Is God real post your thoughts!

[Ambassadar]

Wow... I suggest you go read some books. That would take pages upon pages of someone explaining. As with everything you will find people with different points so read things from different perspectives so you see where people are coming from. Then make up your own mind.

[Defender2516]

I believe in God and that his word is 100% truth.

 

 

 

And no, I won't get into a big debate about it with anyone who disagree's, simpley because I don't have the evidence your looking for, I have my own.

[OldJoe]

No.

 

 

 

I'm an agnostic, so if i would be wrong i'd accept the fact that he/she/it is real but i still wouldn't become a religious person.

 

 

 

I do understand that it can be comforting in hard times (i.e. someone in your family died, or so), but i cannot see how you can believe something that is imaginary.

 

 

 

How many millions of animals (humans are animals!) have died due to religion X?

 

God...

 

If he/she/it would be real, why do we have so much crap on our planet?

 

And i can't see any form of scientific proof of that god did ever exist?

 

 

 

It is a human-make-belief-thing.

 

 

 

-----

 

I am not very well read about this, I am interested about history but not religion. So what i say is completely my own thoughts and not so much from books...

 

"disclaimer"

 

 

 

Why'd you have to stick that "How many animals have died" bit in there. Why does anyone or anything die. Why does it matter how we die. Why are you blaming religions for the act of humans who misunderstood or manipulated the teachings of one's religion. Never again will I listen to ignorant children who use that as an excuse for being too lazy to care.

 

 

 

Saying "A Divine being would not cause so much pain and death" when that is soully the act of men. Men are twisted disgusting creatures and need something to believe in.

 

 

 

"Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex."

 

 

 

Thank you C.S Lewis!

 

 

 

Lewis implies that we all have a deep-seated desire, or wish for, a relationship with the Creator and for an existence beyond this life, though we often mistake it for something else.

 

 

 

"ignorant children"... Not everyone here or on RS is 14...

 

 

 

So you mean when the christians came to Scandinavia to make it a christian area, those were just some people who misunderstood the teachings? You guys slaughtered anyone who wouldn't accept becoming a christian. Wouldn't such an act take some 100's/1000's of converters?

 

 

 

I only said what i personally believe. And i guess you're a christian, this argument as all elses christian-nonchristian will just continue forever (or any other religious believers).

 

But go ahead and continue..

 

 

 

Oh and, if "god" created everything, who/what created him? Since there's something called the Big Bang which has been scientifically proven.

[tryto]

^ And The thread right above ours is a differnet model, that is also "scientifically proven".

 

The theory also states that at the beginning, there was a dense mass. What created the mass of matter?

[Nadril]

^ And The thread right above ours is a differnet model, that is also "scientifically proven".

 

The theory also states that at the beginning, there was a dense mass. What created the mass of matter?

 

 

 

I swear I can sound like a broken record at times.

 

 

 

What is the difference between a 'god' starting first or a dense mass of matter starting first?

 

 

 

 

 

Basically, why is god not subject to the same questionings? That -- my friends, is called a double standard.

[misterxman]

would someone care to explain dinosaurs, it's obvious they ruled this planet millions of years ago? sorry but my church's scriptures says that god created this planet for man, not big lizards.

 

 

 

and also galaxys past ours, or heck even planets past ours.

 

 

 

ice age? was that divine punishment :-#

 

 

 

What do you want explained about them?

[Range_This11]

Actually "in the beginning" according to scripture, it is said that God and Wisdom existed alone together. Wisdom of course being his wife.

[insane]

^ And The thread right above ours is a differnet model, that is also "scientifically proven".

 

The theory also states that at the beginning, there was a dense mass. What created the mass of matter?

 

 

 

I swear I can sound like a broken record at times.

 

 

 

What is the difference between a 'god' starting first or a dense mass of matter starting first?

 

 

 

 

 

Basically, why is god not subject to the same questionings? That -- my friends, is called a double standard.

 

 

 

Because there are rules governing matter stating that matter can't just "start" from nothing.

[Denismage]

No, god doesn't exist.

[Nadril]

^ And The thread right above ours is a differnet model, that is also "scientifically proven".

 

The theory also states that at the beginning, there was a dense mass. What created the mass of matter?

 

 

 

I swear I can sound like a broken record at times.

 

 

 

What is the difference between a 'god' starting first or a dense mass of matter starting first?

 

 

 

 

 

Basically, why is god not subject to the same questionings? That -- my friends, is called a double standard.

 

 

 

Because there are rules governing matter stating that matter can't just "start" from nothing.

