NationStates Jolt Archive

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

Read this and stop making throwing bombs

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Top_ten_arguments_for_the_existence_of_God

No, and its a pointless venture to ask an Internet Forum...

I used to be a junkie for these sort of threads, but ive OD'd as of late...and im sick of them...

LEAVE YOUR RELIGION AT HOME!!!!

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

I could possibly prove God exists... but I'd need a can of crisco, a battle axe, a toothbrush, and a doughnut and a willing vic.... test subject.

OH me me me ...I want to be the vic.... test subject!

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

Not. Another. One. Of. These. Threads!!:headbang:

God exists because the earth exists.

Prove me wrong.

Honestly, that is what it comes down to. The unprovable source of existence.

lol well I can see the opening was pointless for the record im atheist (or possibly very very agnostic) as to the test I love it lol

Not. Another. One. Of. These. Threads!!:headbang:

Lol, we easily get one of these a day. And sometimes two.

God exists because the earth exists.

Prove me wrong.

Honestly, that is what it comes down to. The unprovable source of existence.

If god created everything what created gods (or god . . . .whatever)?

First of all, the word "God" is almost empty and meaningless by itself. It's the people who fill in the word "God" with various attributes (like all-loving and stuff like that, and even the basics like it's an actual being that exists for everyone regardless of beleif, stuff like that). All those different compositions of attributes are godly-images. We already know that some godly-images exist, namely the godly-images of a metaphorical being that represents of reflects something (the perfect human, something like that for example). For other, more literal godly-images that's much harder. With those images, I mean the one's who would describe actual beings that would exist for anyone regardless of his personal thoughts, opinions and beleives. An example of such an image is the Abrahamic God, the Old Testament one. Those images are the one that matter in a discussion like this, the one's who would only describe beings inside reality (not just inside someone's mind) who exist for anyone regardless of his own thoughts.
God exists because the earth exists.

Prove me wrong.

Honestly, that is what it comes down to. The unprovable source of existence.
We know a lót more about the existance of the earth then you think. Really, what's the source of making the connection between those 2. Can't planets come into existance without the help of some kind of really powerfull alien-thingy?

Lol, we easily get one of these a day. And sometimes two.

aw but I love these threads lmao their so much fun (plus the added bonus of seeing people bounce their heads off walls ehehehehheheheheheh)

No. Next.

If god created everything what created gods?

lolwut? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_chicken_or_the_egg)

If god created everything what created gods?

Not that you aren't asking a valid question, but why is that necessary?

Why can something not always exist?

Why could the Universe not have always existed?

How you doin'?

First of all, the word "God" is almost empty and meaningless by itself. It's the people who fill in the word "God" with various attributes (like all-loving and stuff like that, and even the basics like it's an actual being that exists for everyone regardless of beleif, stuff like that). All those different compositions of attributes are godly-images. We already know that some godly-images exist, namely the godly-images of a metaphorical being that represents of reflects something (the perfect human, something like that for example). For other, more literal godly-images that's much harder. With those images, I mean the one's who would describe actual beings that would exist for anyone regardless of his personal thoughts, opinions and beleives. An example of such an image is the Abrahamic God, the Old Testament one. Those images are the one that matter in a discussion like this, the one's who would only describe beings inside reality (not just inside someone's mind) who exist for anyone regardless of his own thoughts.

Ok fair enough but that does not really answer the question which was is their any logical proof that god exists. If not thats fine and I AM NOT CLAIMING GOD DOES NOT EXIST but I'd like to know if anyone can come up with one.

I'm selling threadspace on page 34 of this thread, if anyone is interested.

Lol, we easily get one of these a day. And sometimes two.

Yeah. I´ve noticed.:(

Ok fair enough but that does not really answer the question which was is their any logical proof that god exists. If not thats fine and I AM NOT CLAIMING GOD DOES NOT EXIST but I'd like to know if anyone can come up with one.

Here you go: I think, therefore God exists.

Not that you aren't asking a valid question, but why is that necessary?

Why can something not always exist?

Why could the Universe not have always existed?

How you doin'?

If the universe have always existed...then there was no creation.

Not that you aren't asking a valid question, but why is that necessary?

Why can something not always exist?

Why could the Universe not have always existed?

How you doin'?
lol pretty good u?

Its not necessary at all. Personally its too deep for me fathom something that has literally always existed but I agree completely that the universe could have always existed possibly only changing never beginning or ending.

Here you go: I think, therefore God exists.

thought is an electro chemical process where does god come into it?

Here you go: I think, therefore God exists.

Your first premise may be false. :p

Yeah. I´ve noticed.:(

Plus, they never even go anywhere beyond what you can read on the wikipedia article on arguments for and against God's existence.

I'm selling threadspace on page 34 of this thread, if anyone is interested.

heheheheh I've already got a couple of prime locations cornered

Plus, they never even go anywhere beyond what you can read on the wikipedia article on arguments for and against God's existence.

but they're fun! come on u know u want too lol

but there fun! come on u know u want too lol

Oh, I have done these threads many times before. I have had my share of fun for awhile.

I AM god.... therefore I exist, prove me wrong!

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

Read this and stop making throwing bombs

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Top_ten_arguments_for_the_existence_of_God

*Reads Rules*
*Attempts to break every rule stated by the OP*

You suck Santiago I, you immoral atheist! Every other religion except mine is wrong and stupid! I know this for a fact because I experienced God first hand, he came to me in private. That argument is idiotic!

:D

No, and its a pointless venture to ask an Internet Forum...

I used to be a junkie for these sort of threads, but ive OD'd as of late...and im sick of them...

LEAVE YOUR RELIGION AT HOME!!!!

uh oh! I lost it . .. . now where did I put that *searches through pockets* aw drat I think i left it in my other coat . .. . shucks

I AM god.... therefore I exist, prove me wrong!

*shoots Santiago*
Bang! You´re dead, god. That means you don´t exist. Carry on.

I AM god.... therefore I exist, prove me wrong!

I can't see you, therefore you don't exist.

*Reads Rules*
*Attempts to break every rule stated by the OP*

You suck Santiago I, you immoral atheist! Every other religion except mine is wrong and stupid! I know this for a fact because I experienced God first hand, he came to me in private. That argument is idiotic!

heheheheheh
*attempts too nuke new manvir. Goes down in flames . .. . country burned to a crisp* . . . .. hmmmmmmmm maybe rules weren't such a good idea

*Reads Rules*
*Attempts to break every rule stated by the OP*

You suck Santiago I, you immoral atheist! Every other religion except mine is wrong and stupid! I know this for a fact because I experienced God first hand, he came to me in private. That argument is idiotic!

Im an ImmorTal atheist... and I dont recall going to you first hand in private

I can't see you, therefore you don't exist.

But you can read me...and then you can deny Im writing this...so I exist.

Oh, I have done these threads many times before. I have had my share of fun for awhile.
lol true . . .I haven't quite OD'd yet but I'm working on it anyway this is fun wheeeee :)

lol well I can see the opening was pointless for the record im atheist (or possibly very very agnostic) as to the test I love it lol

Just so we're clear, being very Agnostic is more than likely farther from athiesm than moderate agnosticism. The more agnostic one is, the more they believe nothing either way. Athiesm is the unorganized religion of belief that a god(s) cannot exist.

But you can read me...and then you can deny Im writing this...so I exist.

*turns into satan. Attempts to start war with Santiago . . . .losses . . . .badly.*

*shoots Santiago*
Bang! You´re dead, god. That means you don´t exist. Carry on.

