If you are refering to me saying "there is no god it's crap" and stating it as a fact then I would like to see you point it out.

And besides, even if people HAVE said "there is no god it's crap", why do you have to retaliate with what you said? Surely you are intelligent enough to see that two wrongs don't make a right?

You have to swallow your pride and avoid taking the sucker punch I'm afraid...

I observe the pyramids with my eyes.
I hypothize the pyramid is there.
I predict that they are there.
I kick the pyramid to see if it's there.
I break my foot-- it's there.

Have you ever thought about what the world would be like without religion? Can you even comprehend that? From religions we aquired: our time scale-- 7 days in a week, 12 months in a year, AD and BC. We got explorers finding new worlds under the pretense of evangilism. The reading and writing system we have today was used by the clergy to teach Biblical scriptures. The enlightenment, the discovery of America in some ways, the Rennisiance [sp?] shall I go on? As stupid as you may think religion is, noone can deny that it has done huge things to shape the world as it is today, and no matter if you believe in God or Allah or Dvjzpurhanwhatever, you cannot overlook the fact that we would not be anywhere today without religion.

You can go have fun, but next time you read a book, or listen to music or even look at the time of day, remember, without religion, most of that stuff would be next to useless.


But there is some logic to what you said earlier-- we've been progressing in the ways of science, and logically, that progression will go on. And that progression may well include a logical explanation for the creation of the universe with or without God.

True faith is believing in something that you cannot prove.


KTHX, TYVM. Now STFU or GTFO. That pretty much sums up what I have to say about that. If you want to have an opinion about something, at least have some basis. And the Bible isn't the only document that has mentioned Jesus. Jesus wasn't just "made up." I know that for a fact, and I doubt that anyone can disprove that. Understand I'm not saying that he was God, but I can garuentee that Jesus did exist at one time or another.

Now look throughout history at the various religions. Do you really believe that they were all just "made up" by one man who felt like keeping his "village" in order? As I said before-- think before you post.


Minor cult? See above about the things that Christianity and religion in general have brought into the world. I'm not going to put words in your mouth and say that you called Christianity a "minor cult" but with all due respect-- that's certainly what it sounded like you said.


Let's play a game. It's called telephone. I'll wisper something in your ear, then you wisper the same thing in another person's ear, and so on. After we pass it through four thousand people, that last person will tell what they heard to me. Do you think it'll be the same?

WAIT!!!!! Let's not just wisper it to each other-- let's wait fifty years after the person told us to pass it on. And not only that, but let's also mix this in with nievity [sp?] and superstition that is virtually non-existant today.

Do you see where I'm going with this?


A monomer is formed by the right combonation of gasses combined with just the right electrical current. They can be formed that way-- it has been tested and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

A polymer is a chain of over five hundred or so monomers. A polymer is one tiny part of a protein.

Monomers are constructed as both left and right handed-- in approxamately equil numbers. For a polymer to form, all the monomers must be right handed. If one left handed monomer gets in on the chain, then the whole chain is useless and dissolves. Using the knowledge, the odds of two right handed polymers joining are one in two. The odds of three joining and being right handed are one in four. The odds of four joining are on in eight.

Assuming that five hundred have to be joined, the odds of two hundred of the five hundred monomers joining together and all being right handed are about-- one in 6.427752177*10^60. The odds of three hundred are about one in 1.629628781*10^91. Keep in mind that in order to form a protein, there must be hundreds [I think] of polymers. But for a moment, assume that you needed-- five is a fair number. To find the odds of five polymers being formed, we multiply the odds of each polymer being formed together. It would seem that the power raises by about thirty for each hundred monomers that we add on, so assuming this is the case-- the odds of one full monomer forming are about one in 1*10^150. The odds of five forming would be about.

:: Does some sort of calculation. ::

One in 1*10^75937500000. And that, my friend, is a number so large that you cannot possibly comprehend it. In case you're wondering, mathmatical statistic impossibility occures at 1*10^600. Good luck with those odds.

And keep in mind that the very science you use to back your statements found those numbers.

And you think that other planets really defeated those odds?


Next post

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the Bible, wasn't there also a flood? Could a worldwide flood possably destroy small parts of the world? Could that be where eden went? Maybe the satellites overlooked it because it doesn't exist anymore.

