when I die, right?

I suggest you look into this fella

Louie Giglio

Last edited by bakinacake (2008-04-16 04:54:29)

2008-04-16 04:53:45

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

bakinacake wrote:
I suggest you look into this fella

Louie Giglio

Spreading the word on college campuses, eh? What's that got to do with me?

2008-04-16 04:55:30

bakinacake: HA HA; +383|6288|Aus, Qld

SenorToenails wrote:
bakinacake wrote:
I suggest you look into this fella

Louie Giglio
Spreading the word on college campuses, eh? What's that got to do with me?

His DvDs about the universe, science, and Christianity.

2008-04-16 05:10:51

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

bakinacake wrote:
His DvDs about the universe, science, and Christianity.

Kent Hovind wannabe?

2008-04-16 05:16:00

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6857

DesertFox- wrote:
CameronPoe wrote:
No. Anyone who says otherwise - prove it.
We've been through this already, dammit. I thought we came to an impasse where actual physical proof to benefit either side is nigh on impossible. From my point of view, the burden of proof that there isn't is on you guys, yet you put it on us. The earthly argument on to whether or not there is any number of gods is foolish. However, if there is an afterlife, I suggest we all meet up there and commence the debate at that place and time.

It is far easier to prove a positive. Proving a positive means presenting irrefutable evidence to demonstrate something to be true. You can't prove a negative on the basis of their being evidence to suggest that something that doesn't exist doesn't exist!!! If it doesn't exist there is not trail of evidence! The onus is on those who contend that God exists not on those that contend God doesn't exist. The default position of everyone in relation to an unproven or something not proven beyond reasonable doubt should be to assume that the hypothesis fails.

2008-04-16 05:22:24

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

CameronPoe wrote:
DesertFox- wrote:
CameronPoe wrote:
No. Anyone who says otherwise - prove it.
We've been through this already, dammit. I thought we came to an impasse where actual physical proof to benefit either side is nigh on impossible. From my point of view, the burden of proof that there isn't is on you guys, yet you put it on us. The earthly argument on to whether or not there is any number of gods is foolish. However, if there is an afterlife, I suggest we all meet up there and commence the debate at that place and time.
It is far easier to prove a positive. Proving a positive means presenting irrefutable evidence to demonstrate something to be true. You can't prove a negative on the basis of their being evidence to suggest that something that doesn't exist doesn't exist!!! If it doesn't exist there is not trail of evidence! The onus is on those who contend that God exists not on those that contend God doesn't exist. The default position of everyone in relation to an unproven or something not proven beyond reasonable doubt should be to assume that the hypothesis fails.

You can easily prove a positive, indeed. But the thing is you can't say something doesn't exist just because you have no proof. For instance, everyday we discover new animal species. Didn't these species exist before we discovered them? I'm not saying God exists, I'm just saying that not being able to prove a negative isn't an excuse to say something doesn't exist.

2008-04-16 05:24:14

Braddock: Agitator; +916|6592|Éire

"In order for life to have appeared spontaneously on earth, there first had to be hundreds of millions of protein molecules of the ninth configuration. But given the size of the planet Earth, do you know how long it would have taken for just one of these protein molecules to appear entirely by chance? Roughly ten to the two hundred and forty-third power billions of years. And I find that far, far more fantastic than simply believing in God."

-Killer Kane, The Ninth Configuration

Putting it all down to 'God' is just too simplistic for me, the universe is so amazing in it's own right that it doesn't really matter if God exists or not in my opinion.

2008-04-16 05:24:46

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6857

sergeriver wrote:
You can easily prove a positive, indeed. But the thing is you can't say something doesn't exist just because you have no proof. For instance, everyday we discover new animal species. Didn't these species exist before we discovered them? I'm not saying God exists, I'm just saying that not being able to prove a negative isn't an excuse to say something doesn't exist.

Are you suggesting that I should pre-invent animal species and then go and find them? OK then. Zoblogots exist. Go find them.

2008-04-16 05:26:28

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:
You can easily prove a positive, indeed. But the thing is you can't say something doesn't exist just because you have no proof. For instance, everyday we discover new animal species. Didn't these species exist before we discovered them? I'm not saying God exists, I'm just saying that not being able to prove a negative isn't an excuse to say something doesn't exist.

That doesn't give an excuse to say it does exist either.

2008-04-16 05:28:03

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

CameronPoe wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
You can easily prove a positive, indeed. But the thing is you can't say something doesn't exist just because you have no proof. For instance, everyday we discover new animal species. Didn't these species exist before we discovered them? I'm not saying God exists, I'm just saying that not being able to prove a negative isn't an excuse to say something doesn't exist.
Are you suggesting that I should pre-invent animal species and then go and find them? OK then. Zoblogots exist. Go find them.

No, I'm saying the species DO exist, you just DON'T know they exist. Big difference. I'm not suggesting you go and find God, if that was what you were implying.

2008-04-16 05:29:38

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6857

sergeriver wrote:
No, I'm saying the species DO exist, you just DON'T know they exist. Big difference. I'm not suggesting you go and find God, if that was what you were implying.

