Do you believe in God?

"God created, and exists outside of, time and is therefore not affected by it." That's just an assertion , what makes you believe that? You can't have something that exists outside of time and space (or maybe you can, maybe science will find something that exists outside of time and space, some sort of weird matter or something, but it (almost certainly) won't be an intelligent being like the god of any religion)

As for what caused the Big Bang, science hasn't found out yet. It may be decades or even centuries until it does, and we as a species may be wiped out long before then, but just making up some sort of god because you can't explain it any other way is stupid.
.

" We have evolved a system of morality to benefit us as a species of social primate. I think there are certain ideas that are ingrained in us as part of our evolutionary heritage. And besides, different cultures and different points in time had different ideas of what counts as murder and what is morally wrong. For example, a few hundreds of years ago, slavery was considered acceptable and in the future who knows what our opinions on things like killing intelligent animals will be. Maybe in a few hundred years we will look at the mass slaughter of animals for food similarly to how we look at the Nazi genocide.

Why is it less plausible to believe that there is an entity existing outside of time and space, defying the laws of physics, than to believe that the Big Bang happened spontaneously, for no reason, again defying the laws of physics?

So you don't believe that there was anything objectively wrong with killing 6 million innocent people?

...could we not therefore also say, God is false because there is no proof of it?

Be careful with your wording mate, your arguments are bad enough I wouldn't want you to set yourself up for complete failure.

There is a hell of a lot more proof for evolution than there is for all religions combined.
That's because there is no proof for any religion but lots of proof for evolution. Your statement is false.

What about miracles or religious experiences- surely they are evidences to show God exists as it is a direct encounter with the divine. Miracles, by pure definition, is something that breaks the law of science and makes you think only God must have done it. How can something so psychologically, physically, mentally so overwhelming be deemed to be as being an induced experienced. That's why philosophers like William James, Fredrich Schleiermacher and Rudolf Otto all give convincing arguments as to why religious experience prove that God exists.My arguments are supported by prominent philosophers so I wouldn't count them to be amazingly awful.

If there is a god why did he give the bullies at my school free will to make my life absolute hell, yes hell, for 5 years?!


Posted from TSR Mobile

Evolution ultimately just talks about how sentient beings evolve to biologically fit in their environment. But, how can we possibly know when we haven't experienced ourselves evolving to fit in our environments. Scientists haven't seen biological organisms evolve to fit in their environment so how can the 'theory' of evolution be applicable to the universe when it's entirely flawed.

Our ancestors haven't withdrawn evolution and do you honestly believe that we evolved from monkeys- then why are there still some monkeys here surely they would have died out as 'the survival of the fittest' ensures the stronger beings survive.

The most obvious thing, as I point out over and over again which you love to ignore, that all religions have in common is that they acknowledge that there is a designer of the world. Surely, this validates my point, that there is a designer of the world. Your view of the nature of the designer of the world is different from mine and I respect that. But, how can you ignore how some people have religious experiences whether it be mystic or a miracle or voices and not regard there ever being a God.

The design argument, out of all argument, is rather strong as the argument does not rely upon fixed definitions that we must accept thus we don't focus on trying to define 'God' and lose sight of the obvious evidence. It provides us clear examples of design and we don't ever try to doubt it. All I'm trying to tell you is that this argument proves there is a designer of the world and it's not like I'm forcing you to acknowledge God is all loving, all-powerful and all-knowing just that there is a designer of the world.

Because they have free will and so do you. Irenaeus states that God gave us free will to develop our qualities such as compassion, courage and so forth. If God intervened , according to John Hick, then this would lead to a counter factual hypothesis in the basis that we wouldn't be able to individually develop our qualities as we would keep on relying on God to help us. We would have that ideology that 'It's fine that I didn't revise because God will help me by giving me the answers"- like what honest goods would that do. We need the free will to develop those qualities and show our benevolence to God. Those bullies at your school are dickheads, they just feel the need to pick on someone but the fact is those bullies help you think. It makes you realise what type of people you want to keep contact, people who I should ignore etc.

