Jump to content

Is God real post your thoughts!


Joes_So_Cool

Recommended Posts

You're very bad at making a point.

 

 

 

You believe in interpretation of the Bible yet still maintain that the Bible is a "rigid moral code", even though interpretation is simply our subconscious choosing of scripture which we already agree with.

 

 

 

/thread

 

/religion

 

/the bible

 

 

 

damn.

My private chat is always ON.

Winner of The Tip.It Teamcape Outfit Contest!

6 years. 1 dragon CS drop and some barrows, bad luck?

99melee.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Beh, God was always used as an excuse. Do this in the name of God, do that in the name of God. Change your way of life in the name of God, kill people in the name of God.

 

 

 

I do wish there was an 11th commandment: keep thy religion to thy selves.

RSN:Mico1311 Combat: 82 Highest skill: Fishing 75 Playing time: From around August 2003

 

The guy in my avatar is Veso, a comedian mastermind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beh, God was always used as an excuse. Do this in the name of God, do that in the name of God. Change your way of life in the name of God, kill people in the name of God.

 

 

 

I do wish there was an 11th commandment: keep thy religion to thy selves.

 

 

 

Carlin would be proud :D

Hey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beh, God was always used as an excuse. Do this in the name of God, do that in the name of God. Change your way of life in the name of God, kill people in the name of God.

 

 

 

I do wish there was an 11th commandment: keep thy religion to thy selves.

 

 

 

Carlin would be proud :D

 

 

 

May he rest in peace :(

RSN:Mico1311 Combat: 82 Highest skill: Fishing 75 Playing time: From around August 2003

 

The guy in my avatar is Veso, a comedian mastermind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why I keep clicking on this thread. Maybe it's for the lulz. I dunno'. Anyway...

 

 

 

1) That the Bible is the word of God because the Bible says that it is the word of God

 

Other than some really vague predictions that Christians say have come true, this is pretty much the only reason for the justification of believing the Bible to be the word of God. If you ask a Christian why it is the word of God, they will usually say "it is extremely wise" or "it has given me comfort" or "because it is." These aren't arguments, because they prove nothing..

 

 

 

Amazingly, you display the same (Lack of knowledge) as the people who use the aforementioned argument as to why the Bible is the Word of God. No, the Bible isn't the Word of God because it says it is. It's the Word of God because it's coherent, infallible and forms a cohesive view of the natural world, therefore proving it's Divine Inspiration and therefore proving that God exists (As no book written by man has possesses all of the three aforementioned traits.

 

 

 

2) That any deed can be forgiven if you simply pray.

 

To be forgiven, all you have to do is to forgive other peoples' sins. It says so in Matthew, and I can find the quote if you really want.

 

 

 

No, any deed can't be forgiven if you pray. Please, show me the passage stating otherwise.

 

 

 

3) That every other religion that has ever existed is WRONG.

 

Christians, when asked, will say that their religion is correct. To say that their religion is correct, that must mean the other religions are wrong. They can't both be right, unless there are multiple Gods, which in turn, would make all the religions wrong because they aren't polytheist. You don't hear Christians say that their religion is the "most plausible" or "most likely," - they say that it is correct (generally).

 

 

 

Ummm... Yeah. That is generally what happens when arguing ultimate truths. How, exactly, doe this make Christianity wrong.

 

 

 

4) That you are the only true possessors of absolute truth.

 

The only way you can get into heaven is to accept the Christian God - according to the Bible. As Christians, you are the only ones who accept the Christian God, and therefore you are the only ones who possess this "absolute truth".

 

 

 

Ummm... Yeah. See my response above.

 

 

 

5) That no matter what evidence is presented, your God has and always will be the "right God"

 

Are you really going to try and argue that this isn't the case? This is the whole point of faith. You cannot believe in an eternal God and then refute the idea that he has always been the "right God." If you believe him to be the one true God, and also eternal, then you believe that he has, and always will be, the right God.[/

 

 

 

...Obviously there was a point here, but I missed it. Care to explain to me what you were getting at?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the question of the tread. No i don't believe God is real. I don't think theres enough proof to say God exist.

