Is God real post your thoughts!

[warri0r45]

I (though I support evolution) could also ask that if humans evolved from monkeys then why do monkeys still exist? I never got a good answer for that.

 

 

 

For the same reason you and your cousin still exist. You share a common ancestry, and we share common ancestry with the apes.

 

 

 

Phylogram: Species A and B share ancestry, as do species C and D. Each branch represents a lineage and after a branch point (speciation), each of the two new lineages still exists.

 

[hide=Phylogram][/hide]

[Perakp]

My problem with these debates is that they normally descend into petty Bible quoting with one side claiming to know more about the context and actual meaning than the other, failing to see the inherent subjectivity in any historical document with controversial origins.

 

 

 

This to-ing and fro-ing doesn't answer the question: Is God real? Which begs the question, if yes, why? My real interest lies with the arguments for God's existence, not Yahweh's or Allah's, just some unspecified higher being. Because frankly, if there aren't any strong arguments for God existing then the whole Bible debate seems to lose some of its potency. Surely any myth/culture with enough history and followers could be debated like this, but that's not what gives it credibility.

 

 

 

 

I see the (only) way to proving God does not exist, is to defeat his purpose.

 

God's purpose is to give hope that life has a meaning, a direction, a goal. If you can get this hope elsewhere, don't need the hope or understand that life really has no higher meaning, you do not need God. This may seem ruthless, but it seems like it, only because it is. Life is easier when you accept it the way it is and don't lie to yourself or to others.

 

God's purpose is also to relieve the pain of sin and death. You get over these when you understand, that there is no sin and that living forever is boring, that death is inevitable and needed.

 

By saying that sin does not exist I mean, that you are not a worse person or doomed to go to hell if you sin, because everybody does sin. Sin and hell are only means of making people fear God or feel sorry for what they've done. You can feel sorry for your actions without God and you don't need God to accept you, or forgive you, if you accept yourself and forgive yourself. And see, the pain is gone.

 

 

 

If I go to hell for my words I can only blame God, because he did decide my future, the meaning of my life and everyone else's, before I was born. :cry:

[Ginger_Warrior]

And Ginger, it wasn't one person dedicating his life to writing these scriptures. It was many people, often from different parts of the world and different backgrounds, who wrote these. Some of them weren't even Christian like Pliny the Younger who wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan about how Jesus is leading Christians and they are a threat to the empire.

 

My point was that just because lots of people write about a certain tale of events doesn't necessarily make it true, unless of course it has some sort of evidence behind it. Arguing through a "

 

They said this..." format is inherently weak, and does not convince me that either God exists or that Jesus is His Son.

 

 

 

If by arguing that there are thousands of manuscripts, you argue Jesus was the Son of God, than 2pac must also have risen from the grave five years ago given how many people wrote about the whacko seven years prophecy.

 

 

 

Of course, 2pac did not come back to life. Hence, by the same logic, I have no reason to have faith in these manuscripts.

[Sly_Wizard]

Does that make it right...?

 

 

 

Given the large amount of manuscripts present, why wouldn't you believe it to be true?

 

Because they're copies of the same thing; much like the works of Homer and the Beowulf poet, just because there were a lot of them doesn't mean all the events portrayed in them are true to the point of fact. There's [basically] no other angles to look at the matter from, hence the bias and uncertainty, especially when adding the supernatural.

 

 

 

You misunderstand. We're not talking about copies of a single source, but rather thousands upon thousands of corroborating evidence from historical figures which, at the very least, indicate that many of the events depicted in the Bible did happen; that Jesus did exist; and that he said the things the Bible said he did. Really, there is no reason to believe that the events portrayed in the New Testament didn't happen, given the fact that there are multiple sources for various events which are all fairly accurate with one another (About 99.5%). If you're going to apply such a rigid standard to questioning the validity of the New Testament, then you must discredit other Classical era literature as being both less documented than the New Testament and less accurate than the New Testament. But you don't, often accepting them as true yet reject the New Testament as true. Why is that?