Apples? Where did you get that idea? Where in the Bible does it say that Adam and Eve ate the "apples" of good and evil. I must have missed that when I read through the creation story fifteen seconds ago so do tell.

And for posts like this one, please know what you're talking about before opening your mouth.


I've never heard my church say that God can forgive any sin, but there has been alot of debate about this. But try and remember that these are people saying this, and people are wrong-- more often then not sometimes. I don't trust everything that every scientist says, and you shouldn't trust everything that every pastor says. The best thing to do would be to read the Bible looking for where it says God can forgive any sin and make your own conclusion.

About the sin that couldn't be forgiven-- this was Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I honestly forget the referance right now, but I'll look it up later. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit happened when someone saw Jesus in the flesh, knew who he was, had seen his testimony, and realized beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was who he said he was, and still attributed his works to Satan. So technically, that sin cannot be committed at this time. I believe, though, that all other sins-- no matter how horrable-- can be forgiven.


If someone broke into my house with a knife and held it to my throat, and I pulled out my gun and shot him dead on the spot, he cannot be sorry and he cannot ask for forgiveness. But you still can forgive him (for whatever good it'll do). We don't have to ask for God's forgiveness to get it. Otherwise, we'd all be going to hell because we can't remember every sin we've ever commited.


If you're dead, would you really care? :: Raises an eyebrow. ::


What makes you think that humans are the worst creatures around? How many cats developed science? How many dolphins have written shakespear? How many termites can say that they've ever made a concious choice? What makes you think that we're the worst?


Justin-- about your next post-- let me just say, no. God doesn't require that we ask forgiveness for sins to get into heaven.

Matthew 3:11 "'I baptize you with water for repentance . But after me will come one who is more powerful then I, whose sandles I am not fit to cary. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."' (The fire is symbolic of the future judgement incase anyone is wondering.)

At this time, baptism became a symbol. It is not neccisary for salvation and is a declaration of your faith-- nothing more.


What a stupid question. That would be a waste of cheddar!!!


Read Job and tell me how vague the descriptions of the bohemoth and the leviathan are.



I've heard that question so many times it's not even funny. Assuming that God is real and he created the universe, how would he create it? I would think he would give it some sort of age. Adam and Eve were not created as babies, the animals as cubs/eggs, and the trees as seeds. If that were the case, then everything would have died save a few termites who would have gone on to write Shakespear. God would have had to add age to the earth-- so why not the rest of the universe? I don't expect anyone to accept this, but assuming that there was a God, then it would make sense that he woudl add age to what he made, wouldn't it?


Well I'm happy to see that you acknowledge that he existed no matter what his diety was. And don't take this as condesending in any way please. I just see people who deny the existance of Jesus, Christ or not, alltogether and it's-- refreshing to see someone who's not that nieve.


Realize that God isn't a babysitter. It's not his responsibility to control us. Granted He'll intervene once in a while, but it's not His job to control us as I said before.

One in 1*10^75937500000 is easier to believe then God?


And I am tired of people trying to convince me that there is no God. But let me just say, if you're willing to change your beliefs because of some chat on the internet, then you were never that solid in them to begin with.

:: Double take ::

The hell are they teaching you in that school of yours, boy? What makes you say that?

A year ago, I found my best friend kissing the girl I liked at my school. I was angry-- but that didn't end my love for him (as friends.) That didn't stop me from following her around like a puppy dog and getting nervous when she talked to me.

Justin, I think you need to rethink alot of what you believe.



This is sad but true. Many Christains and hypocrats [sp?] and don't practice what they preach. That's another thing that I doubt anyone can deny.


Then why should we have to prove something right to prove it is real? It all goes back to this little arguement which has been going around and around throughout the whole topic.


Your senses are fooling you. Space is actually a bright pink zebra with four heads and three hooves on each foot.

Oh it's not? Then prove me otherwise.


I neither said or implied that I knew. I'm not sure where you picked that up-- but it's-- quite flawed. And you should probably check your logic on that one.



About the contradiction-- keep in mind that many of the things written in the Bible were in context. For example.

