Is God real post your thoughts!

[walka92]

the main problem ive had with "gods" and religion is that the creator god, whichever religion it is, is supposedly omnipotent, yet still has a rival/evil counter part (god/satan for example), who is constantly supposed to be threatening heaven and such, but if the god was truly omnipotent, he could simply banish satan for eternity. i mean, if he is "all powerful" it should be within his power, right? but nooooooo, he just leaves the devil to go on rampaging and doing whatever he wants.

 

 

 

or, if he was omnipotent, he could theoretically create something better than him, but he is already omnipotent, so he cant make anything better, but someone omnipotent could create anything, right? or am i missing something?

 

 

 

there is part of me that does sort of want there to be a god, so i could know that when i die i might have somewere to go after, but my logical mind casts that aside as impossible.

 

 

 

another thing is that evolution has been pretty much proven AFAIK (i dont know if it missing a few links for species or whatever, i dont assume to know everything), and no religions/gods account for that. UNLESS there was a god that created what some people ive met described as the "spark" of life that then slowly evolved in different ways to get where it is. ive heard hypothesis' saying that life arived here in the form of microscopic creatures that "breathe" iron and can withstand very high and low temperatures (they do exist but i forgot the name), which could withstand space and come here, but if that is true, where did THEY originate from? some incredible stroke of luck in another galaxy at the beginning of the universe? or some allpowerful entity somewhere? i strugle to see how anything could make the leap from inanimate to living

 

 

 

just my thoughts ;)

[Iamdan]

the main problem ive had with "gods" and religion is that the creator god, whichever religion it is, is supposedly omnipotent, yet still has a rival/evil counter part (god/satan for example), who is constantly supposed to be threatening heaven and such, but if the god was truly omnipotent, he could simply banish satan for eternity. i mean, if he is "all powerful" it should be within his power, right? but nooooooo, he just leaves the devil to go on rampaging and doing whatever he wants.

 

 

 

or, if he was omnipotent, he could theoretically create something better than him, but he is already omnipotent, so he cant make anything better, but someone omnipotent could create anything, right? or am i missing something?

 

 

 

I'm not religious but that's a weak argument.

 

 

 

If there are no bad things, what is good? Good and bad is only relative, you can't have one without the other because then there's nothing to compare it to.

 

 

 

Say you have a puppy, and you love this puppy and want the best things for it. It hate's being cooped up inside, would you let it play in your backyard? Say it got curious and squeezed though the fence and got beaten up by your next door neighbor's cat. It got a scratch but was otherwise fine, but the puppy learned not to go next door.

 

 

 

If you had the power to go back in time and keep the puppy from playing outside and getting the scratch, would you do it? Or would you let it have it's freedom, and learn it's lesson?

[warri0r45]

 

another thing is that evolution has been pretty much proven AFAIK (i dont know if it missing a few links for species or whatever, i dont assume to know everything), and no religions/gods account for that. UNLESS there was a god that created what some people ive met described as the "spark" of life that then slowly evolved in different ways to get where it is. ive heard hypothesis' saying that life arived here in the form of microscopic creatures that "breathe" iron and can withstand very high and low temperatures (they do exist but i forgot the name), which could withstand space and come here, but if that is true, where did THEY originate from? some incredible stroke of luck in another galaxy at the beginning of the universe? or some allpowerful entity somewhere? i strugle to see how anything could make the leap from inanimate to living

 

 

 

Good questions. The scientific explanation of how life first arose, although incomplete, is abiogenesis.

 

 

 

Here is a good place to start with your research: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 

 

 

There are links to the relevant scientific papers to back it up.

 

 

 

While we may never be able to prove exactly how life came about, we can postulate and test the possible mechanisms by which it happened.

 

 

 

As for the bacteria which metabolise iron, they are part of what are termed lithotrophs, or bacteria which derive their energy from inorganic molecules. This is a good start for research into bacteria that can survive in very harsh environments. It's definitely an interesting topic if you want to read up on it some more.

[sphinxor86]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

[sphinxor86]

Zomg God does exist, and its name is GOOGLE!! LOL

 

 

 

And there's proof, hilarious proof!

 

 

 

http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/Scripture/Proof_Google_Is_God.html

[Shinjula]

Here is a good place to start with your research: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 

 

 

Talk Origins is NEVER a good place to start your sresearch

[walka92]

the main problem ive had with "gods" and religion is that the creator god, whichever religion it is, is supposedly omnipotent, yet still has a rival/evil counter part (god/satan for example), who is constantly supposed to be threatening heaven and such, but if the god was truly omnipotent, he could simply banish satan for eternity. i mean, if he is "all powerful" it should be within his power, right? but nooooooo, he just leaves the devil to go on rampaging and doing whatever he wants.