Santiago I dies after being shoot in the head by NnT..... but after three days RESURRECTS AND ASCENDS TO HEAVEN

But you can read me...and then you can deny Im writing this...so I exist.

KILL THE DEMIURGE!!!

Just so we're clear, being very Agnostic is more than likely farther from athiesm than moderate agnosticism. The more agnostic one is, the more they believe nothing either way. Athiesm is the unorganized religion of belief that a god(s) cannot exist.
true only I believe that while the existence of god cannot be proven either way it seems extremely unlikely

KILL THE DEMIURGE!!!

hehehe

I personally believe that if there is a God, it is made up of the souls of every (living) thing in the universe. My reasoning? Well I can't prove that there even is such thing as a soul but I figure to take this approach anyway 'cause it kinda combines the Big Bang theory with the God-created-everything theory. Essentially, I believe there may have been a God, he exploded (or died or something of that sort) and instead of fading from existance simply expanded into the universe around us. Feel free to poke holes in my theory if you wish, its kinda why its up here on the internet where anyone can view it. Anyway, that's my personal take, if it doesn't have enough logic for you, oh well. I'm typically a very logical person but there are just some things in this expansive world of ours I just say "I'm not touching that one" to.

If the universe have always existed...then there was no creation.
I am aware of that.
lol pretty good u?

Its not necessary at all. Personally its too deep for me fathom something that has literally always existed but I agree completely that the universe could have always existed possibly only changing never beginning or ending.
Quite.
thought is an electro chemical process where does god come into it?
Where? The thought part probably. In the brain.
Your first premise may be false. :p
Unlikely. One cannot help but think. Now, whether or not the thoughts are of any use is another thing entirely.
heheheheh I've already got a couple of prime locations cornered
The market is booming.

Santiago I dies after being shoot in the head by NnT..... but after three days RESURRECTS AND ASCENDS TO HEAVEN

Hate it when that happens puts quite the crimp in my schedual

I personally believe that if there is a God, it is made up of the souls of every (living) thing in the universe. My reasoning? Well I can't prove that there even is such thing as a soul but I figure to take this approach anyway 'cause it kinda combines the Big Bang theory with the God-created-everything theory. Essentially, I believe there may have been a God, he exploded (or died or something of that sort) and instead of fading from existance simply expanded into the universe around us. Feel free to poke holes in my theory if you wish, its kinda why its up here on the internet where anyone can view it. Anyway, that's my personal take, if it doesn't have enough logic for you, oh well. I'm typically a very logical person but there are just some things in this expansive world of ours I just say "I'm not touching that one" to.
interesting

I personally believe that if there is a God, it is made up of the souls of every (living) thing in the universe. My reasoning? Well I can't prove that there even is such thing as a soul but I figure to take this approach anyway 'cause it kinda combines the Big Bang theory with the God-created-everything theory. Essentially, I believe there may have been a God, he exploded (or died or something of that sort) and instead of fading from existance simply expanded into the universe around us. Feel free to poke holes in my theory if you wish, its kinda why its up here on the internet where anyone can view it. Anyway, that's my personal take, if it doesn't have enough logic for you, oh well. I'm typically a very logical person but there are just some things in this expansive world of ours I just say "I'm not touching that one" to.

First hole in your theory. Im alive and well thanks. Bing bang didnt killed me...it shook me...but didnt killed me.

First hole in your theory. Im alive and well thanks. Bing bang didnt killed me...it shook me...but didnt killed me.

thats unfortunate . . .. who was the bang then?

First hole in your theory. Im alive and well thanks. Bing bang didnt killed me...it shook me...but didnt killed me.

So that's why angels start singing whenever your text appears on my screen...

Can anyone prove god exists?

No

First hole in your theory. Im alive and well thanks. Bing bang didnt killed me...it shook me...but didnt killed me.

or maybe u were banging someone! that makes perfect sense! god and. . . . . whatever go at it, universe comes to life. Dude unplanned pregnancy sucks I'm really sorry. but congrats anyway allfather

No

but but but then this thread is pontless . . . .awwwwww :(

thats unfortunate . . .. who was the bang then?

its a little embarrasing... but you know..I had all that chili con carne...and well I didnt really felt well... my stomach ached...and well.... I think you can take a guess.

San, your joke is going to die the slowest of deaths at the hands of humanity, just to let you know.

its a little embarrasing... but you know..I had all that chili con carne...and well I didnt really felt well... my stomach ached...and well.... I think you can take a guess.

hehheheheh I like my explanation better lol but awesome!

Sure.... but then after three days my joke will resurrect and ascend to heaven.

But you can read me...and then you can deny Im writing this...so I exist.

I imagine lots of things, just because they talk back (or write back as the case may be) doesn't make them real.

San, your joke is going to die the slowest of deaths at the hands of humanity, just to let you know.
lol awwwwww

Here you go: I think, therefore God exists.

How about, I think, therefore God DOESN'T exist.
Each of those is equally valid.

Ok fair enough but that does not really answer the question which was is their any logical proof that god exists. If not thats fine and I AM NOT CLAIMING GOD DOES NOT EXIST but I'd like to know if anyone can come up with one.
Again, depends wich godly-image you're meaning here.

Sure.... but then after three days my joke will resurrect and ascend to heaven.

every time@%$#$!

I imagine lots of things, just because they talk back (or write back as the case may be) doesn't make them real.

Dont do drugs kid.

Sure.... but then after three days my joke will resurrect and ascend to heaven.

That'll be difficult if ppl bolt it to the floor and begin poking it with sticks.

Again, depends wich godly-image you're meaning here.

personally I don't mind. Pick one and go! I promise to answer seriously

That'll be difficult if ppl bolt it to the floor and begin poking it with sticks.

That sounds like someone asking for another deluge :mad:

No

can anyone disprove God exists?
No :)

can anyone disprove God exists?
No :)

I havent really tried... Im sure if I put some work on it I can prove that others gods dont exist.

personally I don't mind. Pick one and go! I promise to answer seriously
It may not mind personally, but it matters a LOT for the topic question. If you talk about the godly-image that describes God as some kind of reflection or what the perfect human would be, like a prime example, then yes you can safely say such a God would exist: in someone's mind, since someone made that up and used that as a living standard. Now if you mean a godly-image wich describes a literal being that exists inside our reality and meddles with it or meddled with it, then there is a possibility that logical arguments and evidence can be found in the future. For now, there is nothing for such a godly-image.
It all matters on with godly-image you pick for a discussion.
can anyone disprove God exists?
No :)
Proving a negative is false logic anyway, so that doesn't matter. What you cán do is making a godly-image less likely to exist because of logical falacies in the composition of that godly-image, e.a in the attributes.

Dont do drugs kid.

:p




Sadly, it's true. Still, I was always very imaginative -even before I tried the drugs.