 

 

 

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

[assassin_696]

Save us all the time and don't even bother trying to prove God with science. If you want to believe in God on faith, then that's absolutely fine, i'm not going to argue with you, but as soon as you start trying to prove the big guy with conservation of energy/matter you are going down a dead end road.

[Nitramosma]

The whole idea of God created the matter used to begin the universe/The matter was always there sound shockingly like the chicken or the egg question, to me at least. Besides, what does it really matter. We are here, we can't look back and find out, there is no real proof for either theory. I'm going to go with this theory : Ignorance is bliss. Even if we did find out exactly how the universe was created, who is to say that any of the theories would be correct. Given the lack of true scientific evidence we have supporting any of these theories, for all we know the Scientologists could be correct.

[assassin_696]

The whole idea of God created the matter used to begin the universe/The matter was always there sound shockingly like the chicken or the egg question, to me at least. Besides, what does it really matter. We are here, we can't look back and find out, there is no real proof for either theory. I'm going to go with this theory : Ignorance is bliss. Even if we did find out exactly how the universe was created, who is to say that any of the theories would be correct. Given the lack of true scientific evidence we have supporting any of these theories, for all we know the Scientologists could be correct.

 

 

 

Just because you might be ignorant of the scientific evidence doesn't mean we have to assign an equal probability to all the different theories.

[insane]

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

 

 

 

Then matter is your "god". It's whatever seems more logical to you. For me, a hunk of matter as the necessary being just doesn't cut it.

[InfiniteLove]

No.

 

 

 

I'm an agnostic, so if i would be wrong i'd accept the fact that he/she/it is real but i still wouldn't become a religious person.

 

 

 

I do understand that it can be comforting in hard times (i.e. someone in your family died, or so), but i cannot see how you can believe something that is imaginary.

 

 

 

How many millions of animals (humans are animals!) have died due to religion X?

 

God...

 

If he/she/it would be real, why do we have so much crap on our planet?

 

And i can't see any form of scientific proof of that god did ever exist?

 

 

 

It is a human-make-belief-thing.

 

 

 

-----

 

I am not very well read about this, I am interested about history but not religion. So what i say is completely my own thoughts and not so much from books...

 

"disclaimer"

 

 

 

Why'd you have to stick that "How many animals have died" bit in there. Why does anyone or anything die. Why does it matter how we die. Why are you blaming religions for the act of humans who misunderstood or manipulated the teachings of one's religion. Never again will I listen to ignorant children who use that as an excuse for being too lazy to care.

 

 

 

Saying "A Divine being would not cause so much pain and death" when that is soully the act of men. Men are twisted disgusting creatures and need something to believe in.

 

 

 

"Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water. Men feel sexual desire: well, there is such a thing as sex."

 

 

 

Thank you C.S Lewis!

 

 

 

Lewis implies that we all have a deep-seated desire, or wish for, a relationship with the Creator and for an existence beyond this life, though we often mistake it for something else.

 

 

 

"ignorant children"... Not everyone here or on RS is 14...

 

 

 

So you mean when the christians came to Scandinavia to make it a christian area, those were just some people who misunderstood the teachings? You guys slaughtered anyone who wouldn't accept becoming a christian. Wouldn't such an act take some 100's/1000's of converters?

 

 

 

I only said what i personally believe. And i guess you're a christian, this argument as all elses christian-nonchristian will just continue forever (or any other religious believers).

 

But go ahead and continue..

 

 

 

Oh and, if "god" created everything, who/what created him? Since there's something called the Big Bang which has been scientifically proven.

 

 

 

No, I am not stereotyping Runescape players after all I've played it before and for a long time at that. What does it matter that religion is the cause of so many hardships. Live in YOUR life the past matters very little and the future not so much either. I refuse to see the wrongs in religion and focus on the right it has done. (i.e Helped prevent poverty, attempting to help others etc.) I know that sounds wrong but I like to live a simple life. Simplicity is bliss for me. I do not care for the past, it's in the past after all...

[purfishx]

No, god doesn't exist.

 

 

 

Sure told us why, didn't ya.

[Korskin]

The question: "Is God real?" is a rather interesting one. To me it's almost a ridiculous question since my life is devoted to God. I only really have one main goal in my life and that's to remain faithful to God. Whether I succeed with my studies, get a good job or find true love is not as important. To sum it up I'll refer to the Bible and this verse: "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?" Matthew 16:26

 

 

 

Then again, the initial question might be just as ridiculous for an atheist or at least a strong atheist. You might think that religion is complete and utter rubbish. However, if you're not sure, it's probably the most important question in life. It's sort of a combination of classic questions such as: "Who are we?", "What's the meaning of life?" and "We're do we come from?".