 

 

 

or, if he was omnipotent, he could theoretically create something better than him, but he is already omnipotent, so he cant make anything better, but someone omnipotent could create anything, right? or am i missing something?

 

 

 

I'm not religious but that's a weak argument.

 

 

 

If there are no bad things, what is good? Good and bad is only relative, you can't have one without the other because then there's nothing to compare it to.

 

 

 

Say you have a puppy, and you love this puppy and want the best things for it. It hate's being cooped up inside, would you let it play in your backyard? Say it got curious and squeezed though the fence and got beaten up by your next door neighbor's cat. It got a scratch but was otherwise fine, but the puppy learned not to go next door.

 

 

 

If you had the power to go back in time and keep the puppy from playing outside and getting the scratch, would you do it? Or would you let it have it's freedom, and learn it's lesson?

 

theres a difference between the bad/evil i intended and getting an injury due to your own stupidity or adventuring, and you also managed to miss my point totally

[warri0r45]

Here is a good place to start with your research: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 

 

 

Talk Origins is NEVER a good place to start your sresearch

 

 

 

I found it was perfectly fine. Ultimately your research should focus on first-hand research that's published in scientific journals, hence why I used TalkOrigins because it links to some papers so you can check it out for yourself. Added, it explains some of the misconceptions about abiogenesis, so naturally it's a good place to start.

[speedofsound]

The existance of a God is a point we could sit here and argue forever, just look at how huge this thread is, ultimatly it's trivial. It doesn't matter if there is a God or isn't because the necessity for one is there. Some people need something to believe in, they need to know there is something larger than themselves looking out for them, or else they may feel alone in this world. There are also people who don't need that, athiests. And that's fine.

 

Everyone is just doing what they need to get through this life, if people need God, let them have it, if they don't, let them not.

 

When people start being delusional because they can't otherwise find stability in society, we don't let them build organizations and give them tax breaks, we get them assistance and mental help. There must be more to religion; otherwise we should be trying to get rid of it and help people out of it.

 

 

 

If youre going to equate people who are religious to people with mental diseases, then you must equate religion to medication that control those diseases.

 

It's the same thing.

[Wisp]

 

Atheism is different, in that it's the belief that there is no god, and it instead relies on something can legitimately be prove; science.

 

 

 

It's just as outlandish to say you can prove god doesn't exist as it is to say you can prove that he does.

 

I am not saying we can disprove god. We can disprove it no more than we can disprove ghosts, vampires, werewolves, demons, etc. But that doesn't mean I should believe in vampires and ghosts.

[meol]

The existance of a God is a point we could sit here and argue forever, just look at how huge this thread is, ultimatly it's trivial. It doesn't matter if there is a God or isn't because the necessity for one is there. Some people need something to believe in, they need to know there is something larger than themselves looking out for them, or else they may feel alone in this world. There are also people who don't need that, athiests. And that's fine.

 

Everyone is just doing what they need to get through this life, if people need God, let them have it, if they don't, let them not.

 

When people start being delusional because they can't otherwise find stability in society, we don't let them build organizations and give them tax breaks, we get them assistance and mental help. There must be more to religion; otherwise we should be trying to get rid of it and help people out of it.

 

 

 

If youre going to equate people who are religious to people with mental diseases, then you must equate religion to medication that control those diseases.

 

It's the same thing.

 

This goes to Zierro too: I'm not saying that religion equates a mental illness. I'm arguing against the argument that says: "even if there's no God, religion is good for the people". I really should avoid metaphors like this one since the relevance quickly gets lost, but I'll try to stick to my word. Medication seeks to control chemical balances and tries to solve the problem. Believing in a -hypothetically non-existing- God does not solve the problem, but is a way of escapism.

 

 

 

Anyway, my point is religion shouldn't be supported as a means of calming down people (or trying to find a life purpose, etc.), especially if there was no God. The question of God's existence is not trivial.

[mmmcannibalism]

The existance of a God is a point we could sit here and argue forever, just look at how huge this thread is, ultimatly it's trivial. It doesn't matter if there is a God or isn't because the necessity for one is there. Some people need something to believe in, they need to know there is something larger than themselves looking out for them, or else they may feel alone in this world. There are also people who don't need that, athiests. And that's fine.

 

Everyone is just doing what they need to get through this life, if people need God, let them have it, if they don't, let them not.

 

When people start being delusional because they can't otherwise find stability in society, we don't let them build organizations and give them tax breaks, we get them assistance and mental help. There must be more to religion; otherwise we should be trying to get rid of it and help people out of it.

 

 

 

If youre going to equate people who are religious to people with mental diseases, then you must equate religion to medication that control those diseases.

 

It's the same thing.