The fact is you can't prove they exist until they've demonstrated their existence. You can't presume specifics.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-16 05:30:17)

2008-04-16 05:29:58

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

SenorToenails wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
You can easily prove a positive, indeed. But the thing is you can't say something doesn't exist just because you have no proof. For instance, everyday we discover new animal species. Didn't these species exist before we discovered them? I'm not saying God exists, I'm just saying that not being able to prove a negative isn't an excuse to say something doesn't exist.
That doesn't give an excuse to say it does exist either.

No, of course not. As long as you don't discover them they don't exist for you.

2008-04-16 06:08:32

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

CameronPoe wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
No, I'm saying the species DO exist, you just DON'T know they exist. Big difference. I'm not suggesting you go and find God, if that was what you were implying.
The fact is you can't prove they exist until they've demonstrated their existence. You can't presume specifics.

I can't proof they exist, which doesn't mean they don't.

2008-04-16 06:19:16

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:
No, of course not. As long as you don't discover them they don't exist for you.

That statement needs clarification.

2008-04-16 06:24:37

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

SenorToenails wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
No, of course not. As long as you don't discover them they don't exist for you.
That statement needs clarification.

The things you don't know don't exist for you. This is not the same than saying they don't exist at all.

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-04-16 06:25:16)

2008-04-16 06:36:42

PuckMercury: 6 x 9 = 42; +298|6829|Portland, OR USA

I voted null. I believe God exists, I believe God hears "prayer" in any number of forms - but to listen does not mandate a subsequent response.

I won't go into it further ... now. I'm sure I'll get sucked in later.

2008-04-16 06:40:21

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:
The things you don't know don't exist for you. This is not the same than saying they don't exist at all.

Indeed. I recognize this, but to impose X exists and has always existed with no shred of physical evidence is lunacy. I'm sure some smart ass will say "But you live on the evidence". I don't accept that.

2008-04-16 06:42:07

PuckMercury: 6 x 9 = 42; +298|6829|Portland, OR USA

sergeriver wrote:
The things you don't know don't exist for you. This is not the same than saying they don't exist at all.

exactly - I believe this on a much larger scale. Just because I don't know how to do something doesn't mean it is impossible. Just because I don't know why something is the nature that it is doesn't mean there is no reason.

EDIT: This seems best personified by a child closing their eyes and assuming that everything ceases to exist

Last edited by PuckMercury (2008-04-16 06:43:20)

2008-04-16 06:42:29

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6983|Disaster Free Zone

Jesus is the son sun.
Jesus is God.
Sun is God.... got it!!!!!

The sun is the creator of all life the bringer of warmth and light, the healer of the sick and the main reason we exist today.

2008-04-16 06:48:16

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

SenorToenails wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
The things you don't know don't exist for you. This is not the same than saying they don't exist at all.
Indeed. I recognize this, but to impose X exists and has always existed with no shred of physical evidence is lunacy. I'm sure some smart ass will say "But you live on the evidence". I don't accept that.

Let's see. X exists, you don't know X. Does X exist in your mind? No. Does X exist at all? Yes. But we need physical evidence to prove X exists, so technically without that X doesn't exist for us.

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-04-16 06:48:38)

2008-04-16 06:51:12

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

PuckMercury wrote:
exactly - I believe this on a much larger scale. Just because I don't know how to do something doesn't mean it is impossible. Just because I don't know why something is the nature that it is doesn't mean there is no reason.

EDIT: This seems best personified by a child closing their eyes and assuming that everything ceases to exist

This breaks down at a point. Can you reasonably believe that you can walk through solid walls just because you don't know how?

If you are referring to physical phenomena, then I agree that there is a reason for it. You know there is a reason for it because you observed in in nature or determined that it must exist for a physical model to be complete (in which case, you know what to look for). In the case of god, there is no physical manifestation. There is no evidence that points to a testable 'god' model.

2008-04-16 06:52:51

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:
Let's see. X exists, you don't know X. Does X exist in your mind? No. Does X exist at all? Yes. But we need physical evidence to prove X exists, so technically without that X doesn't exist for us.

I agreed with this already. I disagree to its application to religious entities.

I probably should have made that clear. Sorry for the confusion.

2008-04-16 06:56:25

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7059|Argentina

SenorToenails wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Let's see. X exists, you don't know X. Does X exist in your mind? No. Does X exist at all? Yes. But we need physical evidence to prove X exists, so technically without that X doesn't exist for us.
I agreed with this already. I disagree to its application to religious entities.

I probably should have made that clear. Sorry for the confusion.

Well, when it comes to Religion it's up to you to accept a negative or a positive without any evidence. I accept there is no evidence at all that God exists. That doesn't mean, IMO of course, he doesn't. But of course, if I had to say yes or no, I'd must say no.

2008-04-16 06:59:20

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6432|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:
Well, when it comes to Religion it's up to you to accept a negative or a positive without any evidence. I accept there is no evidence at all that God exists. That doesn't mean, IMO of course, he doesn't. But of course, if I had to say yes or no, I'd must say no.

I agree. I honestly don't care all that much if god exists or not, but I love the debate!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums God

Poll

bakinacake wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

bakinacake wrote:

bakinacake wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

bakinacake wrote:

bakinacake wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

PuckMercury wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Board footer