 

 

 

http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm

 

 

 

http://www.creatingfutures.net/validity.html

 

 

 

I'm gonna commit my life to writing one thousands manuscripts about the Pink Elephant. If I do that, will you believe He exists?

 

 

 

No?

 

 

 

How about if I call him the Messiah then?

 

 

 

That's not how it works. You can write as much as you want, but without substantial corroborating evidence or something to cross reference it against, it won't mean anything.

[user1991]

A couple of questions I'd like answered:

 

 

 

-Evolution has been proven and tested. It is the most comprehensive explanation as to how we are as we are. What I'd like to know is, if "God" created us in his image, which one of our phases is God?

 

-Is there any other thing you believe in that is untestable, intangable, and not physically existant? Why do you choose to believe that god is the only thing that can be those three and still exist?

 

 

 

For kicks, how about a brain teaser:

 

 

 

Can god create a rock that is too large for him to lift? If he can, then he would be incapable of lifting it, so he cannot be all powerful. If he cannot create it, then, again, he is not an all powerful creator.

 

 

 

 

 

Cut the [cabbage], Satenza tried that. God would find a way, and you still wouldn't give a [cabbage], as proven by humans in general.

 

 

 

Second: You guys say its selfish to think wew're alone in this universe, and aliens are all three of those, and well, I think it's quite selfish to think we are able to evolve ourselves.

 

 

 

And NoMoreDead, you hit the nail right on the button, exactly, which phases? The only one. Which just goes to show, evolution is not compatible with the Bible. The way we are now, is the way we *looked* back then. And I'm still sticking with Evolution as a theory, since thats what my BIOLOGY teacher said, and she teached college Biology for 15 years, and is head of the science department, and every single SCIENCE TEACHER there, athiest or not, says Evolution is a theory, even thoughs that believe in it.

 

 

 

 

 

At least Sly Wizard, whilst he IS incredibly pompous, can formulate a coherent argument.

 

 

 

But YOU, you are just supplying strawman after strawman. Sure, the theory of evolution is a theory.. And.. what? One theory isn't equal to another theory just because they're both technically theories. Plus, the scientific term theory is different to the way most people use it in everyday life. There is a mass of evidence for evolution, A MASS. If I could be bothered I could probably get you a million links from neutral scientific research websites that support evolution. You could get me what.. the ramblings of a brainwashed Catholic priest with no formal scientific knowledge? Theists play the NOMA card all the time and I'm tempted to flip it on them and tell them that if all they care about is "theology" then they should stfu about so called scientific matters.

 

 

 

Second: You guys say its selfish to think wew're alone in this universe, and aliens are all three of those, and well, I think it's quite selfish to think we are able to evolve ourselves.

 

 

 

What the....? It isn't "selfish" to think we're alone in the Universe. We don't know whether life can occur under other environments etc, the environments that we deem unsuitable for life are simply unsuitable for the life that we have observed on Earth. I'm not saying other life exists, but I am saying that if you look at it, there are billions of galaxies and billions/trillions of stars in each, therefore it is LIKELY that there is other life, that is if you don't assume the predicate of the "breath of God."

 

 

 

Cut the [cabbage], Satenza tried that. God would find a way, and you still wouldn't give a [cabbage], as proven by humans in general.

 

 

 

Okay, so God is omnipotent beyond the laws of logic etc because he created them? If that is the case, why couldn't he give us free will AND remove suffering?

 

 

 

Most Christians who have thought about that, even for a second, will say that God can only do the logically possible, or as Aquinas said what is "absolutely possible".

 

 

 

You obviously haven't thought about it..

 

 

 

@ Sly.. ever heard of Sathya Sai Baba?

[Saru Inc]

My problem with these debates is that they normally descend into petty Bible quoting with one side claiming to know more about the context and actual meaning than the other, failing to see the inherent subjectivity in any historical document with controversial origins.

