Is God real post your thoughts!

[unorclan]

Hundreds of thousands of Christian missionaries are going out to all these countries daily to get the word out.

 

Yeah, we hear that. Can you please tell them to stop? its kinda annoying sometimes :?

 

Just joking :P

 

 

 

On a more serious note, does it actually read in the bible that people who haven't heard the word of god are inconent and go to heaven? Because some time ago me and my father were debating cristianity and god and he has read the bible propably several times (I haven't) and I asked him this question and he didin't know the answer.

 

 

 

Yes, they are free from sin because knew sin not.

[Rebdragon]

Yeah, we hear that. Can you please tell them to stop? its kinda annoying sometimes :?

 

Just joking :P

 

 

 

On a more serious note, does it actually read in the bible that people who haven't heard the word of god are inconent and go to heaven? Because some time ago me and my father were debating cristianity and god and he has read the bible propably several times (I haven't) and I asked him this question and he didin't know the answer.

 

 

 

Yes, they are free from sin because knew sin not.

 

Then how the hell is telling them the word of god saving them?

 

 

 

My Christian teachings state that those who do not hear the word of God are doomed, which is why the word is so ernestly spread by the Church. Who, or rather what denomination, taught you otherwise?

[NorthernHero]

Yeah, we hear that. Can you please tell them to stop? its kinda annoying sometimes :?

 

Just joking :P

 

 

 

On a more serious note, does it actually read in the bible that people who haven't heard the word of god are inconent and go to heaven? Because some time ago me and my father were debating cristianity and god and he has read the bible propably several times (I haven't) and I asked him this question and he didin't know the answer.

 

 

 

Yes, they are free from sin because knew sin not.

 

Then how the hell is telling them the word of god saving them?

 

 

 

My Christian teachings state that those who do not hear the word of God are doomed, which is why the word is so ernestly spread by the Church. Who, or rather what denomination, taught you otherwise?

 

I'm having a little hard time believing it can be found anywhere in the bible too. A actual bible quotation would be nice, altought I understand thats not a little thing to ask if you don't know exactly where it says so.

 

 

 

And rebs making a really good point there.. wouldn't that kind take out the need of preachings gods word to people? Wouldn't that just get them to a lot of trouble? I mean.. first youre happily on your way to heaven :-w and then this missionaire comes along and kinda screws things up for you if you find his preachings not appealing to you.

 

Why would there just be no sin to everyone then? I find it a lot fairer (thats not a word I think.. sorry)

[Beaumonde]

This topic has gone way off topic, this topic was intended by the OP for discussion and debate on whether God is real or not, if the Christians want to argue about who goes to heaven please make another topic and stop spamming this one, some people are actually interested in the discussion on whether he is real or not.

[NorthernHero]

This topic has gone way off topic, this topic was intended by the OP for discussion and debate on whether God is real or not, if the Christians want to argue about who goes to heaven please make another topic and stop spamming this one, some people are actually interested in the discussion on whether he is real or not.

 

Well, majority of people here who believe in god believe in christian god. So it's very hard to have a debate about god without having the christian people posting about their own view of god.

 

When talking about god there is always religion involved somehow, regardless we want it or not. Thats because nobody has no knowledge about god on themselves and thats where religion comes in and feeds them "knowledge" about god. No god without religion.

 

And I think we are not too offtopic at all... we are still under that god discussion.. If you have problem with our posts, don't read them, it's as simple as that.

[Rebdragon]

This topic has gone way off topic, this topic was intended by the OP for discussion and debate on whether God is real or not, if the Christians want to argue about who goes to heaven please make another topic and stop spamming this one, some people are actually interested in the discussion on whether he is real or not.

 

I'm pretty sure this forum has finally realized how futile such a debate as that is. Call it maturity, call it thickness, no one really wants to talk about it anymore.

 

 

 

Obligatory: wannabemod.

 

 

 

Also obligatory: Rule 25.

[Plectrum]

@venomai: I replied to your question on page 37.

[Father_Time89]

My belief in God depends on my mood. Most of the time I'm agnostic.

 

 

 

Anyway the way I figure it is this. Why should believing in God be a requirement to get into heaven? "Oh you've been a good person for most of your life but you didn't think that I existed. Well even though I could've easily proven my existence to you I'm still going to send you to the same place that I send serial killers and thieves for eternity."