I imagine this has happened before, someone ask for an opinion about god, mainly complainers come on at first. A few serious ppl post and before you know it, it all breaks down into soon-to-be worn out jokes and semi-mindless dribble. Not that I'm trying to insult anyone since, for the moment, I'm contributing to the mindless dribble. I suppose it just goes to show you can't open a God-based question thread anywhere on the internet. You're either gonna get a lot of bias or not many real answers at all.

if you really tried, you can disprove any god, except the Christian God

if you really tried, you can disprove any god, except the Christian God

If you can disprove other gods, why you cant disprove the Christian one? Oh..and which version of the Christian one are you talking about?

if you really tried, you can disprove any god, except the Christian God
There is no single Christian godly-image as well. I've seen it with my own eyes, people all calling themselfs Christians all describing something completly different.
PS: I got the feeling you're just poking people with this, aren't ya :P

There is no single Christian godly-image as well. I've seen it with my own eyes, people all calling themselfs Christians all describing something completly different.
PS: I got the feeling you're just poking people with this, aren't ya :P

Get lost kiddo..you are ruining my act.:mad:

because (no offense meant to anyone of any culture or belief) the Christian God is real
Christian is Christian (believes in Jesus Christ son of God, died for your sins)

(continued) died for your sins and rose again

be back in about 5 minutes

Well in my eyes I'd find it difficult to prove or disprove the existance of anything that is supposedly larger than life itself. If it expands past what any human can truly comprehend there's nothing that can really be done about that. People can just shoot their personal opinions back and forth, they can argue with their heavily biased beliefs. In the end, none of it will really matters, chances are you're not gonna convert anyone over the internet; best case scenario ppl learn that there are other beliefs in the world besides their own and everyone learns to just deal with it one way or another.

I'm done here.

Get lost kiddo..you are ruining my act.:mad:
Ooo do I smell the smell of dirty socks coming from the name Berzerkirs then, if you catch my drift ;) O I like to stir things up, yummy!

but but but then this thread is pontless . . . .awwwwww :(

Exactly.

k im back

Well in my eyes I'd find it difficult to prove or disprove the existance of anything that is supposedly larger than life itself. If it expands past what any human can truly comprehend there's nothing that can really be done about that. People can just shoot their personal opinions back and forth, they can argue with their heavily biased beliefs. In the end, none of it will really matters, chances are you're not gonna convert anyone over the internet; best case scenario ppl learn that there are other beliefs in the world besides their own and everyone learns to just deal with it one way or another.

I'm done here.

good point, but there's nothing wrong with trying :D

therefore everything in the world depends on faith

I'm not religious at all, but I do believe that SOMETHING had to have created the universe.

Take the cell, for example. So far, we haven't found any living thing that doesn't have these things (exept for some viruses, if you count those as living things). The complexity of how the cell works, from the nucleus that just HAPPENS to have DNA to send orders to the rest of the cell, to the mitochondria the just HAPPEN to have the right tools necessary to create energy, to the cell wall that just HAPPENS to have the lipids in the right place to keep the cell stable. All of these things just HAPPEND in the right place and function perfectly (mostly).

Take atoms and molecules: these things just HAPPEN to have ALL of their components in the right place and amount to create a stable physical environment, which also makes up everything that exists in a way that makes all existence possible.

The total complexity of things, from cells, atoms, the nature of planets and atmospheres and weather, all are too much for any one thing to fathom how and why they exist in such a perfect, yet ever-changing nature.

The total perfection of existence leads me to believe that it had to have been created by something. I'm not saying it is the Christian God, but just some force or supernatural being created it all....of course, this could all be just a computer simulation, and I am the only conscious being that exists and is fooled to believe that you all are real and that I live in a three-dimensional world....but that is just a little TOO crazy for me.

I'm not religious at all, but I do believe that SOMETHING had to have created the universe.

Take the cell, for example. So far, we haven't found any living thing that doesn't have these things (exept for some viruses, if you count those as living things). The complexity of how the cell works, from the nucleus that just HAPPENS to have DNA to send orders to the rest of the cell, to the mitochondria the just HAPPEN to have the right tools necessary to create energy, to the cell wall that just HAPPENS to have the lipids in the right place to keep the cell stable. All of these things just HAPPEND in the right place and function perfectly (mostly).

Take atoms and molecules: these things just HAPPEN to have ALL of their components in the right place and amount to create a stable physical environment, which also makes up everything that exists in a way that makes all existence possible.

The total complexity of things, from cells, atoms, the nature of planets and atmospheres and weather, all are too much for any one thing to fathom how and why they exist in such a perfect, yet ever-changing nature.

The total perfection of existence leads me to believe that it had to have been created by something. I'm not saying it is the Christian God, but just some force or supernatural being created it all....of course, this could all be just a computer simulation, and I am the only conscious being that exists and is fooled to believe that you all are real and that I live in a three-dimensional world....but that is just a little TOO crazy for me.

i agree and disagree with you at some points
yes something did create the universe, a "Big Bang" couldn't just have created everything so well
no you're not a comp simulation

Good. I'm glad I'm not a comp simulation :D

no you're not a comp simulation
Says who? Who says you're not programmed to think that?
I'm not religious at all, but I do believe that SOMETHING had to have created the universe.

[quote=Protzmann]Take the cell, for example. So far, we haven't found any living thing that doesn't have these things (exept for some viruses, if you count those as living things). The complexity of how the cell works, from the nucleus that just HAPPENS to have DNA to send orders to the rest of the cell, to the mitochondria the just HAPPEN to have the right tools necessary to create energy, to the cell wall that just HAPPENS to have the lipids in the right place to keep the cell stable. All of these things just HAPPEND in the right place and function perfectly (mostly).

Take atoms and molecules: these things just HAPPEN to have ALL of their components in the right place and amount to create a stable physical environment, which also makes up everything that exists in a way that makes all existence possible.

The total complexity of things, from cells, atoms, the nature of planets and atmospheres and weather, all are too much for any one thing to fathom how and why they exist in such a perfect, yet ever-changing nature.

The total perfection of existence leads me to believe that it had to have been created by something. I'm not saying it is the Christian God, but just some force or supernatural being created it all....of course, this could all be just a computer simulation, and I am the only conscious being that exists and is fooled to believe that you all are real and that I live in a three-dimensional world....but that is just a little TOO crazy for me.
A typical error is made here, it goes from the assumption that we would be the only outcome, that we're like ment to be here. But who says that's true? You're also seeing this from the wrong direction: top down. We did not háve to arise, it happend to be because of the circumstances, but those circumstances do not háve to be there. They're not around on Jupiter, or in the middle of the sun. "Perfect" like you're saying it, only exists in YOUR mind. Nature just 'is'. I don't understand all the bolding of "happen". Like you're really thinking it's a neccesity we are here. We weren't 50 million years ago.
O and by the way, there is a rough guess that about 99% of every species in the history of this planet is extinct meaning that what you see is just 1% of what éver lived. Species keep dying out as well, what perfect?

The fact that species die out, and yet life continues to exists proves the perfection of the system.

Jupiter still has perfection in nature. Even though life as we know it couldn't exists, planets like jupiter (all planets by definition, actually) have gravity, spherical form, and are the only little spots of matter in the vast expanse of space. The fact that they exist in the nature of a piece of matter that exists without being destroyed in the vaccum of space, and maintains its own gravity and revolved around a star shows that they are perfect.

My idea of a perfection in nature is not limited to the nature that can sustain life. You made a mistake when you assumed that was what I was implying.

Says who? Who says you're not programmed to think that?
[quote]I'm not religious at all, but I do believe that SOMETHING had to have created the universe.


A typical error is made here, it goes from the assumption that we would be the only outcome, that we're like ment to be here. But who says that's true? You're also seeing this from the wrong direction: top down. We did not háve to arise, it happend to be because of the circumstances, but those circumstances do not háve to be there. They're not around on Jupiter, or in the middle of the sun. "Perfect" like you're saying it, only exists in YOUR mind. Nature just 'is'. I don't understand all the bolding of "happen". Like you're really thinking it's a neccesity we are here. We weren't 50 million years ago.
O and by the way, there is a rough guess that about 99% of every species in the history of this planet is extinct meaning that what you see is just 1% of what éver lived. Species keep dying out as well, what perfect?

im not gonna discuss the computer simulation thing because it can go either way.
Perfect? just imagine, if it were any other way, we'd be screwed a looong time ago,and it also depends how you describe perfect

The fact that species die out, and yet life continues to exists proves the perfection of the system.