 

 

 

This to-ing and fro-ing doesn't answer the question: Is God real? Which begs the question, if yes, why? My real interest lies with the arguments for God's existence, not Yahweh's or Allah's, just some unspecified higher being. Because frankly, if there aren't any strong arguments for God existing then the whole Bible debate seems to lose some of its potency. Surely any myth/culture with enough history and followers could be debated like this, but that's not what gives it credibility.

 

 

 

 

I see the (only) way to proving God does not exist, is to defeat his purpose.

 

God's purpose is to give hope that life has a meaning, a direction, a goal. If you can get this hope elsewhere, don't need the hope or understand that life really has no higher meaning, you do not need God. This may seem ruthless, but it seems like it, only because it is. Life is easier when you accept it the way it is and don't lie to yourself or to others.

 

God's purpose is also to relieve the pain of sin and death. You get over these when you understand, that there is no sin and that living forever is boring, that death is inevitable and needed.

 

By saying that sin does not exist I mean, that you are not a worse person or doomed to go to hell if you sin, because everybody does sin. Sin and hell are only means of making people fear God or feel sorry for what they've done. You can feel sorry for your actions without God and you don't need God to accept you, or forgive you, if you accept yourself and forgive yourself. And see, the pain is gone.

 

 

 

If I go to hell for my words I can only blame God, because he did decide my future, the meaning of my life and everyone else's, before I was born. :cry:

 

 

 

 

 

1) That isn't his purpose.

 

 

 

2) Yes, everyone sins, but only Christians are repentant, thsu why they're Christians. And he didn't decide your future, you did. He put you on this Earth, you could have gone wherever you wanted. Done whatever yuo wanted. He wouldn't have stopped you.

 

 

 

 

 

TheTrueNoob, on that October 14-17 Aleins Visiting thread, peoplesaid it was selfish and or ignorant to think we're alone in this universe. I was just applying it to Evolution.

 

 

 

Second: There is plenty of evidence to support the Bible, and I've shown it; but let's recap:

 

 

 

Dead Sea Scrolls anyone?

 

 

 

And, of course, the story where an Atheist proved the Bible is real - with the space program.

 

 

 

Third: Well, this doesn't really prove the Bible per se, but so many scientists were Christians, Newtown for one.

 

 

 

And, what's this 'other' theory?

[Lenticular_J]

Of course, 2pac did not come back to life. Hence, by the same logic, I have no reason to have faith in these manuscripts.

 

What exactly don't you have faith in? Historical authenticity? The moral stories (although I don't know why you would)? Or something else?

[D Jay99]

2) Yes, everyone sins, but only Christians are repentant, thsu why they're Christians. And he didn't decide your future, you did. He put you on this Earth, you could have gone wherever you wanted. Done whatever yuo wanted. He wouldn't have stopped you.

 

What makes you so sure Christianity is the right way? It could very well be Hinduism, the Islam or Buddhism. There is proof for neither of them, so what makes Christianity the right one?

 

It is very well possible that if you try to live your life the good way following Christ, you go to hell anyway because Hinduism was right and you ate cows.

[brunokiller]

[hide=]

My problem with these debates is that they normally descend into petty Bible quoting with one side claiming to know more about the context and actual meaning than the other, failing to see the inherent subjectivity in any historical document with controversial origins.

 

 

 

This to-ing and fro-ing doesn't answer the question: Is God real? Which begs the question, if yes, why? My real interest lies with the arguments for God's existence, not Yahweh's or Allah's, just some unspecified higher being. Because frankly, if there aren't any strong arguments for God existing then the whole Bible debate seems to lose some of its potency. Surely any myth/culture with enough history and followers could be debated like this, but that's not what gives it credibility.

 

 

 

 

I see the (only) way to proving God does not exist, is to defeat his purpose.

 

God's purpose is to give hope that life has a meaning, a direction, a goal. If you can get this hope elsewhere, don't need the hope or understand that life really has no higher meaning, you do not need God. This may seem ruthless, but it seems like it, only because it is. Life is easier when you accept it the way it is and don't lie to yourself or to others.

