Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Does God Exist?

Announcements Posted on
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jcarz)
    What caused the Big Bang to happen?
    Why are we here? Surely our lives must have some extensive purpose?

    These are the important questions that convince billions of people around the world of God's existence.
    I cannot understand how people can reject the existence of God and be content with that. How can anyone be happy thinking that death is the absolute end and God does not exist.

    There must be somewhere for people to receive eternal justice after we die - God exists to punish the wicked and reward the faithful.
    You cannot understand how someone can be happy without eternal life?

    Clearly you don't enjoy what you have in the only life you get. There is no afterlife, there is no god. If you disagree with this, give me proof. We can clearly see our own evolutionary path, and we are clusters of cells partially directed to survive in the environment we find ourselves in. A huge line of successful ancestors survived and gradually formed what we know as the human genome. Enjoy it, or waste the only opportunity for life that you will ever be given.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anjelofernando)
    science is the process as well the results thus the knowledge



    sadly my car number plate is knowledge this process need not be direct
    eg- the camera takes a picture of your plates when you run a light
    using this picture(the number plate) they acquire all my information
    thus knowledge
    You make no sense now - science provides knowledge, science is not knowlege. Science is a method to obtain some knowledge. Using an encyclopaedia is not "knowledge", it's what you find inside it that is knowledge. That's the equivalent - doing science is like using an encyclopaedia, and if you do science well you will find the knowledge there is to be found.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...A&feature=plcp

    This is a playlist I've posted in this forum before. A very good watch on the issue of God.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alpharius)
    http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...A&feature=plcp

    This is a playlist I've posted in this forum before. A very good watch on the issue of God.
    A very good video series indeed, but the guy speaks so freakin' slowly!
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    A very good video series indeed, but the guy speaks so freakin' slowly!
    Yeah, can't disagree with that, it is very slow. Good watch though.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SsEe)
    So? I need good reasons to believe things. And by the way, that's not a choice I made. It's how my brain is wired. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't believe something based on faith alone.



    You've got it backwards. Religion believes it has all the answers. Science knows it doesn't have all the answers. That's why it's still being done.

    but i see is you choose to have "FAITH" in science though you say you cant believe in faith alone
    caused most fact are based taking an assumption(a small tiny one at least) you have faith in that assumption whether you know it or not
    • 87 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    About the guy below, I think he might be a poe. Sadly we have no way of telling though. Damn you Poe's Law.

    (Original post by anjelofernando)
    but i see is you choose to have "FAITH" in science though you say you cant believe in faith alone
    caused most fact are based taking an assumption(a small tiny one at least) you have faith in that assumption whether you know it or not
    Faith is believing something about evidence. Science is based on rigorous methods of research into the functionings of reality and everything that underpins it, which we understand from collected and observed evidence through direct and indirect means. I most certainly do not have 'faith' in science. Certainly not in that sense.

    As for that basis, those with religious faith have to take the same assumptions that an atheist does, our hand's are pretty much forced here. See the Munchhausen Trilemma.
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I don't know.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I think theres 2 meanings of faith

    Faith = religious faith (ie delusion)

    Faith = having faith as in trust

    But why would you trust god when youve never seen him? Why would you trust something that you dont know to exist?
    I might as well say, I have faith in the flying spaghetti monster and i trust that he will look over us. The flying spaghetti monster sounds ridiculous right? well so does god...
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mrwhatwhat)
    I think theres 2 meanings of faith

    Faith = religious faith (ie delusion)

    Faith = having faith as in trust

    But why would you trust god when youve never seen him? Why would you trust something that you dont know to exist?
    I might as well say, I have faith in the flying spaghetti monster and i trust that he will look over us. The flying spaghetti monster sounds ridiculous right? well so does god...
    Yet there is reason to believe God exists. Just look at the promises God made to Israel, and how they have come true. Now, some might say it was self-fulfilling, but some things aren't possible to bring to life no matter how badly we want it to be so. For instance, the impact people of Israelite ancestry have had on the world, in spite of being such a small people group. The smartest man to ever live is considered to be Einstein. Guess what his heritage is. So God promise to Abraham that his seed will bless the whole world, and sure enough it came to pass.