 

 

 

So basically my advice is to really think about the question and spend time to find the answer that you believe is the truth.

[Rebdragon]

Then again, the initial question might be just as ridiculous for an atheist or at least a strong atheist. You might think that religion is complete and utter rubbish. However, if you're not sure, it's probably the most important question in life. It's sort of a combination of classic questions such as: "Who are we?", "What's the meaning of life?" and "We're do we come from?".

 

Anyone who says religion is "complete and utter rubbish" is either a) too young to properly think for themselves, or B) hasn't study the topic at all, or both.

 

 

 

Me, I'm more keen to Eastern Religion (Buddhism for it's depth, Confucianism and Taoism for their insightful teachings, Zen for it's training, etc.), as the vast majority of it focuses nearly completely on the here and now, a vast contrast to much of the Western [and primal] religions. Yes, familiarity does breed contempt, so I've got that influencing me, but [world] religions as a whole, when examined holistically and with an unbiased viewpoint, give us valuable insights into understanding both ourselves and the world we live in :) .

[warri0r45]

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

 

 

 

Then matter is your "god". It's whatever seems more logical to you. For me, a hunk of matter as the necessary being just doesn't cut it.

 

 

 

To me, the mere fact that we can envisage someting more sensible to explain the issue away just dosen't cut it. Applying a consideration to the universe (the need for a creator) which dosen't fall back to the creator himself just because we envisage him being outside our rules dosen't cut it for me (all the better that him being outside the rules makes our detection of him by any mortal means impossible). What if he has his own rules which make his creation necessary? I don't see it as a particularly compelling answer right now to envisage a personified character to end the deadlock. No doubt this whole issue would be down to what you think would be a sensible answer - there's obviously no science to it. You've seen my views, and I can respect others. I'm just the kind of person who has more questions than answers.

[venomai]

So basically my advice is to really think about the question and spend time to find the answer that you believe is the truth.

 

I agree. :)

 

 

 

A few days ago I bought a book called Adventures Beyond the Body by William Buhlman. It's taught me a lot of new things about spirituality, and I've only just started reading it. Before that, I was strictly atheist, and now I'm beginning to question myself. :-k

[InfiniteLove]

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

 

 

 

Then matter is your "god". It's whatever seems more logical to you. For me, a hunk of matter as the necessary being just doesn't cut it.

 

 

 

To me, the mere fact that we can envisage someting more sensible to explain the issue away just dosen't cut it. Applying a consideration to the universe (the need for a creator) which dosen't fall back to the creator himself just because we envisage him being outside our rules dosen't cut it for me (all the better that him being outside the rules makes our detection of him by any mortal means impossible). What if he has his own rules which make his creation necessary? I don't see it as a particularly compelling answer right now to envisage a personified character to end the deadlock. No doubt this whole issue would be down to what you think would be a sensible answer - there's obviously no science to it. You've seen my views, and I can respect others. I'm just the kind of person who has more questions than answers.

 

 

 

So you are admitting there is something greater? I'm not questioning anything about you've yet this statement has stood out from your others.

 

I find it incoceivable that there is not something larger than us. Whether it be science or a divine being.

 

 

 

It all comes down to what you think is more rational. Which is an unhinging thought. :uhh:

 

 

 

It scares me to death although I've learned it's better to believe and just do so (in whatever you believe). Simplicity is bliss. Well for me it is. I believe that exploration just leads to more unanwsered questions which is, personally, not what I need right now.

[warri0r45]

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

 

 

 

Then matter is your "god". It's whatever seems more logical to you. For me, a hunk of matter as the necessary being just doesn't cut it.

 

 

 

To me, the mere fact that we can envisage someting more sensible to explain the issue away just dosen't cut it. Applying a consideration to the universe (the need for a creator) which dosen't fall back to the creator himself just because we envisage him being outside our rules dosen't cut it for me (all the better that him being outside the rules makes our detection of him by any mortal means impossible). What if he has his own rules which make his creation necessary? I don't see it as a particularly compelling answer right now to envisage a personified character to end the deadlock. No doubt this whole issue would be down to what you think would be a sensible answer - there's obviously no science to it. You've seen my views, and I can respect others. I'm just the kind of person who has more questions than answers.

 

 

 

So you are admitting there is something greater? I'm not questioning anything about you've yet this statement has stood out from your others.

 

I find it incoceivable that there is not something larger than us. Whether it be science or a divine being.