 

 

 

Oh great, thanks mister loving God you have a really great concept of justice.

 

 

 

If God was really like that then I would refer to him as 'scum' and I would think he's not deserving of my worship (yeah that may be pride, so sue me).

 

 

 

Plus if I did a good deed not for the reward or for fear of punishment wouldn't that be considered better. (An example being a guy who tells someone at gunpoint to help a lady pick up her stuff while simultaneously offering him $100 to do so vs. someone who does it unprovoked).

 

 

 

Plus there is the whole 'problem with hell'. Which is basically the idea that you only live for a finite amount of time and could only commit a finite amount of sin and therefore you would not deserve infinite punishment.

[warri0r45]

My belief in God depends on my mood. Most of the time I'm agnostic.

 

 

 

Anyway the way I figure it is this. Why should believing in God be a requirement to get into heaven? "Oh you've been a good person for most of your life but you didn't think that I existed. Well even though I could've easily proven my existence to you I'm still going to send you to the same place that I send serial killers and thieves for eternity."

 

 

 

Oh great, thanks mister loving God you have a really great concept of justice.

 

 

 

If God was really like that then I would refer to him as 'scum' and I would think he's not deserving of my worship (yeah that may be pride, so sue me).

 

 

 

Plus if I did a good deed not for the reward or for fear of punishment wouldn't that be considered better. (An example being a guy who tells someone at gunpoint to help a lady pick up her stuff while simultaneously offering him $100 to do so vs. someone who does it unprovoked).

 

 

 

Plus there is the whole 'problem with hell'. Which is basically the idea that you only live for a finite amount of time and could only commit a finite amount of sin and therefore you would not deserve infinite punishment.

 

 

 

I'd tend to agree with this view somewhat.

 

 

 

I personally rather respect, reward or condemn people based on their actions, not their beliefs. I don't give a toss whether you believe x, y, or z. I don't think it's sensible to judge and reward or punish people on that and neglect their actions. (see John 3:18, Ephesians 2:8-9)

 

 

 

I'm also perplexed by the whole infinite punishment for finite sins thing. I don't think that's fair. I mean, imagine being a good person by anyone's measure your whole life, giving to charity, raising a good family, failing to accept Jesus and earning everlasting fire. :? (see John 15:6, Matt 25:41)

[Beaumonde]

My belief in God depends on my mood. Most of the time I'm agnostic.

 

 

 

Anyway the way I figure it is this. Why should believing in God be a requirement to get into heaven? "Oh you've been a good person for most of your life but you didn't think that I existed. Well even though I could've easily proven my existence to you I'm still going to send you to the same place that I send serial killers and thieves for eternity."

 

 

 

Oh great, thanks mister loving God you have a really great concept of justice.

 

 

 

If God was really like that then I would refer to him as 'scum' and I would think he's not deserving of my worship (yeah that may be pride, so sue me).

 

 

 

Plus if I did a good deed not for the reward or for fear of punishment wouldn't that be considered better. (An example being a guy who tells someone at gunpoint to help a lady pick up her stuff while simultaneously offering him $100 to do so vs. someone who does it unprovoked).

 

 

 

Plus there is the whole 'problem with hell'. Which is basically the idea that you only live for a finite amount of time and could only commit a finite amount of sin and therefore you would not deserve infinite punishment.

 

 

 

Thank god :wink: we're back on topic, to Rebdragon, no debate is futile until everyone has the same opinion and their is no rule 25 smart [wagon].

 

 

 

Anyways, I pretty much agree. If god is so high in himself he will punish you for having even the slightest reasonable doubt he exists, then maybe he's not so great and I don't want to spend eternity with him anyways. Thomas Jefferson once said "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

[Rebdragon]

Thank god :wink: we're back on topic, to Rebdragon, no debate is futile until everyone has the same opinion

 

Or it could be futile if neither side has any proof for it's opinion, nor any proof against the other's opinion.

 

 

 

A negative can never be proven, and thusfar physical evidence for a supernatural being is nonexistent. It's futile. It's a matter of faith, either you got it or you don't.

 

 

 

and their is no rule 25 smart [wagon].

 

 

 

No rule 25 :lol: .

 

 

 

No.