Jupiter still has perfection in nature. Even though life as we know it couldn't exists, planets like jupiter (all planets by definition, actually) have gravity, spherical form, and are the only little spots of matter in the vast expanse of space. The fact that they exist in the nature of a piece of matter that exists without being destroyed in the vaccum of space, and maintains its own gravity and revolved around a star shows that they are perfect.

My idea of a perfection in nature is not limited to the nature that can sustain life. You made a mistake when you assumed that was what I was implying.

i agree (again)

In my speech, I also said that the universe is constantly changing, for the better of some areas and at the detriment of others, it still manages to exist. Even though 99% of the species on earth that have ever existed have died out, life still exists on earth, and is still incredibly complex.

The system of existence is perfect in the sense that it was designed to be self sustaining. Planets, including those devoid of life, are perfect. Solar systems, having planets attracted the the central star to create the possiblity for life to be created, are perfect. The universe is perfect. That is why it had to have been created by some supernatural force.

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)
There aren't any. It can't be proven either way. You must be new here.

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way
Ah, but not TOO new, I see.

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

I wish you luck. You're gonna need it.

Oh, btw. God does exist. I met her. She's really a nice lady.

There aren't any. It can't be proven either way. You must be new here.


Ah, but not TOO new, I see.



I wish you luck. You're gonna need it.

Oh, btw. God does exist. I met her. She's really a nice lady.

God does exist, yes

I asked God to prove He exists. He told me to go fuck myself. *nod*

I asked God to prove He exists. He told me to go fuck myself. *nod*

how sad that you thought the person that told you to fuck yourself was God

how sad that you thought the person that told you to fuck yourself was God

He seemed trustworthy. So I obeyed. :)

The idea that there isn't a "God" unless someone can generate proof is as silly as believing the earth was flat until it was proven to be round.

It was round all along girls and God by definition exists without your approval, burden of proof or need for acceptance.

The idea that there isn't a "God" unless someone can generate proof is as silly as believing the earth was flat until it was proven to be round.

It was round all along girls and God by definition exists without your approval, burden of proof or need for acceptance.

i agree :)

I asked God to prove He exists. He told me to go fuck myself. *nod*

I asked him the same thing, but he is giving me the silent treatment.

Here is my proof: God exists because you can talk to him. If you can't, then you aren't a real Scotsman.

Simple. :)

God does exist, yes

And so does humor.

God DID exist, but he proved that he himself did not exist:

"Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

Most leading theologians claim that this argument isn't worth a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a fortune when he used it as the central argument in his book Well That About Wraps It Up For God."

God DID exist, but he proved that he himself did not exist:

"Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

Most leading theologians claim that this argument isn't worth a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a fortune when he used it as the central argument in his book Well That About Wraps It Up For God."

Proof denying faith can mean many things, and it could be the wrong proof as well

Can anyone proof He doesn't?

it alos depends on what you count as proof

Can anyone proof He doesn't?

Nope, because youd have to PROVE...

Im not sure how you commit a noun...

u can't prove that any religion is true, all of them take some belief or faith, which I say is trusting in something you can't prove, but believing it anyway

u can't prove that any religion is true, all of them take some belief or faith, which I say is trusting in something you can't prove, but believing it anyway

you apply faith to something every day of your life, religious or not

you apply faith to something every day of your life, religious or not

Bullshit...Im a Droid! lol

Im an ImmorTal atheist... and I dont recall going to you first hand in private

Immortal eh?













*let's loose on Santiago*
http://www.holdmyfile.com/n_images/usr/gal7223/s_img/f0002.gif
http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/paladin/flamethrower.gif
http://i1.tinypic.com/o0o07q.gif
http://smiles2k.net/smiles/big_smiles/super_smilies088.gif

Nope, because youd have to PROVE...

Im not sure how you commit a noun...

Thank you, darling. I really appreciate your grammar lesson.

Thank you, darling. I really appreciate your grammar lesson.

No problem, it was the only smart-ass thing i could think of to say at the time, lol...

The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence...

But if the evidence has been absent for 2000 years...and the only "Proof" is an old book that sounds like mystical stories, I'de prefer not to believe

Ok, so god emailed me. Attached as follows:

From god@theuniverse.org, May 8, 2008, 13:53 GMT
Re: Do I exist? Can I prove it?

Can you prove I don't?

Love,
God

Ok, so god emailed me. Attached as follows:

From god@theuniverse.org, May 8, 2008, 13:53 GMT
Re: Do I exist? Can I prove it?

Can you prove I don't?

Love,
God

while your in touch with him...please ask him where my car keys are o.O

Ok, so god emailed me. Attached as follows:

From god@theuniverse.org, May 8, 2008, 13:53 GMT
Re: Do I exist? Can I prove it?

Can you prove I don't?

Love,
God

Ask him about this:
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b42/Segomo2/1183977445799ob9.jpg

I go to church every week. I see these arguments on NationStates. I keep wanting to take part. Long ago, I used to be one of the smart kids. Now, I'm too old to be smart anymore.

In answer to the guy that started this thread . . . God is in the back. He's in the quiet people, some of them, the people that you get to know in just about any church if you hang on past all the reasons for leaving. Go in knowing that there will be plenty of reasons to leave. Know that there will be hypocrites and a lot of them will be leaders in the church. If you can just keep hanging in there, though, there are these people that you find in the church that make you glad you kept believing.

How do you start believing in God? You will seek Him and find Him when you search for Him with all your heart. That's doesn't mean that you have to throw out your good, God-given mind. It just means keep searching. If you really, really want to know Him, He will be found by you. If all you want to know is "about" Him . . . I don't know what He does with that.

My Child...
Please worship me, otherwise I will be an old-useless-forgotten God.
I am exist just for you to worship and believe.
If you don't believe in me anymore, nor to worship me, then I will cease to exist.
I have given you much... so much...
Wars, Disputes, Murders, Hatreds... For you to play in My name.
Love... For you to breed more warmongers.
Please do not forget me.
Do not abandon your belief.
Since I am the only logic that can explain your fear of the unknown.
Since I am the only illumination that you should follow in times of oppressions.
Since I am protecting you from the burning fire of science.
Since I am exist out of your ancestors bed time stories, and keeping them from wandering alone in the wilderness.

Do not forget me my child...
Or I will no longer exist...


-GOD-

These kind of threads are annoying I've seen too many on NSG.I see it this way,Christians are going to keep insisting God exists and that there's no point in trying to prove it,while Atheists will keep trying to prove he doesn't exist.I'm an Atheist who was once a Chistian.I stopped believing in Gods for my own personal reasons and I think people waste too much time on this subject.They should leave it alone.


Well,damn I've just used up a minute of my life typing this...:D

These kind of threads are annoying I've seen too many on NSG.I see it this way,Christians are going to keep insisting God exists and that there's no point in trying to prove it,while Atheists will keep trying to prove he doesn't exist.I'm an Atheist who was once a Chistian.I stopped believing in Gods for my own personal reasons and I think people waste too much time on this subject.They should leave it alone.