 

 

 

lol there is no proof that god exists except for a book written thousands of years ago by crazy nomads wandering aimlessly through a desert talking to bushes.

 

 

 

Incorrect. What you mean to say is "There's no proof as to which you'll accept as proof of God's existence". To state that there is no proof means one of two things: Your standard of "proof" is far too stringent or you're just being dishonest.

 

 

 

...And, as a total side note (And a question) what would you accept as definitive proof of God's existence. And, assuming you couldn't view said proof, how many people would have to simultaneously witness this proof being evidenced before you accept that God exists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the question of the tread. No i don't believe God is real. I don't think theres enough proof to say God exist.

 

 

 

lol there is no proof that god exists except for a book written thousands of years ago by crazy nomads wandering aimlessly through a desert talking to bushes.

 

 

 

Incorrect. What you mean to say is "There's no proof as to which you'll accept as proof of God's existence". To state that there is no proof means one of two things: Your standard of "proof" is far too stringent or you're just being dishonest.

 

 

 

...And, as a total side note (And a question) what would you accept as definitive proof of God's existence. And, assuming you couldn't view said proof, how many people would have to simultaneously witness this proof being evidenced before you accept that God exists?

 

 

 

haha i love how people try to hang me on my grammar. always make me chuggle inside :lol: no i mean what i said, and by that i mean what i mean in my sentece :P

My private chat is always ON.

Winner of The Tip.It Teamcape Outfit Contest!

6 years. 1 dragon CS drop and some barrows, bad luck?

99melee.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha i love how people try to hang me on my grammar. always make me chuggle inside :lol: no i mean what i said, and by that i mean what i mean in my sentece :P

 

 

 

And what I wrote in my two sentences still stands. And by that I mean in the setences you quoted.

 

 

 

AAANNNDDD... You totally didn't answer the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha i love how people try to hang me on my grammar. always make me chuggle inside :lol: no i mean what i said, and by that i mean what i mean in my sentece :P

 

 

 

And what I wrote in my two sentences still stands. And by that I mean in the setences you quoted.

 

 

 

AAANNNDDD... You totally didn't answer the question.

 

 

 

nope if you werent so in to "perfect" senteced i maybe would completly. but i think my first one is good enough.

 

 

 

@ jack. i dont know what giccle means. so if it's an insult to me i could't care less :lol: :lol: (i tryed google it nothing come up)

My private chat is always ON.

Winner of The Tip.It Teamcape Outfit Contest!

6 years. 1 dragon CS drop and some barrows, bad luck?

99melee.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha i love how people try to hang me on my grammar. always make me chuggle inside :lol: no i mean what i said, and by that i mean what i mean in my sentece :P

 

 

 

And what I wrote in my two sentences still stands. And by that I mean in the setences you quoted.

 

 

 

AAANNNDDD... You totally didn't answer the question.

 

 

 

The beauty of the scientific mind is that it will change as evidence is discovered. As for what standard of proof is required, empirical would be nice.

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha i love how people try to hang me on my grammar. always make me chuggle inside :lol: no i mean what i said, and by that i mean what i mean in my sentece :P

 

 

 

And what I wrote in my two sentences still stands. And by that I mean in the setences you quoted.

 

 

 

AAANNNDDD... You totally didn't answer the question.

 

 

 

The beauty of the scientific mind is that it will change as evidence is discovered. As for what standard of proof is required, empirical would be nice.

 

 

 

Even though you only answered half the question... Explain to me how one derives empirical evidence from the Divine? Anything which can be qualified based on naturalistic principles ceases to be Divine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though you only answered half the question... Explain to me how one derives empirical evidence from the Divine? Anything which can be qualified based on naturalistic principles ceases to be Divine.

 

 

 

This was more or less my point. The supposed Divine will always be a mystery, and choosing to ignore it requires many less assumptions than claiming to be on personal terms with it. What standard of proof did you use when deciding to become a Christian?