<<<17. Jesus told a man in Mark 8:34 that "whosoever will come after me,let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me." The obvious question is: What cross? He hadn't yet died on the cross. There was nothing to take up. That man would have had no idea what he was talking about.>>>

The cross was always a symbol of death. Jesus' was not the first crusifiction [sp?] and his wasn't the last. Back then, a cross was a symbol of death. They knew what he was talking about. Most of them had viewed multiple cruisifictions, and knew very well what the cross was.


And this again goes back to proving God wrong or right.



I'm not going to try to explain God's mentality because frankly, I can't. And neither can you. I'm not sure exactly what God is thinking or was thinking when he left his hat in the street, and I'm not about to claim that I do. And God's people were not always happy worshiping him. He never once said we should be.



I'm not sure exactly where you're coming up with that, but I still choose how to live my life. I can still judge people on character alone. I still control myself. I choose by my own free will to live a life in accordance with the Bible and it's teachings. I choose to find my opinions about people by who they are and not what they believe. Dont believe this? Well then IM my best friend. He's gay-- but that doesn't stop us from being friends. I know what he does is wrong, but I don't let that stop me from loving him (as a friend).


Under the same train of thought, if I find a watch in a field, I don't just assume it evolved there. I know that someone had to have taken time and effort to make that watch. Look how perfectly the earth works and tell me that there was no thought or effort put into it and it happened by chance.


"I'm trying to see from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my ass." (Directed at noone in here really-- I just thought that might go nicely after that little quote)


There was a case a while ago of a recently dead snail being dated at over five million years old. There are many other accounts of it being wrong, and I'll look for more later.

I do know how carbon dating is done. By comparing the amounts of the carbon isotopes, I believe. But then you have to assume that the amount was equil in the first place. What's to prevent more of one of the isotopes then the other?


Okay, my hands are sore and I think this post is gonna take about ten pages, so I'll just post it and get back to the rest later.

LeonMagnolis, you are making some great posts. In fact, I'm about to give you some doubloons as soon as I finish this one.

But please don't feel as if atheists are attacking your religion and trying to convert you to atheism. This is just a discussion about what we believe in and why. We all started this knowing that there's no way we are going to change anyone's beliefs. All the atheists are doing is explaining their point of view. If that involves pointing out what seems to be a contradiction in religion that you don't see as a contradiction, just explain it right back to them.

no i wansn't implicating you, it was someone else. *goes to find it* d'oh! xantar was right, it does say believe. i'm sorry xantar.

oh, and pickachu, i figured out the confusion on the religion thing! for some unknown reason when religion was brought up i only thought about the religions who base their beliefs on the bible. i thought his question meant like which out of those is the right one. now i understand your criticism. sorry for the misunderstanding. i meant like lutherans, catholics, mormons, baptists, etc. like which of those is right.

now to answer the question which religion(all religions) is right, well, i dunno. i'll do some research and get back to you guys.

wait to go leon magnolis. i wish i had your patience to do those kind of posts.

Oh believe me, I know what they're doing and these are mostly arguements that I've heard, although some made me think. And as I said before, I don't expect anyone's point of view to change. This is a-- spar, for lack of a better term. Two differant opinions fighting-- neither side is going to win, but both can come out a little wiser and better able to argue the other side.

Well as long as I'm on somewhat of a roll, I might as well post something my friend brought up. This is totally random and apart from the topic really, but how does one prove the scientific method scientifically?

I'm not gonna comment on this because I already got a headache thinking about it, but I just thought I'd throw that out here, lol.

Well, I do not like to post when threads get large such as this one... But I guess I'll throw in my two cents into this conversation. Now remember, I have not read all of the posts, well, because there is just too damn many of them. So I'll just write what comes to my mind on different issues.

After Life

Pika and I had a conversation about this on ICQ, so I'll post what I think here. I belive that a person does not have to be a certain religion, or be in the "right" religion to go into an afterlife. I belive this: (this is a clippet of mine and Pika's conversation)

"I think that a person who accepts all people, will die. And when they die, whatever they belive in (heaven, or blackness, etc.) will happen. I think that a person who does not accept all, will also die. And when they die, whatever they believe in, the oposite will happen.

I mean, BigJustin says that everybody will go to hell. But from a Christian's point of view, I think that everybody who is not open to other religions/people will go to hell, or their equivalent of a bad place. Which is why I think we should all be positive to eachother, then we will not fear what happens after death, but welcome it."