[warri0r45]

Thank god :wink: we're back on topic, to Rebdragon, no debate is futile until everyone has the same opinion

 

Or it could be futile if neither side has any proof for it's opinion, nor any proof against the other's opinion.

 

 

 

A negative can never be proven, and thusfar physical evidence for a supernatural being is nonexistent. It's futile. It's a matter of faith, either you got it or you don't.

 

 

 

Pretty much sums up the whole nature of the debate. :wink:

[Futurama]

Hahah, my honest and simple viewpoint;

 

 

 

The typical view of God, no. I don't believe in divine power and anything really religious, although the existence of god and religion are two very different things, remember. I don't believe a "god" exists and is answering prayers, watching people marry and welcoming stevie wonder into heaven.

 

However; A grand creator, yes. Someone must've created this crap, even by accident.

[Plectrum]

[hide]

My belief in God depends on my mood. Most of the time I'm agnostic.

 

 

 

Anyway the way I figure it is this. Why should believing in God be a requirement to get into heaven? "Oh you've been a good person for most of your life but you didn't think that I existed. Well even though I could've easily proven my existence to you I'm still going to send you to the same place that I send serial killers and thieves for eternity."

 

 

 

Oh great, thanks mister loving God you have a really great concept of justice.

 

 

 

If God was really like that then I would refer to him as 'scum' and I would think he's not deserving of my worship (yeah that may be pride, so sue me).

 

 

 

Plus if I did a good deed not for the reward or for fear of punishment wouldn't that be considered better. (An example being a guy who tells someone at gunpoint to help a lady pick up her stuff while simultaneously offering him $100 to do so vs. someone who does it unprovoked).

 

 

 

Plus there is the whole 'problem with hell'. Which is basically the idea that you only live for a finite amount of time and could only commit a finite amount of sin and therefore you would not deserve infinite punishment.

 

[/hide]

 

I'd tend to agree with this view somewhat.

 

 

 

I personally rather respect, reward or condemn people based on their actions, not their beliefs. I don't give a toss whether you believe x, y, or z. I don't think it's sensible to judge and reward or punish people on that and neglect their actions. (see John 3:18, Ephesians 2:8-9)

 

 

 

I'm also perplexed by the whole infinite punishment for finite sins thing. I don't think that's fair. I mean, imagine being a good person by anyone's measure your whole life, giving to charity, raising a good family, failing to accept Jesus and earning everlasting fire. :? (see John 15:6, Matt 25:41)

You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right?

 

 

 

Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God.

 

 

 

Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

[Ambassadar]

Pretty much sums up the whole nature of the debate. Wink

 

 

 

Yep...

 

 

 

You cannot scientifically directly prove or disprove anything because none of it can reproduced right now. All you can do is look at indirect things and use them to try to see the bigger picture.

 

 

 

Like Rebdragon said, basically it all comes down to which position you place your faith in.

[Plectrum]

Thank god :wink: we're back on topic, to Rebdragon, no debate is futile until everyone has the same opinion

 

Or it could be futile if neither side has any proof for it's opinion, nor any proof against the other's opinion.

 

 

 

A negative can never be proven, and thusfar physical evidence for a supernatural being is nonexistent. It's futile. It's a matter of faith, either you got it or you don't.

 

 

 

Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true.

 

 

 

And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

[Rebdragon]

Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true.

 

 

 

And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

 

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any.

 

 

 

Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile.

 

You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right?

 

 

 

Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God.

 

 

 

Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

 

WTFMATE?

 

 

 

When did warrior ever say he had all the answers? And what does that have to do with this topic at all?

[Plectrum]

[hide]

Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true.

 

 

 

And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

 

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any.

 

 

 

Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile.

 

You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right?

 

 

 

Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God.

 

 

 

Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

[/hide]

 

WTFMATE?

 

 

 

When did warrior ever say he had all the answers? And what does that have to do with this topic at all?

Sorry, I withdraw what I said.

 

 

 

What I meant was that Warrior was making logical conclusions about his experiences. The problem is that if there were a God it doesn't matter how we think God should act because God would be acting how God would be acting.

[Plectrum]

Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true.

 

 

 

And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

 

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any.

 

 

 

Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile. I'll start with your last paragraph, regarding faith.