    The spread of Christianity, a religion that should have never begun once Jesus died on the cross, is another clue. I hear a lot of modern scholars talk about Jesus as if He was just some revolutionary teacher speaking out against the religious leaders of His day. How all the miracles and the attributions of the title "Son of God" were produced many years after Jesus' crucifixion. (70+ years afterward) Yet if that were true, why even attribute those things 70+ years after the fact? By that time, the temple was destroyed, and Israel was about to go to war with Rome. Why in the world would there be a cat, who all of a sudden just decided to make up stuff about someone who died on a cross 70 years ago? Does that make any kind of sense?

    So in spite of how crazy that sounds, this belief all of a sudden began to spread, until it reached the ears of a roman emperor. I believe the only reason Constatine accepted Christianity, is because of it's spreading among the people, possibly seeing it as a way to control the people. This tells us it was spreading without the aid of force. These rulers really hindered the gospel for well over a thousand years, and it's only really getting back to it's roots today. Nonetheless, the Gospel has spread just like Jesus said it would. An even more amazing feat if what modern scholars said was true about how the Scripture came about, 70+ years after the fact. (Of course we know that is bonkers. There is no mention of Paul's death in the Book of Acts, and there is no mention of the Great Persecution of Christians under Roman rule. Two facts the Book of Acts would never leave out if it was written later than 70 AD/CE)

    So these are a couple of hard reasons why the God of the Bible does exist. He's able to make good on His promises.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Okashira)
    Yet there is reason to believe God exists. Just look at the promises God made to Israel, and how they have come true. Now, some might say it was self-fulfilling, but some things aren't possible to bring to life no matter how badly we want it to be so. For instance, the impact people of Israelite ancestry have had on the world, in spite of being such a small people group. The smartest man to ever live is considered to be Einstein. Guess what his heritage is. So God promise to Abraham that his seed will bless the whole world, and sure enough it came to pass.

    The spread of Christianity, a religion that should have never begun once Jesus died on the cross, is another clue. I hear a lot of modern scholars talk about Jesus as if He was just some revolutionary teacher speaking out against the religious leaders of His day. How all the miracles and the attributions of the title "Son of God" were produced many years after Jesus' crucifixion. (70+ years afterward) Yet if that were true, why even attribute those things 70+ years after the fact? By that time, the temple was destroyed, and Israel was about to go to war with Rome. Why in the world would there be a cat, who all of a sudden just decided to make up stuff about someone who died on a cross 70 years ago? Does that make any kind of sense?

    So in spite of how crazy that sounds, this belief all of a sudden began to spread, until it reached the ears of a roman emperor. I believe the only reason Constatine accepted Christianity, is because of it's spreading among the people, possibly seeing it as a way to control the people. This tells us it was spreading without the aid of force. These rulers really hindered the gospel for well over a thousand years, and it's only really getting back to it's roots today. Nonetheless, the Gospel has spread just like Jesus said it would. An even more amazing feat if what modern scholars said was true about how the Scripture came about, 70+ years after the fact. (Of course we know that is bonkers. There is no mention of Paul's death in the Book of Acts, and there is no mention of the Great Persecution of Christians under Roman rule. Two facts the Book of Acts would never leave out if it was written later than 70 AD/CE)

    So these are a couple of hard reasons why the God of the Bible does exist. He's able to make good on His promises.
    This is mainly what you have said.

    1) There are some successful Israelis, which means they were blessed by god.
    2) Christianity is real, because lots of people believe it's real
    3) The Bible is amazing because people remembered Jesus' miracles in the timespan between them occurring and them being put into scripture which was a lifetime in the early CE.

    Well, that's rubbish.

    1) There are more successful people from other countries than from Israel. (Not to dump on Israel, but I'm pretty sure it is not considered one of the greatest world leaders in many areas.) So this is an argument against your god.

    2) Flock mentality is an awful argument. If anything it's a reason against having unfounded belief.

    3) People "remembered" his miracles? No-people invented his miracles through myth. In the school yard, a bit of gossip gains new and incorrect information over the course of a week, and all of the original people who were there to hear the gossip are (normally) still alive after that week. What do you think is bound to happen after 50 years of people dying and spreading the stories wide enough to become scripture?! Especially when the people spreading the myths want to ensure their lifestyles by recruiting members, and outlandish stories were sure to do that!!?