I also think that everybody who follows the example which Martin Luther King set, will be living an amazing afterlife, the way that they want it to be.

Religions (Right, Wrong)

I do not know what I truly belive, but right now, I think that there is no true religion. I believe in Jesus Christ, and He taught us to love all and respect eachother, including those who are "lower class", and prostitutes, criminals, etc. I think that there should be a religion that just promotes peace and unity. I think that if we focus on this, then God will look down on us and be happy with what He sees... That being because I believe in God. And for Atheists, well, they can just know that what they are doing is helping them, and they will be great people if they join this "help everybody" religion.

Also, as I already said, I believe in Jesus, and I believe in His Father, God. But do you know what? Who the hell I am I to say that Jesus is my Saviour? I mean, there are so many different religions, so many different people who believe in God, so many people who do not believe in God, so how do I know that He is God? And hell, how do I know that there is a God? I think about this alot, and I still am confused, very, very much confused at that.

Creation

Wow... Just go outside and look around. Look at the stars. Look at the trees, the grass, the houses, the people. It is amazing how many things there are on this land. It is amazing how many events have taken place, and how many adoptations animals and mamals have done. So how the f*ck did this all start? I have no friggen clue. Was is created by God? Was it created in a big BANG? Here are some of my thoughts.

God Theory : God created everything. God created the Universe, God created the planets, God created animals and man. This all makes sence, except for the nagging fact of WHO THE F*CK CREATED GOD? I mean, did God have a father? I doubt it. And even if He did, then who created Him? I mean, I think that it is amazing that I am alive right now, and that I am breathing and that I can function. This is crazy, I mean, how could this have happened? I have no clue.

BANG theory : Another one that ends up in a question of "Who created the Universe so this could all happen". I am really confused about this theory too because I am just too damn skeptical of things being created without anybody to create them. But then, how am I alive?

So, as one can see, my views on creation are messed up and I am just flat out confused about it. I just cannot see how something can just appear out of thin air. It is so damn confusing. And the only way that we can probably find out is if we die. That sucks.

Conclusion

Love all. Strive to be equal to all. Respect all nations, religions, and nature. Follow the plans that Marting Luther King jr. did. And most of all, do not think that just because somebody is not up to your standards, or do not follow the same views as you, do not think less of them. Because everybody is unique, and precious.

god wasn't created by anybody. what i'm about to tell you is mind boggling but.........

god always was. no beginning no end.

I know the God has no beginning and no end.

But how isn't there a beginning??? It is so damn confusing.

here is my prob with the scientific method thing.

the scientific method is limited to a process defined by stuff that measurable and repeatable. it can't speak on issues of ultimate origin, meaning, or morality. for this stuff science is dependent on the values and personal beliefs of those who use it. science can be used for both good and bad. it can be used to make vaccines or poisons, nuclear power plants or nuclear weapons. it can be used to clean up the environment or to pollute it. it can be used to argue for God or against Him. science by itself offers no moral guidance or values to govern our lives. all science can do is show us how natural law works, but it tells us nothing about its origins.

Actually science has a lot to do with the origins of things.

give some examples.

Anthropology
Paleontology
Archeology
Astronomy

To name a few. And to give specific examples would result in pages and pages of stuff no one here would bother reading.

LeonMagnolis, the topic is "Why don't you believe in God?"

Then you say "And I am tired of people trying to convince me that there is no God" If you're implying the people who are saying there's no god in this topic is trying to tell you there's no god, then you obviously can't read.

"Then why should we have to prove something right to prove it is real?"

Who says you have to? This is a topic about why we DON'T believe in god, and I'm telling you. You're giving us a lotta crap about odds and what John 3:19 says for no reason. I said "I don't have to prove something wrong to know it's not real." Key word: I

And how exactly could we prove you wrong if we were right? We can't because like I said millions of times before, you'd have to die first. Everything about religion is just so convenient for the people who are arguing in favor of it because there's absolutely nothing we can do to prove it wrong. But ask yourself this: Can you prove there is a god? If so, please prove it to me. You can't. So if I can't prove it wrong, and you can't prove it to be true, then I'll go by logic. And logic says that there isn't an all-powerful being who can control everyone in the world.