 

 

 

First of all, faith is not illogical at all. All faith is based off of logic. This chair is holding me up because I have faith in the craftsmanship. I have faith in the craftsmanship because from what I can determine the chair is sturdy. It has four thick legs, making it balanced; it has a thick seat, making it strong; it has no rotting wood, making it solid.

 

 

 

Regarding your thoughts on needed proof.

 

 

 

If I'm ignorant that lightning is electrical but I see proof that it is electrical when I see it hit a generator and causes power to come out of the generator and light up the light bulbs of a house but remain ignorant that lightning is electrical, does that change the fact that I just saw evidence of lightning being electrical? No. Regardless of ignorance evidence remains evidence. Proof on the other hand, is only evidence that you accept.

 

 

 

Therefore, if there was a supernatural being and it did create all matter and non-matter, being ignorant of the fact that physical matter would be evidence of its existence does not prove anything. Furthermore, being ignorant of evidence does not mean it is erroneous. It simply means you are ignorant. Pretend you are in a time before the science of static electrify was discovered and understood. You can experience static electricity when you touch someone, you get zapped. The zap is evidence of static electricity but that doesn't prove static electricity. You are only ignorant of static electricity.

[warri0r45]

[hide]

Unless there is a supernatural being that created all matter and non-matter. If this was true then all physical matter is physical evidence that it was created, therefore physical evidence of a creator or supernatural being. The evidence could be under our noses but we don't have the capacity to fully comprehend it if it were true.

 

 

 

And no its not only faith. Christian thought comes from revelation not faith. Faith comes from belief. Belief comes from revelation.

 

Which brings us the the point of no proper evidence existing as to the existence of a supernatural being. If there was logical, definite proof of a specific god, then there would be room for debate. There just... isn't any.

 

 

 

Faith is illogical. Intelligient debate is based on logic. Broken record, it's futile.

 

You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right?

 

 

 

Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God.

 

 

 

Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

[/hide]

 

WTFMATE?

 

 

 

When did warrior ever say he had all the answers? And what does that have to do with this topic at all?

Sorry, I withdraw what I said.

 

 

 

What I meant was that Warrior was making logical conclusions about his experiences. The problem is that if there were a God it doesn't matter how we think God should act because God would be acting how God would be acting.

 

True.

 

 

 

Sorry for not making myself clear. My response was directed at someone's post and was purposed to say some of the things I disagree with about the Christian faith. Those disagreements are inconsequential to the question of whether there is a god or not. Who knows, god could be a real bastard (sorry, can't phrase that in an unoffensive way :lol: ), but that dosen't mean he dosen't exist.

 

 

 

As for this:

 

 

 

You realize that God doesn't exist to you because of your logic, right?

 

 

 

Think about it. If you have all of the answer there wouldn't be a God. Therefore, you have all the answers and there is no God.

 

 

 

Even you have to admit that you don't have all the answers. You don't have to admit that God is real, but to be part of an intellectual conversation you have to admit that you don't have all of the answers.

 

 

 

Yeah, I know I don't have all the answers, hence why I don't believe god dosen't exist. I just don't have any reason to believe he does. I am faithless. I'm your doubting Thomas, "ye of little faith".

[Rebdragon]

First of faith is not illogical at all. All faith is based off of logic. This chair is holding me up because I have faith in the craftsmanship. I have faith in the craftsmanship because from what I can determine the chair is sturdy. It has four thick legs, making it balanced; it has a thick seat, making it strong; it has no rotting wood, making it solid.

 

Yes, but that analogy has absolutely nothing to do with faith. Faith is belief in spite of a lack of evidence, or a hole in the evidence- what you explained was a proper understanding the structure of a chair, past experience of sitting in similiar such chairs, and logical conclusion making based on knowledge of what constitutes a stable and unstable chair. That... really has nothing to do with faith whatsoever. It's actually kind of the exact opposite of faith- instead of just "believing" the chair would hold you up, you analyze every aspect of it before deciding it's good enough to sit on. You're actually making an argument against the logic of faith with that, not for it :lol: .

 

 

 

I've been going to a Christian school for the past seven years of my life. Two different ones in fact, the first being Protestant, the second Catholic. Both acknowledged and taught the fact that faith is, and will always be, illogical.