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though you only answered half the question... Explain to me how one derives empirical evidence from the Divine? Anything which can be qualified based on naturalistic principles ceases to be Divine.

 

 

 

This was more or less my point. The supposed Divine will always be a mystery, and choosing to ignore it requires many less assumptions than claiming to be on personal terms with it. What standard of proof did you use when deciding to become a Christian?

 

 

 

Actually, it doesn't. Choosing to ignore it requires one to put a certain amount of, for lack of a better word, faith in human reasoning. And, last I checked, the only way one can justify human reasoning is by appealing to human reasoning. Choosing to accept the Divine simple means that one is able to admit the shortcomings of human reasoning (That is, that what's known will forever be known; what's knowable will forever be knowable; and what's unknowable will forever be unknowable). And there is no "standard of proof" by which I'm a Christian. Asking as much implies there's scientific reasoning behind my being a Christian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though you only answered half the question... Explain to me how one derives empirical evidence from the Divine? Anything which can be qualified based on naturalistic principles ceases to be Divine.

 

 

 

This was more or less my point. The supposed Divine will always be a mystery, and choosing to ignore it requires many less assumptions than claiming to be on personal terms with it. What standard of proof did you use when deciding to become a Christian?

 

 

 

Actually, it doesn't. Choosing to ignore it requires one to put a certain amount of, for lack of a better word, faith in human reasoning. And, last I checked, the only way one can justify human reasoning is by appealing to human reasoning. Choosing to accept the Divine simple means that one is able to admit the shortcomings of human reasoning (That is, that what's known will forever be known; what's knowable will forever be knowable; and what's unknowable will forever be unknowable). And there is no "standard of proof" by which I'm a Christian. Asking as much implies there's scientific reasoning behind my being a Christian.

 

 

 

What, if any, reasoning did you use then?

 

 

 

I have belief in human reasoning because of the beautiful things that have come from it. Obviously it has some limitations, but to try to exist outside of it is fumbling in the darkness.

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faith is plenty reasoning for me.

 

 

 

Have fun misconstruing this in your own, arrogant ways, TrueNoob.

 

 

 

My question is how does one arrive at a position where just faith is enough?

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazingly, you display the same (Lack of knowledge) as the people who use the aforementioned argument as to why the Bible is the Word of God. No, the Bible isn't the Word of God because it says it is. It's the Word of God because it's coherent, infallible and forms a cohesive view of the natural world, therefore proving it's Divine Inspiration and therefore proving that God exists (As no book written by man has possesses all of the three aforementioned traits.

 

 

 

How does a "cohesive view of the natural world"[*] prove that it is of Divine inspiration? It is as much proof of the existence of a God as it is proof of the existence of intellectually superior aliens.

 

 

 

And do you believe the entire Bible? You must, if you consider it the word of God, right?

 

 

 

If to you, ANY of the Bible, yes ANY of it, is open for interpretation, you must realise that your interpretation is simply you choosing to believe what you want - which would totally undermine the idea of the Bible being "the word of God."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[*]Coherent. Infallible. Coherent world view. It cannot be considered coherent when virtually all of it is open for intepretation. If it is open for interpretation, than it cannot possibly be infallible. As said earlier, it cannot have a coherent world view if it is open for interpretation. What about all the contradictions?

Hey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faith is plenty reasoning for me.

 

 

 

Have fun misconstruing this in your own, arrogant ways, TrueNoob.

 

 

 

My question is how does one arrive at a position where just faith is enough?

 

Well, I have a story. You may call it silly or a sheer coincidence, but it's enough for me.

 

 

 

I never used to be a very faithful Christian. Of course, even now I'm not particularly orthodox, but that's not the point.

 

 

 

Once, there was a tornado heading for my home. It wasn't a particularly large one, but we lived in an aluminum-sided and roofed trailer home. We were about to run to my grandparents' more sturdy home, but my mother took one step out of the door, and she got caught up in it. My father and brother grabbed her, and my older sister held me back. I prayed with all my heart, asking God to spare me and my family. I can't remember anything else from that until the next morning, when we woke up laying on the floor of our living room. My family was fine, our home was fine, all that happened was our trampoline getting lobbed over our roof into our neighbors' driveway. Pieces of the material were snagged on our roof, it passed that close.