    Now let's get some real "hard" evidence, or stop believing in things just because people tell you.
    • 51 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hypocrism)
    This is mainly what you have said.

    1) There are some successful Israelis, which means they were blessed by god.
    2) Christianity is real, because lots of people believe it's real
    3) The Bible is amazing because people remembered Jesus' miracles in the timespan between them occurring and them being put into scripture which was a lifetime in the early CE.

    Well, that's rubbish.

    1) There are more successful people from other countries than from Israel. (Not to dump on Israel, but I'm pretty sure it is not considered one of the greatest world leaders in many areas.) So this is an argument against your god.

    2) Flock mentality is an awful argument. If anything it's a reason against having unfounded belief.

    3) People "remembered" his miracles? No-people invented his miracles through myth. In the school yard, a bit of gossip gains new and incorrect information over the course of a week, and all of the original people who were there to hear the gossip are (normally) still alive after that week. What do you think is bound to happen after 50 years of people dying and spreading the stories wide enough to become scripture?! Especially when the people spreading the myths want to ensure their lifestyles by recruiting members, and outlandish stories were sure to do that!!?

    Now let's get some real "hard" evidence, or stop believing in things just because people tell you.
    ^^^ What he said. I've never really gotten the argument that the success of a religion or its proponents equates to its validity, it's like some sort of weird offspring spawned from the ontological argument. The same thing may well be said for scientology in a few centuries time.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    its like asking what is after death? we will NEVER ever know. so it's not a definitive no and can never be. so those that think no that are atheist its impossible and stupid of u to say. at end of the day the ONLY one thing guaranteed in your and everybodies like around the world is DEATH. the only thing that is guaranteed in your life is death. lifes **** and short.
    • 51 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NotSoCool.Fly)
    its like asking what is after death? we will NEVER ever know. so it's not a definitive no and can never be. so those that think no that are atheist its impossible and stupid of u to say. at end of the day the ONLY one thing guaranteed in your and everybodies like around the world is DEATH. the only thing that is guaranteed in your life is death. lifes **** and short.
    Just to be pedantic, but being born is also a guarantee, hard to die without living first.

    As for your actual point, very few atheists will explicitly say "there is no god", most simply reject the claims made by theists until evidence can be provided.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I never said god didn't exist, only that there is no evidence for his existence.
    So what do you actually believe then?

    Would agnostic be a better word to describe you, rather than atheist?
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaintSoldier)
    So what do you actually believe then?

    Would agnostic be a better word to describe you, rather than atheist?
    An athiest is a person who doesnt believe in a God/gods not a person who believes a God/gods do not exist.

    An agnostic is a person who does not know how to interpret evidence (if any) to come to a conclusion (even if that conclusion is that there isnt enough evidence to make a definite claim)

    An antithiest believes a God does not exist.
    • 57 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Of course.
    • 51 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SaintSoldier)
    So what do you actually believe then?

    Would agnostic be a better word to describe you, rather than atheist?
    I believe what can be determined from studying the universe. Since such study has not yielded evidence for a god, I don't currently believe in one and am therefore an atheist by definition. Bare in mind that atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive, as explained in the above post. I would technically be an agnostic atheist.
    • 51 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Person1001)
    An antithiest believes a God does not exist.
    Not necessarily, it can simply describe someone who is opposed to religion without factoring in belief. I expect a lot of current atheists would occupy such a position should the god of Abraham be proven to exist, since most would still recognise him for the terrible chap he's portrayed to be in the bible. I for one would not love such a god with such an extensive list of character flaws =P
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Person1001)
    An athiest is a person who doesnt believe in a God/gods not a person who believes a God/gods do not exist.

    An agnostic is a person who does not know how to interpret evidence (if any) to come to a conclusion (even if that conclusion is that there isnt enough evidence to make a definite claim)

    An antithiest believes a God does not exist.
    This is hilarious!

    Atheist = does not have theistic beliefs. Can either actively believe there is no god or simply not have a belief or disbelief in god.

    Agnostic = does not believe proof either way is possible for something. Not exclusive to religious agnosticism and definitely not someone who cannot interpret evidence.

    Antitheist = actively dislikes or opposes religion.
Updated: August 21, 2012
New on TSR

Naughtiest thing you did at school

Did you get away with it or were you punished?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.