And of course there's that question again that NOBODY can answer: Who made god? Does god have a god?

As for your quote "I'm trying to see from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my ass." thanks for it, I could use it for many religious people.

"Have you ever thought about what the world would be like without religion? Can you even comprehend that?"

Nope, I can't comprehend that... Because it would be too good of a place compared to what we have now. Religion just starts fights, wars, and causes millions of deaths. The attack on the WTC buildings wouldn't have happened if it weren't for religion. WWII? Religion. Should I go on?

"Your senses are fooling you. Space is actually a bright pink zebra with four heads and three hooves on each foot.

Oh it's not? Then prove me otherwise."

What the hell are you trying to say here? I said the universe is all around me... IT IS. It's a fact, if you wanna argue this then you're too stupid to have an opinion on anything anyway. It's also a fact that I don't see god, and neither do you. I don't hear god, and neither do you. I don't feel god's hand helping me when I need help, and neither do you. So if you can't see him, touch him, hear him, then you have no clue if he's real do you? No, you don't. So why do you believe him?

Here's something that I said ealier in this topic: "I don't believe in god because I (as well as pretty much everyone else I know) don't believe in stuff until it can be proven. People use the argument "Well, you can't prove there ISN'T a god, can you?" and I don't have to prove something wrong to know it's not real. Like I said hundreds of times before, if you're going to believe something that can't be scientifically proven just because it makes sense to you and your prayers have come true, then you'd have to try every single religion to see if you were right."

And you seem to like to talk about odds. Well, you never mention that odds of there being a god... And using simple logic, I think you can agree with me that the odds are too horrible to even comprehend. I mean, have you ever seen an all powerful being that can do anything he wants? Have you ever seen someone who just lives in someplace we never see? Have you ever seen someone create millions and millions of people before? I'll assume you answer "no" to the questions, then the odds of there being a god is pretty damn bad. So giving the odds you gave about the science crap, yes, I'd take them odds over the odds of there being a god.

Staying on the topic about odds, what do you think the odds that your religion is right over every other religion? Have you tried every religion? No you haven't, because that's impossible. So the odds of your religion, being right over every other one that you've never even heard of aren't very good, are they?

"Now STFU or GTFO. That pretty much sums up what I have to say about that. If you want to have an opinion about something, at least have some basis...Do you really believe that they were all just "made up" by one man who felt like keeping his "village" in order? As I said before-- think before you post."

This ALWAYS happens when arguing with religious people. You use odds when it's convenient for you, you use logic when it's convenient for you, you use faith when it's convenient for you, you use whatever is convenient for you at the time. Look at this example here. You say that guy had no basis for thinking that some rich guy made up the story about god, yet you read the story out of a book that you don't know who made it. It could have been monkeys that wrote that book for all you know, yet you believe this book. And then you say "Do you really believe that they were all just "made up" by one man who felt like keeping his "village" in order?" So know you're using simple logic, eh? Well do YOU really think that there's such a thing as a superbeing with magical powers?

Just use logic. You can't prove there's god. You can't prove there's ever been something/someone that is at all similar to god. You can't prove there's a heaven or hell. You can't prove there ever was a garden of eden or whatever. You can't find me anyone that can prove that. So using very simple logic, I've come to the conclusion god just isn't real.

Oh really? So I'll say so was the universe, and scientists have answers for most everything else after we know how the universe was created (it "alway swas") so I guess there's no more argument then. There's no god, right?

Cant we all just beleive what we want to beleive, stop making stupid topics, and get on with our lives?

Im all for debates, but this one has been made over and over...

Speaking of how the universe was created...

god aside, I find it weird that it would always be here...

and yet... before it was, what was here?..... :hmm:

:D

Just trying to switch the conversation a little bit even though it won't work and it's off topic :sneaky:

Well it involves the fact that "nothing" is actually something. virtual particles are being created all the time, they just pop up out of the void and then return to it. I'm not going to go into details, but the point is quantum physics doesn't need God to explain the emergence of the universe.