 

 

 

I'm now somewhat of a born-again Christian, I pray every night, go to church occasionally, and think of that moment every now and again. Call it what you will, it showed me God cares.

catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a pretty cool story, but I'll never be able to see the correlation between those your survival and God's love or existence. If your house had been blown away and some family members killed, would you have felt like god hated you? I don't mean any disrespect by that, it's just a difficult sentence to sugarcoat.

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, some people will believe what they will.

 

 

 

I can't say what I would have felt, it didn't happen. I'm definitely not one to think about the "What ifs?", as much as a can at least.

 

 

 

You seem to want reason and logic to lead you in the world, Lateralus. I see nothing wrong with that, and that's how I live a sizable portion of my life. It just doesn't dictate my entire being, I guess. I believe if one's constrained by logic and reason, they can't achieve everything they want.

 

 

 

Like being the first man to wrestle a giant bear. On one of Saturn's rings.

catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to want reason and logic to lead you in the world, Lateralus. I see nothing wrong with that, and that's how I live a sizable portion of my life. It just doesn't dictate my entire being, I guess. I believe if one's constrained by logic and reason, they can't achieve everything they want.

 

 

 

I consider them to be very important things, and I employ them often on these forums (because I'm usually arguing with people, I suppose :P ), but I don't let them dictate my entire life. I don't think you meant any offence by it, I'm just clarifying. My sense of wonder at the world is something I'm proud of and always try to nurture, it just never comes across on here.

 

 

 

In all honesty, I don't think there's any argument between us. I have absolutely no problem with theists like you (perhaps other than the glaring one), and you seem to be a model poster.

La lune ne garde aucune rancune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazingly, you display the same (Lack of knowledge) as the people who use the aforementioned argument as to why the Bible is the Word of God. No, the Bible isn't the Word of God because it says it is. It's the Word of God because it's coherent, infallible and forms a cohesive view of the natural world, therefore proving it's Divine Inspiration and therefore proving that God exists (As no book written by man has possesses all of the three aforementioned traits.

 

 

 

How does a "cohesive view of the natural world"[*] prove that it is of Divine inspiration? It is as much proof of the existence of a God as it is proof of the existence of intellectually superior aliens.

 

 

 

And do you believe the entire Bible? You must, if you consider it the word of God, right?

 

 

 

If to you, ANY of the Bible, yes ANY of it, is open for interpretation, you must realise that your interpretation is simply you choosing to believe what you want - which would totally undermine the idea of the Bible being "the word of God."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[*]Coherent. Infallible. Coherent world view. It cannot be considered coherent when virtually all of it is open for intepretation. If it is open for interpretation, than it cannot possibly be infallible. As said earlier, it cannot have a coherent world view if it is open for interpretation. What about all the contradictions?

 

 

 

 

 

It's not that any of it is open to interpretation, it's that it's not literal. The only people who take the bible literally are anti-religious people. I've met people who say the bible is literal but no one is an actual literalist. Taken literally, the Bible says the earth is flat and setting on pillars and cannot move. It says that great sea monsters are set to guard the edge of the sea. Does that mean that there really are sea monsters? No, the author was trying to convey another point.

My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet.

 

These are the times that try mens souls...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Faith is plenty reasoning for me.

 

 

 

Have fun misconstruing this in your own, arrogant ways, TrueNoob.

 

 

 

My question is how does one arrive at a position where just faith is enough?

 

 

 

My guess on answering that question for you...

 

Endoctrinated from birth.

 

 

 

And as for the tornado story, did you perhaps misjudge the size/power of the tornado. It is almost impossible to predict its size and power when it is up close; partly because of adrenaline/fear, partly because you can not see its edges (you can just feel the hurling wind). I'm just saying, maybe it wasn't that dangerous a tornado.