Well,damn I've just used up a minute of my life typing this...:D

Ive just wasted two Minutes reading and replying to it...:rolleyes:

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

-I do realize this may go nowhere and will likely not affect anyone in any way

Rules
-Please please no ad hominem arguments. I am frankly uninterested in the fact that an atheist considers a Christian ignorant or that a Christian thinks an atheist is without morals.

-This is not an attack on religion don't treat it as such

-Logical arguments only. If your proof for an argument is "I experienced god" you had better be able to back that up

-Please cite any claims that you wish to make

-feel free to refute any argument but keep it clean. Saying "that argument is idiotic" is not a rebuttal

It is impossible to 'prove' that a god exists in empirical terms. There's just no way you can prove to someone else that your evidence support the claim you make.

Reality is infinite. In an infinite reality, all things must exist. Therefore God exists.

These kind of threads are annoying I've seen too many on NSG.I see it this way,Christians are going to keep insisting God exists and that there's no point in trying to prove it,while Atheists will keep trying to prove he doesn't exist.I'm an Atheist who was once a Chistian.I stopped believing in Gods for my own personal reasons and I think people waste too much time on this subject.They should leave it alone.


Well,damn I've just used up a minute of my life typing this...:D

I've known a couple of people have their faith confirmed much more strongly in these NSG debates. I've also known a couple of people to change their mind and move accross the fence in these debates - although it's doubtful (obviously) that NSG alone can claim responsibility for that.

Personally, I like these threads. If all they do is make people think... well, that's a good thing, isn't it?

If all they do is make people think... well, that's a good thing, isn't it?

No, Thinking Denies Faith, Promotes Heresy! :p

Reality is infinite. In an infinite reality, all things must exist. Therefore God exists.

Cute, but flawed. On at least two levels:

1 - In an infinite reality, only real things MUST exist.

2 - In an infinite reality, it doesn't logically follow that 'all things must exist' anyway. If your 'infinite reality' is simply an infinite expanse of treacle, there's nothing else that 'must' exist there.

No, Thinking Denies Faith, Promotes Heresy! :p

Yes. I'm a heretic. Go Heresy!

It is impossible to 'prove' that a god exists in empirical terms. There's just no way you can prove to someone else that your evidence support the claim you make.

Well,I didn't want to get involved in this but WTH I'll join in.Anyway nobody can prove God exists.The only way we'd ever know he existed is if he suddenly opened up the sky and said.....THIS IS MY KINGDOM...and then started kicking everyboby into a dark void, in which after he finished pwning everyone he'd decided all of our fates forever more!:D

Cute, but flawed. On at least two levels:

1 - In an infinite reality, only real things MUST exist.

2 - In an infinite reality, it doesn't logically follow that 'all things must exist' anyway. If your 'infinite reality' is simply an infinite expanse of treacle, there's nothing else that 'must' exist there.

The instant you place any conditions or restrictions on infinity, it is no longer infinite.

Your shot.:)

The instant you place any conditions or restrictions on infinity, it is no longer infinite.

Your shot.:)

Infinity isn't the problem - you specified 'reality'... thus only 'real' things must exist there. And not even all of those MUST.

Intro
-This is not an attempt to prove atheism I am genuinely interested in logical proofs that God Exists. (any god)

<snip>


Proof....Not going to happen, at least not in a public forum as this.

However, as evolution and natural selection increases in popularity, coupled with advances in technology and genetic manipulation...the day that mankind creates complex life, will be the day that god as creator is indeed a rational concept, for if we can create, so too could we be created.

I imagine that most will see that as a proof that god does not exist, though.

Well,I didn't want to get involved in this but WTH I'll join in.Anyway nobody can prove God exists.The only way we'd ever know he existed is if he suddenly opened up the sky and said.....THIS IS MY KINGDOM...and then started kicking everyboby into a dark void, in which after he finished pwning everyone he'd decided all of our fates forever more!:D

Not at all. It is easy to prove god exists. I can look at my phone and say 'wow, if a phone exists, so must a creator god'.

It might prove it TO ME, but it wouldn't be empirical, and I couldn't carry that proof to anyone else. That's the problem with proving the existence of 'god'.

There is, of course, a god.

Bowie be thy name.

Infinity isn't the problem - you specified 'reality'... thus only 'real' things must exist there. And not even all of those MUST.

Point noted. I was originally going to use "the universe" instead of "reality", but then I would have placed a condition or restriction on Infinity.

Perhaps I should have said "In an infinity all things that can exist, will exist, therefore God exists"

*I am trying to prove God exists.:eek:*

If god created everything what created gods (or god . . . .whatever)?

Heh I love this question.

Nothing created God, God is the cause of all.

The instant you place any conditions or restrictions on infinity, it is no longer infinite.

Your shot.:)

There are an infinite number of integers, yet none of them are chickens.

There are an infinite number of real numbers between 1 and 2, yet none of them are greater than 2.

You can put all sorts of limits on infinity.

For example, if there are an infinite number of possible things that aren't God, you could have an infinite universe without a God, that persisted via recursive infinite iteration.

That said, there also COULD be a God, there just doesn't have to be, at least not by your "Reality is infinite" argument.

Heh I love this question.

Nothing created God, God is the cause of all.

So, then, it is possible for something to exist that wasn't created.

And if that kind of ontological primacy can be considered as a property of a sentient being, the same property could be imagined as a belonging to a universe that cycles infinitely both forward and backward.

Doesn't have to be that way, of course, but if you can imagine a God that was never born and will never die, its equally plausible to imagine a cycling universe that never had a first cycle or a last.

Heh I love this question.

Nothing created God, God is the cause of all.

That isn't really a proof more of an assumption. Though I always wonder why some people who are happy to accept that God needs no creator cannot also see that a universe does not need one either.

So, then, it is possible for something to exist that wasn't created.

And if that kind of ontological primacy can be considered as a property of a sentient being, the same property could be imagined as a belonging to a universe that cycles infinitely both forward and backward.

Doesn't have to be that way, of course, but if you can imagine a God that was never born and will never die, its equally plausible to imagine a cycling universe that never had a first cycle or a last.

Exactly. Which is why the question makes me laugh so much, for if you can imagine a cyclying universe, then why can you not imagine an uncreated creator?

Interestingly just saw this on the BBC

The Archbishop of Westminster has urged Christians to treat atheists and agnostics with "deep esteem".

Believers may be partly responsible for the decline in faith by losing sense of the mystery and treating God as a "fact in the world", he said in a lecture.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor called for more understanding and appreciation between believers and non-believers.

But the leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales said that Britain must not become "a God-free zone".

The cardinal's lecture at Westminster Cathedral comes after a spate of public clashes over issues such as stem-cell research, gay adoption and faith schools.

Mystery of God

He expressed concern about the increasing unpopularity of the Christian voice in public life, saying: "Our life together in Britain cannot be a God-free zone and we must not allow Britain to become a world devoid of religious faith and its powerful contribution to the common good."

Societies ruled only by reason were like those created by Hitler and Stalin, ripe for "terror and oppression", he said.

Last year, he complained of a "new secularist intolerance of religion" and the state's "increasing acceptance" of anti-religious views.

To stem this tide, he said Christians must understand they have something in common with those who do not believe.

God is not a "fact in the world" as though God could be treated as "one thing among other things to be empirically investigated" and affirmed or denied on the "basis of observation", said Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor.

"If Christians really believed in the mystery of God, we would realise that proper talk about God is always difficult, always tentative.