 

God's purpose is also to relieve the pain of sin and death. You get over these when you understand, that there is no sin and that living forever is boring, that death is inevitable and needed.

 

By saying that sin does not exist I mean, that you are not a worse person or doomed to go to hell if you sin, because everybody does sin. Sin and hell are only means of making people fear God or feel sorry for what they've done. You can feel sorry for your actions without God and you don't need God to accept you, or forgive you, if you accept yourself and forgive yourself. And see, the pain is gone.

 

 

 

If I go to hell for my words I can only blame God, because he did decide my future, the meaning of my life and everyone else's, before I was born. :cry:

[/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

1) That isn't his purpose.

 

How would you know?

 

2) Yes, everyone sins, but only Christians are repentant, thsu why they're Christians. And he didn't decide your future, you did. He put you on this Earth, you could have gone wherever you wanted. Done whatever yuo wanted. He wouldn't have stopped you.

 

*cough* adam and eva *cough*

 

 

 

 

 

TheTrueNoob, on that October 14-17 Aleins Visiting thread, peoplesaid it was selfish and or ignorant to think we're alone in this universe. I was just applying it to Evolution.

 

 

 

Second: There is plenty of evidence to support the Bible, and I've shown it; but let's recap:

 

 

 

Where?

 

Dead Sea Scrolls anyone?

 

 

 

And, of course, the story where an Atheist proved the Bible is real - with the space program.

 

I've seen some studies saying there isn't any proof for the bible being real.

 

Third: Well, this doesn't really prove the Bible per se, but so many scientists were Christians, Newtown for one.

 

So? Back in the 1600s about everyone, not just scientists were religious.

[warren211]

2) Yes, everyone sins, but only Christians are repentant, thsu why they're Christians. And he didn't decide your future, you did. He put you on this Earth, you could have gone wherever you wanted. Done whatever yuo wanted. He wouldn't have stopped you.

 

What makes you so sure Christianity is the right way? It could very well be Hinduism, the Islam or Buddhism. There is proof for neither of them, so what makes Christianity the right one?

 

It is very well possible that if you try to live your life the good way following Christ, you go to hell anyway because Hinduism was right and you ate cows.

 

 

 

The more open minded Christians would believe that if you live a moral life, believe that there is some omnicient force out there that we can use as a guide, and respect other religions, then you have just as good of a chance in the afterlife as the next religion. I disagree with people of my own faith when they say anyone who isn't Christian will burn in hell. That's just ridiculous if you ask a me, it's not your fault if your upbringing convinces you that Hinduism or Buddhism or Jainism is the right faith. Different religions seek different goals, but when you get down to it the main one is to live a good, moral life and have an open mind. If Hinduism was the right religion and cows are sacred then oops, I'm screwed. I'll just have to hope Vishnu or Brahma is as forgiving as my God is, and I'm pretty sure they would be if they exist.

[D Jay99]

Different religions seek different goals, but when you get down to it the main one is to live a good, moral life and have an open mind.

 

Indeed. That is one of the reasons I'm not religious. I can live a perfectly good life just being moral and acting normal, I don't see how I need God or a religion for that. If it feels right for you, that's okay. But I don't need it.

[Lenticular_J]

You'd be surprised how many parables you've been taught that derived from religious texts, even if you aren't religious.

 

 

 

Meh, you can always just have Pascal's Wager if you can't look at religion from anything but a scientific point of view.

[user1991]

You'd be surprised how many parables you've been taught that derived from religious texts, even if you aren't religious.

 

 

 

Meh, you can always just have Pascal's Wager if you can't look at religion from anything but a scientific point of view.

 

 

 

Pascal's Wager.

 

 

 

1) Even if you believe in A God, you haven't specified which of the thousands of them, so if say, Thor turns out to be real, everyone is still screwed.