We can't just disregard God's existence because the way our life is. God is our creator and the designer of the world. He wants to test us and he can't do that by always helping us.

Looking at it scientifically, everything like this starts from something small or less complex and becomes gradually more complex. Evolution, the development of a cell, the growth of an animal from embryo, etc. I'm fairly certain that this will be true with what started the universe.
.

Of course I believe there was something (a lot) wrong with killing 6 million innocent people. I have a sense of right and wrong that is built inside me from an evolutionary heritage. If we didn't have this idea, then we would not have functioned in the distant past as a social species, then you have ideas of survival of the fittest where the tribes which had a sense of morals functioned better together and survived, out competing those that didn't.I will however say that those morals do change over time, cannibalism of people from other tribes was once a beneficial thing for people to believe in, however that is no longer a beneficial thing for people to do so it is now a very rare practice.If by objective, what you mean is this definition: "Existing independent of or external to the mind" then no I do not, we don't have any sense of morals outside of our minds, but I would suggest that morals from within are more powerful than those put on us from some outside source.

At some point, then, there must have been something created/developed from nothing, from which everything else developed. To what do you credit the existence of this first, least complex entity if not a creator.

How would one have evolved this sense of right and wrong?

Having morals gives no help in surviving, and may often be a hindrance. The example you brought, of cannibalism, is one such case. When food supplies are low, it is logical that cannibalism should happen, if one looks at the situation amorally. It may enable 75 people to live instead of 100 dying of starvation.
And if having a sense of morals is indeed as beneficial as you ascertain it to be, then why have no other species developed it?

My point is that we don't know yet as a species, but I have no doubt that we will find out eventually. Science hasn't found out everything yet.

As for how, the same way as anything else that we've evolved, through natural selection and survival of the fittest. And I wouldn't be surprised if sexual selection played a major part in that too.

If science does unequivocally find out, then I can agree with you. Until then, I'm happy with my current beliefs.

My point is, there must have been some basic moral code from which a more complex one evolved. From where did this moral code come?

So... you acknowledge that your beliefs are just something made up that you can use in the interim until science works it out properly?

Why must there? It's quite simple really, the tribes where everyone lives in harmony survived, those where they didn't died out. What is required for a tribe of ancient people to live in harmony? Not murdering each other, not raping each other, not murdering each others' babies, sharing all of the food that everyone produces, caring for those that are sick, making sure everyone has enough food and water and shelter, etc.
Of course this is extremely simplified, but it's the basic idea and it gets the point across.

No, I don't believe science will ever work anything out as there isn't anything to work out; God caused the Big Bang to happen.
However, if science found the indisputable cause then I will have been proved wrong in my beliefs.

You said before that everything starts from something small or less complex and becomes gradually more complex. This should be true with morals as well; there must have been some basic moral code from which a more complex one developed. Not murdering each other, etc. happens not because of morals but because they have no need to. No animal kills for no reason, they either kill for food or because they feel threatened.

Why, or should I say, how, can you just blindly believe that God caused the Big Bang to happen?

Why God? Why not the tooth fairy, or father Christmas, or me? How do you know that I didn't cause the big bang to happen in my previous life when I was God's butler, or something?
I consider those all to be equally probably scenarios, and I don't know how anyone can disagree with the fact that those are all equally probable.

Something caused the Big Bang to happen. The fact that billions of people believe in the same entity is evidence to me that it was God who created the world rather that you or something else entirely. There is evidence within religion that makes it difficult to disprove. E.g in Judaism, from which Christianity (and arguably Islam) stem, the Jews were given the bible in the form of mass revelation. This means that 2-3 million people witnessed it. It would be impossible for someone to have made this event up centuries later and succeeded in convincing an entire nation that all that nation's ancestors witnessed such an event, yet nobody had heard of this event before.