 

 

 

It all comes down to what you think is more rational. Which is an unhinging thought. :uhh:

 

 

 

It scares me to death although I've learned it's better to believe and just do so (in whatever you believe). Simplicity is bliss. Well for me it is. I believe that exploration just leads to more unanwsered questions which is, personally, not what I need right now.

 

 

 

No. There is no need for me to 'admit' anything. I see some creation idea as possible but I outlined why I question it and see it as a pretty empty idea with current knowledge (basically any 'answer' here is unsatisfying to me - I'm always left with questions rather than answers). To frame those questions, you have to inevitably treat the idea as if it were real. I was basically hypothesising.

[Unoalexi]

Then again, the initial question might be just as ridiculous for an atheist or at least a strong atheist. You might think that religion is complete and utter rubbish. However, if you're not sure, it's probably the most important question in life. It's sort of a combination of classic questions such as: "Who are we?", "What's the meaning of life?" and "We're do we come from?".

 

Anyone who says religion is "complete and utter rubbish" is either a) too young to properly think for themselves, or B) hasn't study the topic at all, or both.

 

 

 

Like most of my atheist people.. they give you guys a bad name. -.-

 

 

 

Me, I'm more keen to Eastern Religion (Buddhism for it's depth, Confucianism and Taoism for their insightful teachings, Zen for it's training, etc.), as the vast majority of it focuses nearly completely on the here and now, a vast contrast to much of the Western [and primal] religions. Yes, familiarity does breed contempt, so I've got that influencing me, but [world] religions as a whole, when examined holistically and with an unbiased viewpoint, give us valuable insights into understanding both ourselves and the world we live in :) .

 

Well said. We need to look at what others say about the world(unbiasedly of course), compare it to our own viewpoints, and derive truth from the results. We can't simply just live in a bubble all our lives, surrounding ourselves with what is most familiar, with our heads in the sand. This is the exact reason why atheists shouldn't dismiss theistic people's beliefs as "complete and utter rubbish" or vise versa.

 

 

 

[InfiniteLove]

No, I think you misunderstand me. What I meant is why couldn't it have just been there. Instead of god being the first thing why couldn't mater?

 

 

 

It doesn't have anything to do with being created out of nothing if it was always there, or if it was there at the beginning of time. That's my question.

 

 

 

Then matter is your "god". It's whatever seems more logical to you. For me, a hunk of matter as the necessary being just doesn't cut it.

 

 

 

To me, the mere fact that we can envisage someting more sensible to explain the issue away just dosen't cut it. Applying a consideration to the universe (the need for a creator) which dosen't fall back to the creator himself just because we envisage him being outside our rules dosen't cut it for me (all the better that him being outside the rules makes our detection of him by any mortal means impossible). What if he has his own rules which make his creation necessary? I don't see it as a particularly compelling answer right now to envisage a personified character to end the deadlock. No doubt this whole issue would be down to what you think would be a sensible answer - there's obviously no science to it. You've seen my views, and I can respect others. I'm just the kind of person who has more questions than answers.

 

 

 

So you are admitting there is something greater? I'm not questioning anything about you've yet this statement has stood out from your others.

 

I find it incoceivable that there is not something larger than us. Whether it be science or a divine being.

 

 

 

It all comes down to what you think is more rational. Which is an unhinging thought. :uhh:

 

 

 

It scares me to death although I've learned it's better to believe and just do so (in whatever you believe). Simplicity is bliss. Well for me it is. I believe that exploration just leads to more unanwsered questions which is, personally, not what I need right now.

 

 

 

No. There is no need for me to 'admit' anything. I see some creation idea as possible but I outlined why I question it and see it as a pretty empty idea with current knowledge (basically any 'answer' here is unsatisfying to me - I'm always left with questions rather than answers). To frame those questions, you have to inevitably treat the idea as if it were real. I was basically hypothesising.

 

 

 

Hrm, understandable. I phrased that wrongly, sorry. :wall:

 

Also, I phrased that as if it were real because I believe it to be real. I guess I should have said that.

 

 

 

Off-Topic: You're still here!? Long, long, long ago, I talked to you about religion on my old account. Pureodoom1 was the account name. I can't believe you are still here that was ages ago. :o

[insane]

No. There is no need for me to 'admit' anything. I see some creation idea as possible but I outlined why I question it and see it as a pretty empty idea with current knowledge (basically any 'answer' here is unsatisfying to me - I'm always left with questions rather than answers). To frame those questions, you have to inevitably treat the idea as if it were real. I was basically hypothesising.

 

 

 

You make it sound like God is only relevant to creation and that I only believe in God to fill the gaps in the origin of the universe. It smells like a straw-man.