"I want to encourage people of faith to regard those without faith with deep esteem because the hidden God is active in their lives as well as in the lives of those who believe."

'Imaginary friend'

But Richard Dawkins, scientist, staunch atheist and author of books including The God Delusion, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that the cardinal's comments carried no weight.

Referring to God as an "imaginary friend", Mr Dawkins said: "When talking to a politician you would demand proof for what they say, but suddenly when talking to a clergyman you don't have to provide evidence.

"There's absolutely no reason to take seriously someone who says, 'I believe it because I believe it.'

"God either exists or he doesn't. It's a matter of the truth."

Speaking later on Radio 4, Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor answered those criticisms. He said: "I think there are a number of people in this country who would like to marginalise religion.

"They would much prefer not to see religion as neutral, but to neutralise it.

"And there are unbelievers who construct their own God in order to demolish him."

Of claims that faith has no basis in reason, he replied: "To believe in God is not unreasonable."

I don't see religion as neutral, I don't see how anyone can.

That isn't really a proof more of an assumption. Though I always wonder why some people who are happy to accept that God needs no creator cannot also see that a universe does not need one either.

Well I wouldn't say that is correct, mostly correct, but not wholey.

I belive in God, I belive that God is the cause of the creation, but I can of course understand that because I belive this, then others can belive in an uncreated universe.

To answer your question though, it is because those who belive in God obviously do not belive in an uncreated universe.

It is not that we ridcule the idea, it is just not what we belive.

To turn your statement on it's head though, if you can hold to the idea of an uncreated universe, then why does the idea of an uncreated creator cause problems?

To turn your statement on it's head though, if you can hold to the idea of an uncreated universe, then why does the idea of an uncreated creator cause problems?

Philosophically I have no problem with it, I just don't see the need for one.

If God exists, only he can prove he exists.
If God doesn't exist, no one can prove he exists

If he does exist, his nature is beyond human rationality. Thus humans are unable to comprehend Him, except through some source that is the 'word of God'. However, we can't definitively prove that any particular text is the word of God. So we just can't know, though people can have faith that these texts are accurate, or believe that they have experienced some direct revelation. Can't be proved either way. Thats my two cents.

It's up to the believers to prove that there is in fact a God up there and not to non-believers that he/she does not exist.

Philosophically I have no problem with it, I just don't see the need for one.

Well thats fair enough then.

It's up to the believers to prove that there is in fact a God up there and not to non-believers that he/she does not exist.

Or we can all mind our own business, and belive or not believe as we will.

Or we can all mind our own business, and belive or not believe as we will.

Excellent. You are playing into the hands of the Revolutionary Agnostic Movement. Soon we will be strong enough to take over. Or will we? Damn, this has come up at the annual conference for the past 94 years, yet still we cannot make up our minds. One would almost think it an inherent personality flaw.

Excellent. You are playing into the hands of the Revolutionary Agnostic Movement. Soon we will be strong enough to take over. Or will we? Damn, this has come up at the annual conference for the past 94 years, yet still we cannot make up our minds. One would almost think it an inherent personality flaw.

Heh what are you revoluting against?

Reality is infinite. In an infinite reality, all things must exist. Therefore God exists.

If reality is infinite, then there can be no centre to it, or conversely every point is at it centre....

Yea i am the centre of the universe

Exactly. Which is why the question makes me laugh so much, for if you can imagine a cyclying universe, then why can you not imagine an uncreated creator?

The problem is, one can imagine all sorts of things. One could imagine that our universe is the grad school project of an otherdimensional alien and we are sitting in a containment field on its desk.

That actually could be the case, just as a God could be the case, or the Hindu Gods could be the case.

But I will not pray to the Hindu Gods or a single God any more than I would try to find a way to tap on the containment field to get the alien to notice me.

The universe could be infinitely cycling, or could be the work of a God, or any number of other possibilities. To pick one and believe it, especially the one about a loving God, makes many feel better, and it might conceivably true.

But mostly it makes people feel better, which is understable.

Heh what are you revoluting against?

Well, a couple of conferences ago our meeting went a little like this (This is my personal perspective, we were unable to agree over the details of the minutes). Some members debated whether revolution was really the best way of achieving our aims. Then we got into discussion as to what our aims actually were. Then we got into a whole new debate as to whether we were really agnostics. The whole thing was a disaster, I feel. Luckily our membership didn't decrease as a result of this debacle, as the existing members were unsure if this would really have been in their interests.

Exactly. Which is why the question makes me laugh so much, for if you can imagine a cyclying universe, then why can you not imagine an uncreated creator?

Damn circler Aruguments, That what kill my parents

Well, a couple of conferences ago our meeting went a little like this (This is my personal perspective, we were unable to agree over the details of the minutes). Some members debated whether revolution was really the best way of achieving our aims. Then we got into discussion as to what our aims actually were. Then we got into a whole new debate as to whether we were really agnostics. The whole thing was a disaster, I feel. Luckily our membership didn't decrease as a result of this debacle, as the existing members were unsure if this would really have been in their interests.

I abstained from voting because I can't prove categorically that I am not the dream state of some other being, but I can't prove that I am, so I didn't vote, but I might have and forgot that I did. I can't prove it either way.

When will people realise this is scientifically, logically, and rationally unarguable?

The existence of God isn't argued. It is felt. That feeling so real and so undescribable that no amount of "argument" can do it any justice.

Faith by reason isn't faith at all. I cannot say for other religions but the aim of Christianity isn't trying to settle the great debates of science and reason. Humans can sort that out themselves. Christianity is trying to settle the problem of the human condition.

Damn circler Aruguments, That what kill my parents

Not a circular argument as such, more a statement of belife. And really intended to quash all those non belivers who ask the question, 'what created God'. For if an unbeliver can accept that maybe the universe is of a cylcical nature, then why do these people have problems in accepting a belivers view of an uncreated God?

Its a logic thing, if you can accept one idea, then logicaly you must also be capable of accepting the other.

Of course if you cannot acept the idea of an uncreated universe, then just how do you propose the universe came into being? It begets an infinte line of 'what started that' type of questions.

When will people realise this is scientifically, logically, and rationally unarguable?

The existence of God isn't argued. It is felt. That feeling so real and so undescribable that no amount of "argument" can do it any justice.

Faith by reason isn't faith at all. I cannot say for other religions but the aim of Christianity isn't trying to settle the great debates of science and reason. Humans can sort that out themselves. Christianity is trying to settle the problem of the human condition.

I agree, but I would say that there is no problem of the human condition.

Not a circular argument as such, more a statement of belife. And really intended to quash all those non belivers who ask the question, 'what created God'. For if an unbeliver can accept that maybe the universe is of a cylcical nature, then why do these people have problems in accepting a belivers view of an uncreated God?

Well, the unbeliever (at least a fair one) admits that its a "maybe" that the universe is cyclical.

Most believers won't admit that their God is a "maybe".


Its a logic thing, if you can accept one idea, then logicaly you must also be capable of accepting the other.

Accepting the possibility of one can include accepting the possibility of the other. The problem is, most religious people insist that their God isn't a possibility but a certainty. What's more, they insist that their version of God is the only possible one, when there are an unlimited number of other ideas of God or Gods or Things that are just as possible.


Of course if you cannot acept the idea of an uncreated universe, then just how do you propose the universe came into being? It begets an infinte line of 'what started that' type of questions.

That's where unbounded recursive iteration of creation comes into play. Just as there is no "most negative" integer, each thing could be preceded by something else. (note, could be).

I agree, but I would say that there is no problem of the human condition.