 

 

 

If I'm ignorant that lightning is electrical but I see proof that it is electrical when I see it hit a generator and causes power to come out of the generator and light up the light bulbs of house but remain ignorant that lightning is electrical, does that change the fact that I just saw evidence of lightning being electrical? No, regardless of ignorance evidence remains evidence. Proof on the other hand, is only evidence that you accept.

 

 

 

Therefore, if there was a supernatural being and it did create all matter and non-matter, being ignorant of the fact that physical matter would be evidence of its existence does not prove anything. Furthermore, being ignorant of evidence does not mean it is erroneous. It simply means you are ignorant. Pretend you are in a time before the science of static electrify was discovered and understood. You can experience static electricity when you touch someone, you get zapped. The zap is evidence of static electricity but that doesn't prove static electricity. You are only ignorant of static electricity.

 

Okay, you're arguing semantics again. Whether or not physical matter will later to be used to prove a specific god is beside the point- nowadays, no solid proof has been offered for the existence of god, and thus we have no way of arguing the merit of believing in it.

[Guest]

He's not real.. Does someone really belive that some spirit in the sky created the world? It has been proved that the earth was created in some explosion.

 

He's not real.

 

First of all, the earth wasn't created from "an explosion", but from the particles of a nebula clumping together in a non-gravitational field, eventually to the point where the object that was to become the earth had it's own substantial gravitational field, and thus attracted particles at very fast rate while it orbited around the center of the nebula. Eventually, that large spherical mass crashed into another forming planet of similiar size, resulting in the creation of the moon and a new, larger planet, the Earth.

 

 

 

Geez you got more faith that me (being a Christian) if your going to believe that! Thats a theory-and-a-half! Especially since you can't even state how that matter got their in the first place. At least I say that a higher more powerful being was able to put it there.

 

 

 

I actually respect in a way athiests ability to have so much faith in their fellow-man figuring it out for them. Especially with all the millions of theories floating around out there.

[unorclan]

Yeah, we hear that. Can you please tell them to stop? its kinda annoying sometimes :?

 

Just joking :P

 

 

 

On a more serious note, does it actually read in the bible that people who haven't heard the word of god are inconent and go to heaven? Because some time ago me and my father were debating cristianity and god and he has read the bible propably several times (I haven't) and I asked him this question and he didin't know the answer.

 

 

 

Yes, they are free from sin because knew sin not.

 

Then how the hell is telling them the word of god saving them?

 

 

 

My Christian teachings state that those who do not hear the word of God are doomed, which is why the word is so ernestly spread by the Church. Who, or rather what denomination, taught you otherwise?

 

I'm having a little hard time believing it can be found anywhere in the bible too. A actual bible quotation would be nice, altought I understand thats not a little thing to ask if you don't know exactly where it says so.

 

 

 

And rebs making a really good point there.. wouldn't that kind take out the need of preachings gods word to people? Wouldn't that just get them to a lot of trouble? I mean.. first youre happily on your way to heaven :-w and then this missionaire comes along and kinda screws things up for you if you find his preachings not appealing to you.

 

Why would there just be no sin to everyone then? I find it a lot fairer (thats not a word I think.. sorry)

 

 

 

Good point, maybe I wrong, it's just what I always thought.

 

It does say in the Bible that children are going to Heaven - obviously because their not mature enough to completely understand.

 

I'll have to look into that....but now we got complainers so back on topic.

 

 

 

God is real :thumbsup:

 

 

 

Funny little story I got in an email years back (dont critisize it with your logic and all that crap, it's just a little clever story)

 

 

 

One day in a little school in Florida the teacher told all the children is was time to open up their science books.

 

After they flipped through the pages to the correct chapter the teacher stood up. The teacher said to a little boy, "Johnny, could you please go to the window." So Johnny did. Teacher said, "Johnny what do you see outside?" Johnny said "The playground, a field, a rode, a tree..." The teacher then said "Okay good, now go outside Johnny and look up at the sky and tell me what you see." So the little boy did. Young Johnny walked out and looked up at the clear blue sky and then came back in." The teacher then said "Johnny what did you see?" He answered "The sun....and...that's all." "That's all?" the teacher asked. "Yep" he replied. The teacher turned to the class, "Did you hear that kids? Johnny saw nothing but the sky." The class nodded, "So Johnny didn't see any grand old man up in the sky, so Johnny saw no God, just the sun" The class nodded, but then a little girl perked up. "May I asked Johhny a question teacher?" she asked. "Sure" the teacher said. The little girl looked at Johnny and said "look at the teacher for a second." So Johnny did. The girl said "Do you see the teachers brain?" Johnny nodded his head no. "So, class, from what we learned here today clearly the teacher must not have one."