 

2) You're assuming God rewards belief.. and not honesty. Plus, don't you think an all knowing God would see through the fact that you're believing just to save your skin in the end? If God turns out to be real and I'm standing before him when I die, I'll honestly say that there wasn't enough evidence for me to believe in him (as Bertrand Russel would). If all these Old Testament verses that we atheists keep quoting are really "irrelevant" or "taken out of context" then I'm sure that God could find somewhere, in his all loving metaphorical heart, the kindness to say, well, you didn't believe in me, but at least you're being honest, as opposed to someone who believed in him out of fear.

 

 

 

Why does God have all these human qualities... why would an all loving, powerful, knowing, beyond human comprehension God care whether you believed in him or not - it seems rather petty and quite frankly sounds like something a human would make up..

 

 

 

If something similar to the Christian God existed, coupled therefore with an objective moral standard, wouldn't it be more likely that God would reward those who were "good" people?

 

 

 

Of course, I can't say what God would or wouldn't do, that's your job.. So if you're telling me that he rewards belief, then fine, but it seems like a rather childish attribute..

[Lenticular_J]

Why are you assuming I think God would reward belief? I believe God gives you whatever you want when you die, even if I personally would consider it a Hell, you probably wouldn't. But, you really don't want to ask me to go into detail on my beliefs. They're very strange, often conflicting, and often double-talk.

 

 

 

All I said was that if you need some sort of logic to deal with religion (which is just as misguided), Pascal's Wager was really the only thing I could think of.

 

 

 

(I just learned what it was and wanted to talk about it.)

 

 

 

Besides, the "Christian God" differs for every single person.

[user1991]

Why are you assuming I think God would reward belief? I believe God gives you whatever you want when you die, even if I personally would consider it a Hell, you probably wouldn't. But, you really don't want to ask me to go into detail on my beliefs. They're very strange, often conflicting, and often double-talk.

 

 

 

All I said was that if you need some sort of logic to deal with religion (which is just as misguided), Pascal's Wager was really the only thing I could think of.

 

 

 

(I just learned what it was and wanted to talk about it.)

 

 

 

Besides, the "Christian God" differs for every single person.

 

 

 

I don't see how we can debate this further..

 

 

 

How are you defining God here..?

 

 

 

Also, how are we defining "real"? Coherence or correspondence theory of truth?

 

 

 

Without these two definitions set in stone we really can't debate whether God "exists" or not..

[Saru Inc]

[hide=]

[hide=]

My problem with these debates is that they normally descend into petty Bible quoting with one side claiming to know more about the context and actual meaning than the other, failing to see the inherent subjectivity in any historical document with controversial origins.

 

 

 

This to-ing and fro-ing doesn't answer the question: Is God real? Which begs the question, if yes, why? My real interest lies with the arguments for God's existence, not Yahweh's or Allah's, just some unspecified higher being. Because frankly, if there aren't any strong arguments for God existing then the whole Bible debate seems to lose some of its potency. Surely any myth/culture with enough history and followers could be debated like this, but that's not what gives it credibility.

 

 

 

 

I see the (only) way to proving God does not exist, is to defeat his purpose.

 

God's purpose is to give hope that life has a meaning, a direction, a goal. If you can get this hope elsewhere, don't need the hope or understand that life really has no higher meaning, you do not need God. This may seem ruthless, but it seems like it, only because it is. Life is easier when you accept it the way it is and don't lie to yourself or to others.

 

God's purpose is also to relieve the pain of sin and death. You get over these when you understand, that there is no sin and that living forever is boring, that death is inevitable and needed.

 

By saying that sin does not exist I mean, that you are not a worse person or doomed to go to hell if you sin, because everybody does sin. Sin and hell are only means of making people fear God or feel sorry for what they've done. You can feel sorry for your actions without God and you don't need God to accept you, or forgive you, if you accept yourself and forgive yourself. And see, the pain is gone.

 

 

 

If I go to hell for my words I can only blame God, because he did decide my future, the meaning of my life and everyone else's, before I was born. :cry:

[/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

1) That isn't his purpose.

 

How would you know?