Please elaborate.

When will people realise this is scientifically, logically, and rationally unarguable?

The existence of God isn't argued. It is felt. That feeling so real and so undescribable that no amount of "argument" can do it any justice.

Faith by reason isn't faith at all. I cannot say for other religions but the aim of Christianity isn't trying to settle the great debates of science and reason. Humans can sort that out themselves. Christianity is trying to settle the problem of the human condition.

Part of the issue is, members of non-Christian religions or spiritual practices can describe their own "feelings" as being just as profoundly "indescribable" as yours.

Suppose 5 different members of 5 different doctrinally disparate religions all "feel" their God or Gods existing. Some of them are wrong.

Thus, it is possible to "feel" your God exists, even if it doesn't.

Then again, a God could exist, but be unfelt. Going by your feelings to decide what you believe will lead you to believe what makes you feel better. Understandable, but not suitable for everyone.

Well, the unbeliever (at least a fair one) admits that its a "maybe" that the universe is cyclical.

Most believers won't admit that their God is a "maybe".

Heh well of course, otherwise they would be agnostic.



Accepting the possibility of one can include accepting the possibility of the other. The problem is, most religious people insist that their God isn't a possibility but a certainty. What's more, they insist that their version of God is the only possible one, when there are an unlimited number of other ideas of God or Gods or Things that are just as possible.

Agian that is what makes it faith, not reasonble, rational thought. Of course belife in God is unreasonable, just not 'unreasonable', if you get the differance.

I though don't see the problem to which you refer?



That's where unbounded recursive iteration of creation comes into play. Just as there is no "most negative" integer, each thing could be preceded by something else. (note, could be).

Yes of course that is the logical way to go, if you do not belive in God nor can imagine a cyclic universe.

Please elaborate.

Just that, there is no problem of the human condition, it is easy answered by the fact that we are human, what other condition would you expect?

Part of the issue is, members of non-Christian religions or spiritual practices can describe their own "feelings" as being just as profoundly "indescribable" as yours.

Suppose 5 different members of 5 different doctrinally disparate religions all "feel" their God or Gods existing. Some of them are wrong.

Thus, it is possible to "feel" your God exists, even if it doesn't.

Then again, a God could exist, but be unfelt. Going by your feelings to decide what you believe will lead you to believe what makes you feel better. Understandable, but not suitable for everyone.

Absolutely. Their feelings are as valid as mine (if they are as genuine and as strong). That's why an "argument" will never settle the matter. It's a battle of "inner feelings", for lack of better terminology.

The problem is, one can imagine all sorts of things. One could imagine that our universe is the grad school project of an otherdimensional alien and we are sitting in a containment field on its desk.

"The Universe was a PhD thesis that God was unable to successfully defend."
- James Morrow, "Only Begotten Daughter"

Just that, there is no problem of the human condition, it is easy answered by the fact that we are human, what other condition would you expect?

Ah. I see.

Why I say there is a problem with the human condition is that Christianity compares the pre-sinful human condition and the post-sinful human condition and finds that the pre-sinful human condition is much more desirable. It is the pre-sinful human condition that Christianity aims to grasp again.

Do people 'round here ever read Kant before discussing philosophy? At least a good resume of his works?
Many megabytes would be saved.

:headbang:

Part of the issue is, members of non-Christian religions or spiritual practices can describe their own "feelings" as being just as profoundly "indescribable" as yours.

Suppose 5 different members of 5 different doctrinally disparate religions all "feel" their God or Gods existing. Some of them are wrong.

Thus, it is possible to "feel" your God exists, even if it doesn't.

Then again, a God could exist, but be unfelt. Going by your feelings to decide what you believe will lead you to believe what makes you feel better. Understandable, but not suitable for everyone.


To answer that one I would suggest that all Gods are one and the same. The Gods of the Hindu faith are nothing more than aspects of the one God, and the God of the Christian faith is the same.

Obviously when it comes to dogma, or differing attributes that differant relgion attache to God then some must be correct and some must be incorrect(heh of course if you don't belive in God at all, then all is incorrect), or at least not understood correctly.

I though don't see the problem to which you refer?



The problem is, many (not all) religious folks want their religious beliefs to govern public policy, whereas a non-believer would rather see public policy governed only by things that ARE, as you put it, rational thought.

You see, I don't mind somebody believing that Jesus rose from the dead and absolved their sin.

But if they want law "A" passed, they need to provide a reason other than "Jesus said..."

Ah. I see.

Why I say there is a problem with the human condition is that Christianity compares the pre-sinful human condition and the post-sinful human condition and finds that the pre-sinful human condition is much more desirable. It is the pre-sinful human condition that Christianity aims to grasp again.

Ahhh I see.

Well now I don't belive in the concept of sin. It makes no sense to me that a loving God would allow man to be tricked into sinning, and then further punish us for the sin of Adam and Eve.

This illustrates that God is either not loving or that this concept of God is flawed.

Do people 'round here ever read Kant before discussing philosophy? At least a good resume of his works?
Many megabytes would be saved.

:headbang:

Nope not I.

To answer that one I would suggest that all Gods are one and the same. The Gods of the Hindu faith are nothing more than aspects of the one God, and the God of the Christian faith is the same.

Obviously when it comes to dogma, or differing attributes that differant relgion attache to God then some must be correct and some must be incorrect(heh of course if you don't belive in God at all, then all is incorrect), or at least not understood correctly.

But suppose the Jainists are right, or somebody else, and there are two or more Gods that have no part of one another?

Again, we can imagine or suggest or postulate any number of ideas about a God.

But to pick one and say "this is the real one" really just makes one feel better.

And once you make truth a function of what makes you feel better, you have made it less a function of more rigorous things.

Nope not I.

I really advise you to do: wonderful reading if you like logics: amongst other benefits, the proof of why ontological proofs of god's existance are made of logical fail.

"The Universe was a PhD thesis that God was unable to successfully defend."
- James Morrow, "Only Begotten Daughter"

Not his fault, he picked a lousy advisor and two members of his committee were alcoholics.

The problem is, many (not all) religious folks want their religious beliefs to govern public policy, whereas a non-believer would rather see public policy governed only by things that ARE, as you put it, rational thought.

You see, I don't mind somebody believing that Jesus rose from the dead and absolved their sin.

But if they want law "A" passed, they need to provide a reason other than "Jesus said..."


Ahh yes I agree, that is one of the problems with religion, and springs from the ludicrus concept of 'one true way'. I would ask all belivers to consider why would a loving God populate the Earth with many veriaties of people and ideas, ideals and minsets, and then try to shoehorn all of us into thinking only one why about God?

That is a garenteed way of creating dissent and violence, so either God did not give us 'one true way' or humankind has mucked with Gods word for it's own greedy gains.

Personaly, and as a man of faith, I would rather see all goverments filled with liberal minded athesists, then full of religous 'one true way' nutters.

I really advise you to do: wonderful reading if you like logics: amongst other benefits, the proof of why ontological proofs of god's existance are made of logical fail.

Its a well known fact that Kant later admitted that proof of divine existence was in fact possible on an empirical level, and her name was Gerta Offenvukked, one of his grad students from Sweden.

But suppose the Jainists are right, or somebody else, and there are two or more Gods that have no part of one another?

Again, we can imagine or suggest or postulate any number of ideas about a God.

But to pick one and say "this is the real one" really just makes one feel better.

And once you make truth a function of what makes you feel better, you have made it less a function of more rigorous things.