[Plectrum]

[hide]

First of faith is not illogical at all. All faith is based off of logic. This chair is holding me up because I have faith in the craftsmanship. I have faith in the craftsmanship because from what I can determine the chair is sturdy. It has four thick legs, making it balanced; it has a thick seat, making it strong; it has no rotting wood, making it solid.

[/hide]

 

Yes, but that analogy has absolutely nothing to do with faith. Faith is belief in spite of a lack of evidence, or a hole in the evidence- what you explained was a proper understanding the structure of a chair, past experience of sitting in similiar such chairs, and logical conclusion making based on knowledge of what constitutes a stable and unstable chair. That... really has nothing to do with faith whatsoever. It's actually kind of the exact opposite of faith- instead of just "believing" the chair would hold you up, you analyze every aspect of it before deciding it's good enough to sit on. You're actually making an argument against the logic of faith with that, not for it :lol: .

Faith is belief in revelation. I had a revelation when I saw someone sit in a chair, before that I was doubtful (disregarding the curiosity I had when I was a child. If it makes it easier pretend you are caveman that saw someone sit in a chair for the first time). Revelation is not a lack of evidence, revelation is an acceptance of evidence as proof from an external or internal source (depending on your view point).

 

 

 

My faith in the craftsmanship of my chair does not have a hole in the evidence. All of the evidence is there, regardless if I think it will hold me up or not. Just because I think it will hold me up is not proof that it will hold me up.

 

 

 

Talk about judging a book by it's cover :boohoo: ..

 

 

I've been going to a Christian school for the past seven years of my life. Two different ones in fact, the first being Protestant, the second Catholic. Both acknowledged and taught the fact that faith is, and will always be, illogical.

Explain this please. I don't understand how my simple explanation of faith being logical is refuted by this. Just because it's taught at an institution does not prove to anyone its validity. Maybe you could share with me the argument your teachers used to convince you that faith is illogical?

 

 

 

 

 

[hide]

If I'm ignorant that lightning is electrical but I see proof that it is electrical when I see it hit a generator and causes power to come out of the generator and light up the light bulbs of house but remain ignorant that lightning is electrical, does that change the fact that I just saw evidence of lightning being electrical? No, regardless of ignorance evidence remains evidence. Proof on the other hand, is only evidence that you accept.

 

 

 

Therefore, if there was a supernatural being and it did create all matter and non-matter, being ignorant of the fact that physical matter would be evidence of its existence does not prove anything. Furthermore, being ignorant of evidence does not mean it is erroneous. It simply means you are ignorant. Pretend you are in a time before the science of static electrify was discovered and understood. You can experience static electricity when you touch someone, you get zapped. The zap is evidence of static electricity but that doesn't prove static electricity. You are only ignorant of static electricity.

[/hide]

 

Okay, you're arguing semantics again. Whether or not physical matter will later to be used to prove a specific god is beside the point- nowadays, no solid proof has been offered for the existence of god, and thus we have no way of arguing the merit of believing in it.

Excuse me? When did I argue the implied meaning of my argument? By this logic, every post in this topic thus far is arguing semantics, which may very well be the case but completely irrelevant (yet very important to realize if that were the case).

 

 

 

We are arguing the merit of faith at this very moment. This refutes your entire last paragraph.

[Rebdragon]

Geez you got more faith that me (being a Christian) if your going to believe that! Thats a theory-and-a-half! Especially since you can't even state how that matter got their in the first place. At least I say that a higher more powerful being was able to put it there.

 

Then I guess the Nat Geo "How the Earth [and Solar System] was Formed" documentary lied to me, if you have reason to believe it's wrong >_>.

 

 

 

...

 

Ugh. I don't have the time nor care level to argue with you about this. I've got a couple hours of Physics and Calc to get done now, and to be honest, I don't have the energy anymore to spend five hours of my day arguing the definition of a word with someone who lives to stir the pot.

 

 

 

Go dance and have a party or something 'cause you got the last word in, or do whatever it is you do after an internet victory. Have fun with it.