 

2) Yes, everyone sins, but only Christians are repentant, thsu why they're Christians. And he didn't decide your future, you did. He put you on this Earth, you could have gone wherever you wanted. Done whatever yuo wanted. He wouldn't have stopped you.

 

*cough* adam and eva *cough*

 

 

 

 

 

TheTrueNoob, on that October 14-17 Aleins Visiting thread, peoplesaid it was selfish and or ignorant to think we're alone in this universe. I was just applying it to Evolution.

 

 

 

Second: There is plenty of evidence to support the Bible, and I've shown it; but let's recap:

 

 

 

Where?

 

Dead Sea Scrolls anyone?

 

 

 

And, of course, the story where an Atheist proved the Bible is real - with the space program.

 

I've seen some studies saying there isn't any proof for the bible being real.

 

Third: Well, this doesn't really prove the Bible per se, but so many scientists were Christians, Newtown for one.

 

So? Back in the 1600s about everyone, not just scientists were religious.

[/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, Adam and Eve sinned, as I said, EVERYONE sins. But they repented.

 

 

 

And I know that's not his purpose, because I'm a Christian, you guys all act like Christians are blind leading the blind.

 

 

 

And, Bruno, you didn't answer the question, please answer the one I asked, not the one you want.

[Cup Lion]

Why does God have all these human qualities... why would an all loving, powerful, knowing, beyond human comprehension God care whether you believed in him or not - it seems rather petty and quite frankly sounds like something a human would make up..

 

God relationship with us is similar to that of mother and child. It wouldn't make sense for the mother to not care if the child doesn't think she exists.

[D Jay99]

And I know that's not his purpose, because I'm a Christian, you guys all act like Christians are blind leading the blind.

That's indeed the case. Christians don't know it either, why pretend?

[Saru Inc]

What do we gain by pretending though? I mean really, what do we gain?

[Cup Lion]

Its true. Christians, and theists in general, get a lot of crap for what they believe in. So why do they believe in something that sounds so crazy?

[Lateralus]

Answer your own questions, please. It's nice to hear why people are religious.

[tintin113]

I personally don't beleive that God exists, but the reason that this thread is here after thousands of years of religion, is that noone can comprehensivley prove that God does or doesn't exist. Anyone can argue their heart out over the matter, but that's because they beleive one way or the other and nothing will sway them other than definite proof - which doesn't exist. Religion is a wierd thing, some people say it only starts wars and wastes time, but others argue that it gives people a purpose and a sence of belonging, bringing people closer together via churches and such.

 

 

 

This is the most debated topic of all time, and one that will probably be never fully resolved, so i think God is fictional and there only to give people a way to control other people, but do I really care? As long as people don't press their religion on me, no.

[Sly_Wizard]

@ Sly.. ever heard of Sathya Sai Baba?

 

 

 

I'm not into discounting people's experiences nor am I into arguing why other religions are wrong (Which I don't. I even defend Scientology). So what about Sathya Sai Baba?

[Cup Lion]

Answer your own questions, please. It's nice to hear why people are religious.

 

 

 

I've said this many times in this thread, but the thought that something so abstract like a conscience evolved from simple chemical and energy reactions really doesn't make sense. And if we did all evolve from the earliest forms of life, why aren't there other organisms on the earth that have a conscience and thought process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additionally, its nice to have someone to talk to about stuff that you are too embarrassed to say out loud. Its similar to the concept of an imaginary friend. People find comfort in imaginary friends, just as I find comfort in a being such as God.

[Lenticular_J]

I don't see how we can debate this further..

 

 

 

Never could in the first place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How are you defining God here..?

 

 

 

As my own personal belief.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, how are we defining "real"? Coherence or correspondence theory of truth?

 

 

 

Neither. It's religion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without these two definitions set in stone we really can't debate whether God "exists" or not..

 

 

 

Oh, really? I guess I wasn't aware of that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, wait.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And if you're putting "exists" in quotes, you should technically put "not" in quotes. A fanciful, uncommon part of English I read in a grammar book yesterday.