 

 

 

Now what really makes me have a problem with these personal stories is that each person will accredit their luck in a certain situation to their chosen deity. Can't they just appreciate luck/reallity for what it is?

 

A Muslim would have thanked Allah.

 

A Greek may have thanked Zeus.

 

It works for any religion. It is not proof that the Christian God or any God exists. It is as much proof that aliens intervened or that Leprechauns held you down and then memory wiped you as it is of any Christian God. It just happens that you were endoctrinated as a Christian, so you make unfounded Christian assumptions.

 

 

 

And the bible by no means gives a cohesive view of the natural world. If you want that- there are some very good natural biology and animal behaviour books, brought to you by science.

 

What 'cohesive view of the natural world' does it give? Give examples instead of summaries.

 

 

 

Anyway what has really frustrated me is the story is the idea that everything should be accredited to God ( it always annoys me when it crops up).

 

Thank God for food...NO- thank the farmers and the transport company and the preparation company and the supermarket/tradesman and the chef and the person in your family who worked to earnt money to buy the food. They are the ones who need the credit.

 

If something good happens , Christians assume that it is God, so thank him.

 

If something bad happens, Christians assume that God is punishing them.

 

This is no proof of God because it is really just an assumption based on childhood endoctrination.

 

 

 

And it really annoys me because they thank God for perfectly explainable events (such as the 'food on our plates' example) so the real credit isn't given to the right people.

 

 

 

To Christian posters; give examples of what you have thanked god for recently. It should be interesting.

img.cfm?img=41871

Yeah...Some people just go out of their way to ruin other peoples fun.
Sounds like Jagex to me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazingly, you display the same (Lack of knowledge) as the people who use the aforementioned argument as to why the Bible is the Word of God. No, the Bible isn't the Word of God because it says it is. It's the Word of God because it's coherent, infallible and forms a cohesive view of the natural world, therefore proving it's Divine Inspiration and therefore proving that God exists (As no book written by man has possesses all of the three aforementioned traits.

 

 

 

How does a "cohesive view of the natural world"[*] prove that it is of Divine inspiration? It is as much proof of the existence of a God as it is proof of the existence of intellectually superior aliens.

 

 

 

And do you believe the entire Bible? You must, if you consider it the word of God, right?

 

 

 

If to you, ANY of the Bible, yes ANY of it, is open for interpretation, you must realise that your interpretation is simply you choosing to believe what you want - which would totally undermine the idea of the Bible being "the word of God."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[*]Coherent. Infallible. Coherent world view. It cannot be considered coherent when virtually all of it is open for intepretation. If it is open for interpretation, than it cannot possibly be infallible. As said earlier, it cannot have a coherent world view if it is open for interpretation. What about all the contradictions?

 

 

 

 

 

It's not that any of it is open to interpretation, it's that it's not literal. The only people who take the bible literally are anti-religious people. I've met people who say the bible is literal but no one is an actual literalist. Taken literally, the Bible says the earth is flat and setting on pillars and cannot move. It says that great sea monsters are set to guard the edge of the sea. Does that mean that there really are sea monsters? No, the author was trying to convey another point.

 

 

 

Wait.. in order to not take the Bible literally - you have to interpret it right..?

 

 

 

If the author was trying to "convey another point" - then it must be upon the reader to interpret said point. I doubt very much that every single person who reads the Bible interprets that point in exactly the same way. Why do you dismiss some sections as ancient mythology yet preach "Divine Inspiration!" about the other parts that you agree with? All you are doing is picking and choosing, picking and choosing. Cherry picking your morality and then professing it to be the "will of God."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@ Lenticular J - Okay, but you've got to recognise the good with the bad. What about some kid in Sierre Leone who prays to God but still ends up having his family murdered and his arms chopped off.?

 

 

 

Maybe you were saved from the hurricane for no reason - other than you were. Maybe it was more likely you would live than you would die. If you're going to attribute everything positive to God then it only makes sense to attribute the negative to him too, (unless you believe in the Devil - but that wouldn't make any sense when you consider that God is supposed to be omnipotent.)

Hey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.