 

This goes to Zierro too: I'm not saying that religion equates a mental illness. I'm arguing against the argument that says: "even if there's no God, religion is good for the people". I really should avoid metaphors like this one since the relevance quickly gets lost, but I'll try to stick to my word. Medication seeks to control chemical balances and tries to solve the problem. Believing in a -hypothetically non-existing- God does not solve the problem, but is a way of escapism.

 

 

 

Anyway, my point is religion shouldn't be supported as a means of calming down people (or trying to find a life purpose, etc.), especially if there was no God. The question of God's existence is not trivial.

 

 

 

If escapism keeps masses of people calm and generally more morally centered then it has value. The problem comes when religion tries to involve itself very specifically with politics and the like.

[sphinxor86]

 

If escapism keeps masses of people calm and generally more morally centered then it has value. The problem comes when religion tries to involve itself very specifically with politics and the like.

 

 

 

That, and when Religions seek to impose their dogma on other people. (This is coming from a gay guy, so I *know* what its like).

[mmmcannibalism]

 

If escapism keeps masses of people calm and generally more morally centered then it has value. The problem comes when religion tries to involve itself very specifically with politics and the like.

 

 

 

That, and when Religions seek to impose their dogma on other people. (This is coming from a gay guy, so I *know* what its like).

 

 

 

Agreed; religion is rather useful when its just doing the standard killing and stealing are bad routine, when it tries to dictate reality we get problems.

[Shinjula]

Here is a good place to start with your research: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 

 

 

Talk Origins is NEVER a good place to start your sresearch

 

 

 

I found it was perfectly fine. Ultimately your research should focus on first-hand research that's published in scientific journals, hence why I used TalkOrigins because it links to some papers so you can check it out for yourself. Added, it explains some of the misconceptions about abiogenesis, so naturally it's a good place to start.

 

Edit, sorry i think i may have been confusing this site with a different one. I spoke before checking it out which was very poor of me, my apologies.

[Alg]

 

 

 

Religion in a nutshell.

 

And politics, and life in general, and...

 

 

 

:D

[22pepsi22]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

 

 

 

 

 

There is such a thing as tough love, you know. You can't learn from mistakes if you are not allowed to make them.

 

 

 

We are all given choices. Choices to do the right thing, choices to do the wrong thing. Sometimes we don't make a choice at all and it seems to either help or hurts us. Our decisions may only seem to affect us in the present, but, they will certainly add up in the end.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

Well was God high when he designed humans to hiccup? And gave them appendices?

 

 

 

Humans are not some supremely evolved creatures, they are actually quite pathetic creatures in the great scheme of things. We have no innate defence/attack or escape abilities, no really hard skin/hide, no posionous fangs, super-strength, wings to fly away from danger, super-vision, super-smell, super hearing, super-speed. Hell, human offspring take around a year to even walk, most Savannah animals take a few minutes!

 

 

 

The only advantage that humans have is prediction often (and originally) from experience. Now I say prediction and not intelligence, because one precedes the other. Humans are masters at spotting patterns, and deducing the next most likely outcome. If there was a particular dry valley that flooded with fresh water 17 days after the equinox one year and then 19 days the next year, most people would place a very good bet that the same would happen *around* 18 days after the next equinox. No other creature has this predictive or forward planning ability. Once we start noticing these patterns, we can learn from them and plan for them. Slowly building intelligence.

 

 

 

Humans do have intelligence. Humans use tools. We lack claws, so we pick up a spear. We cannot burrow, so we dig with a shovel. We cannot break a cocnut with our jaw, so we smash it with a rock. Humans survived because we can adapt by making our own shelter, rather than finding one. Or, bring water to us, rather than seeking it out.

 

 

 

The list goes on. Our intelligence is our bread and butter.

 

 

 

Oh, and the appendix has functions in less than sanitary cultures in quickly replenishing intestinal bacteria after an illness etc. Hiccuping is merely the result of some sort of disorder of the nerves or breathing etc.

[mmmcannibalism]

Hiccuping is merely the result of some sort of disorder of the nerves or breathing etc.

 

 

 

Hiccuping is nature's way of making life entertaining.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

Want to justify why god decided to punish the entire human species because of one bad action?

[22pepsi22]

Hiccuping is merely the result of some sort of disorder of the nerves or breathing etc.

 

 

 

Hiccuping is nature's way of making life entertaining.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

Want to justify why god decided to punish the entire human species because of one bad action?

 

 

 

I don't see God punishing anyone on earth. I see him creating a new perfect place in an attempt to rectify the issue man has created.

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

 

 

 

 

 

There is such a thing as tough love, you know. You can't learn from mistakes if you are not allowed to make them.