I see what you mean, but it's not entirly true. I mean, to apply the same sort of thought to the rest of life may cause problems, but there really is nothing comparable to a belife in God, and it is only in this that one can get away with this type of thought.

Perhaps there are two or more God, I though do not belive so. Anytime there are seeming descrepances in either Gods attributes, or Gods plan, then I will always assume misunderstanding or mans tampering of holy scripture.

I really advise you to do: wonderful reading if you like logics: amongst other benefits, the proof of why ontological proofs of god's existance are made of logical fail.

The whole concept of God, being an unreasonable supposition is not logical, but we can of course apply logic to claimed attributes, and God's plan. The whole sphere of trying to prove or disprove the existance of God fails from the outset, so either you belive or you do not.

Ahhh I see.

Well now I don't belive in the concept of sin. It makes no sense to me that a loving God would allow man to be tricked into sinning, and then further punish us for the sin of Adam and Eve.

This illustrates that God is either not loving or that this concept of God is flawed.

Lol! You just to conclusions really quickly!

In the social sciences there are seldom any correct answers. If humans are that complex, what about a God who supposedly created them? Do you think we'll be able to figure Him out in the one sentence "He is either not loving, or that this concept of Him is flawed"?

I could prove God exists, but he made me promise I wouldn't spoil the ending.

Lol! You just to conclusions really quickly!

In the social sciences there are seldom any correct answers. If humans are that complex, what about a God who supposedly created them? Do you think we'll be able to figure Him out in the one sentence "He is either not loving, or that this concept of Him is flawed"?

Heh not really quickly I have spent years thinking about God.

To answer your question though. What is the use of God without knowledge of what God wants us to do re: Godself?

If you have faith in the existance of God, then surley the next step is figuring out what God's plan for us is. To do this we only have holy scriture, perportedly the word of God.

So if scripture attributes God with all encompassing love, then all other parts of the same scripture has to logicaly bear this out, if it does not it is either wrong(in which case how can it be the word of God?) or it has been tampered with, or we are missunderstanding it.

And so I can certianly and reasonably state that i belive an all loving God would not trick us into sinning, and further would not punish us for not excepting God.

Yes God is complex, but we, God's creation, have been given a brain capable of logical thought and reasoning abilities. Is it then wrong to use these to try to fathom what God wants of us?

These kind of threads are annoying I've seen too many on NSG.I see it this way,Christians are going to keep insisting God exists and that there's no point in trying to prove it,while Atheists will keep trying to prove he doesn't exist.I'm an Atheist who was once a Chistian.I stopped believing in Gods for my own personal reasons and I think people waste too much time on this subject.They should leave it alone.


Well,damn I've just used up a minute of my life typing this...:D

No one is forcing you to post in or even read the thread you know.

What intrigues me is the fact that if a God exists, then it must be subject to some sort of measurable constraints. Even if it only imposes those constraints upon itself. For instance, while it may be able to perform supernatural miracles, it can never create a square circle.

Where our present understanding of the nature of the Universe is still sadly lacking, we haven't yet been able to come up with the "Theory of everything", only conjectures based upon our limited understanding of the way physics, quantumn mechanics etc, works.

If a supernatural being is part of this conjecture, then by implication; it is part of the natural order of the Universe and thus not supernatural at all.

Maybe we are all indeed part of this thing we call God, as a means of the Universe being able to understand itself, it needs conciousness to analyse and determine it's own reality. We are just part of that conciousness, along with whatever other aspects of sentience elsewhere in the Universe/Multiverse.

What intrigues me is the fact that if a God exists, then it must be subject to some sort of measurable constraints. Even if it only imposes those constraints upon itself. For instance, while it may be able to perform supernatural miracles, it can never create a square circle.

Where our present understanding of the nature of the Universe is still sadly lacking, we haven't yet been able to come up with the "Theory of everything", only conjectures based upon our limited understanding of the way physics, quantumn mechanics etc, works.



If a supernatural being is part of this conjecture, then by implication; it is part of the natural order of the Universe and thus not supernatural at all.

Maybe we are all indeed part of this thing we call God, as a means of the Universe being able to understand itself, it needs conciousness to analyse and determine it's own reality. We are just part of that conciousness, along with whatever other aspects of sentience elsewhere in the Universe/Multiverse.


Now that mirrors my own belife quite nicely.:D

If a supernatural being is part of this conjecture, then by implication; it is part of the natural order of the Universe and thus not supernatural at all.


Being part of a conjecture does not make something anything other than part of a conjecture.

It turns out anyone can be God. Scientists are very close to creating life out of ideas downloaded into a computer and having living DNA based creatures born based on the formula. This is God. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/16/AR2007121601900.html


Perhaps our God is some guy who beat us to the formula by a few million years.

(Please make an attempt to read al 3 pages of the article, its implications are fairly mind boggeling)

Peepelonia, it's good to know I'm not alone in my views. This way of thinking excludes us from going along with all the bigotry and ignorance that supersticious beliefs usually require.

Heh what are you revoluting against?

It's a revolution in the true sense of the word: they're just going round and round in circles. :p

When will people realise this is scientifically, logically, and rationally unarguable?

The existence of God isn't argued. It is felt. That feeling so real and so undescribable that no amount of "argument" can do it any justice.

Faith by reason isn't faith at all. I cannot say for other religions but the aim of Christianity isn't trying to settle the great debates of science and reason. Humans can sort that out themselves. Christianity is trying to settle the problem of the human condition.

I can't speak for anyone else but my human condition's fine, thanks for asking.

Not his fault, he picked a lousy advisor and two members of his committee were alcoholics.

True, but he didn't help himself by refusing to support his thesis and demanding that they take it on faith.

No. I cannot prove or disprove the existence of God because his supernatural character makes it impossible for me to gain any knowledge of his existence.

I can't speak for anyone else but my human condition's fine, thanks for asking.

*Doesn't believe Agenda is human*
;)

No. I cannot prove or disprove the existence of God because his supernatural character makes it impossible for me to gain any knowledge of his existence.
Depends, does that God have or had any involvement in our reality?

*Doesn't believe Agenda is human*
;)

:eek:

Curses! They're on to me!

*flees*

Nope, no one can prove God exists or not. If anyone can, let me know. I want to do your exclusive interview.:D

Nope, no one can prove God exists or not. If anyone can, let me know. I want to do your exclusive interview.:D
I agree.

Depends, does that God have or had any involvement in our reality?
The answer to this question is the same: I don't know because I just don't have access to that knowledge.

There aren't any. It can't be proven either way. You must be new here.


Ah, but not TOO new, I see.



I wish you luck. You're gonna need it.

Oh, btw. God does exist. I met her. She's really a nice lady.
heheh thanks and thats cool (which one is she?) but no I've been around a while but I think im either insane or eternally optimistic lol

Exactly. Which is why the question makes me laugh so much, for if you can imagine a cyclying universe, then why can you not imagine an uncreated creator?

wouldn't that be a cyclical creator rather than an uncreated one? As in a creator that either created something that created him/her or a creator than in fact created his/herself

When will people realise this is scientifically, logically, and rationally unarguable?

The existence of God isn't argued. It is felt. That feeling so real and so undescribable that no amount of "argument" can do it any justice.

Faith by reason isn't faith at all. I cannot say for other religions but the aim of Christianity isn't trying to settle the great debates of science and reason. Humans can sort that out themselves. Christianity is trying to settle the problem of the human condition.

How can you Feel the existence of god? Is feeling not just a function of the brain?