 

 

 

We are all given choices. Choices to do the right thing, choices to do the wrong thing. Sometimes we don't make a choice at all and it seems to either help or hurts us. Our decisions may only seem to affect us in the present, but, they will certainly add up in the end.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

 

We have tough love because it's the only way to do things sometimes, this isn't the case with an omniscient and benevolent god. If god was truly omniscient and all good then there would be no suffering at all. He wouldn't have to "use evil to fulfill his wishes, he could just do it.

 

 

 

Also the full quote:

 

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

 

[22pepsi22]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

 

 

 

 

 

There is such a thing as tough love, you know. You can't learn from mistakes if you are not allowed to make them.

 

 

 

We are all given choices. Choices to do the right thing, choices to do the wrong thing. Sometimes we don't make a choice at all and it seems to either help or hurts us. Our decisions may only seem to affect us in the present, but, they will certainly add up in the end.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

 

We have tough love because it's the only way to do things sometimes, this isn't the case with an omniscient and benevolent god. If god was truly omniscient and all good then there would be no suffering at all. He wouldn't have to "use evil to fulfill his wishes, he could just do it.

 

 

 

Also the full quote:

 

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

 

 

 

 

Saying this or this because of omni-anything probably wouldn't work. Given God could just say this IS the right way of doing it. God is omnipotent, so, He could do two things that "supposedly" conflict with each other, but, do not. Why? Because He is omni-potent.

 

 

 

Paradox? Maybe. Does it prevent God from doing anything? No. God can do whatever.

[aspokaspofkjsopfkapo]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

 

 

 

 

 

There is such a thing as tough love, you know. You can't learn from mistakes if you are not allowed to make them.

 

 

 

We are all given choices. Choices to do the right thing, choices to do the wrong thing. Sometimes we don't make a choice at all and it seems to either help or hurts us. Our decisions may only seem to affect us in the present, but, they will certainly add up in the end.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

 

We have tough love because it's the only way to do things sometimes, this isn't the case with an omniscient and benevolent god. If god was truly omniscient and all good then there would be no suffering at all. He wouldn't have to "use evil to fulfill his wishes, he could just do it.

 

 

 

Also the full quote:

 

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

 

 

 

 

Saying this or this because of omni-anything probably wouldn't work. Given God could just say this IS the right way of doing it. God is omnipotent, so, He could do two things that "supposedly" conflict with each other, but, do not. Why? Because He is omni-potent.

 

 

 

Paradox? Maybe. Does it prevent God from doing anything? No. God can do whatever.

 

Not true, god is(according to religious people)omnipotent in a subjective sense, not an objective sense. From our view he is omnipotent and all benevolent, "evil" cannot enter into that equation.

[Alg]

Then perhaps God just isn't omnibenevolent, but benevolent to the degree that life was not made to be constant suffering.

 

An omniscient being does not have to use its power constantly to make life constant bliss, does it? Being all powerful would probably give it the ability to choose, and as a result its creation has been able to advance itself through its own power, not that of its creator.

 

 

 

Or this is some higher being's science fair project, you never know.

[Jaffy1]

If got were real, then what on earth created (s)he/it?

 

 

 

 

 

Oh yeah:

 

 

 

 

I rest my case.

[warri0r45]

There is a famous quote/argument that goes a little something like this....

 

 

 

God is omnipotent and all loving. If so, why does suffering exist?

 

 

 

Either, he is willing to remove it, but cannot, so he is not omnipotent.

 

He can, but will not, so he is not all loving.

 

He neither is willing or has the power to do so, so he is not God.

 

 

 

 

 

There is such a thing as tough love, you know. You can't learn from mistakes if you are not allowed to make them.

 

 

 

We are all given choices. Choices to do the right thing, choices to do the wrong thing. Sometimes we don't make a choice at all and it seems to either help or hurts us. Our decisions may only seem to affect us in the present, but, they will certainly add up in the end.

 

 

 

Life has suffering because of sin. This life is merely the tarnished remnant of a world that was once perfect.

 

 

 

I would argue that an all-loving, all-powerful being would spare the tests and suffering of life (tough love, as you call it) and send everyone straight to heaven. Sure, we wouldn't be able to learn from mistakes or really appreciate what we have in human terms, but God could impart us with knowledge and appreciation as well. But he didn't. Why?

 

 

 

Why test humanity with a piece of fruit? Why make a snake he knew would tempt humans into eating the fruit and why be surprised when the inevitable, already-known result happened? Added, I question the morals of a god who damns the decendants of people who commit a crime. I would expect nothing less than a clean slate for everyone from a moral, loving being.

 

 

 

Of course, a possible answer to some of these questions is that God isn't really all-loving. Maybe he just doesn't care that much? Maybe he was just mad on the day he made the Ebola virus?