And it doesn't make sense to talk about "before", since time and space came into being together.

umm... yes.... good point... :sneaky:

well since I don't pay attention to all that stuff, I'll just... walk... away now............... :(

The first thing I learned about science and the elements

"It's impossible to make somthing from nothing"

RSI hell here I come... (pun not intended by the way)

"From religions we aquired: our time scale-- 7 days in a week, 12 months in a year, AD and BC"

Pointless - our calendar is based on the seasons, not by religious edict (apart from the seven day week thing, which is conveniently just the simplest way to split up a 28 day period). Did you not find it odd that non-christian cultures also developed the 12 month year etc etc? Month - 28 day lunar cycle, which has been messed about with by various people (esp. the romans) to fit in with the rather chaotic mess the whole calendar is. In 10,000 years time our calendar will have changed. In 10 million years it will be totally different.
AD and BC are totally arbitary scales, and have no meaning really. They're just what we in the western world mark as "ground zero". Most major cultures not based on the bible have different ground zeros.

"We got explorers finding new worlds under the pretense of evangilism."

Also curiosity, also greed, also being a stubborn bastard and saying "look you fools, the earth is round and I KNOW I can get to India this way much quicker... damnit, what's this America-shaped thing I've run into?"

"The reading and writing system we have today was used by the clergy to teach Biblical scriptures."

During the dark ages, the church was in total control and no-one aprt from religious leaders and members was taught how to read or write, so the church could remain in control. It was onlt during the Renaissance and with the advent of the printing press that education of the masses became feasible (with, I might add, the stauch opposotin of most of the church - they thought the idea of someone reading and understanding a copy of the bible in their own home was blasphemous).

"As stupid as you may think religion is, noone can deny that it has done huge things to shape the world as it is today"

Yep... as well as propagating moral codes and establishing the initial strategies for a stable large civilisation under the pretext of fear, it has also been responsible for some of the greatest wars and atrocities in history. It's certainly shaped the world alright.

"you cannot overlook the fact that we would not be anywhere today without religion. "

Not a fact. See some of your later posts regarding what you cvlassify as "fact" and "not-fact." Like me, you have no idea what the world would be like today if religion had never existed. Naturally, the initial reaction you will have is that it would be a much worse place. I wonder.

"that progression may well include a logical explanation for the creation of the universe with or without God."

It may indeed, in which case you'll find me saying "Oh well, looks like I was wrong then". It may also lead to an explanation for everything religion has answers for that science doesn't... yet...

"True faith is believing in something that you cannot prove."

And that's why I have no true faith. The point of this thread, I think. Although you can look at it objectively and say that nothing can be proved, and we just believe we exist and see the stuff we see. But I draw the line at believing things I can see and touch.

" Jesus wasn't just "made up." I know that for a fact"

How? Do you know something not even the top biblical scholars in the world know? Jesus is present in records made by humans, there are no living eyewitnesses, and no time machine. Therefore, you cannot prove these documents are true, and you cannot say that it is a fact that Jesus existed. You may, like me, believe he existed (although as you picked up on I don't think he was a godsent figure at all) but you cannot say for a fact that he did.

"Do you really believe that they [religions] were all just "made up" by one man who felt like keeping his "village" in order?"

Is that really such a ridiculous hypothesis? Although I think you'll find that most religons were actually introduced to whole countries by the government, usually as the result of influence over a leader. Christianity wasn't actually getting anywhere fast until it was made official religion of the Roman Empire.

"See above about the things that Christianity and religion in general have brought into the world."

You can see it in the papers too. Usually on the front page.

" In case you're wondering, mathmatical statistic impossibility occures at 1*10^600"

I'm no mathematician, but I've found a page which debunks this, as well as the way you arrived at this number. Once I find it, I'll post it for your perusal. But from what I remember your calculation leaves out several important biological factors.

"And you think that other planets really defeated those odds?"

I never said that other planets supporte life (although chris may have done). But I accept it as a possibility.

"Could a worldwide flood possably destroy small parts of the world?"

Begs the question of a) how a flood formed in the first place b) how all the animals survived and c) where the evidence of it is today

" I don't trust everything that every scientist says, and you shouldn't trust everything that every pastor says. The best thing to do would be to read the Bible"

So you hold the bible to be an infallible record of everything it contains? Namely, that if the bible says something, and the evidence saus something else, then the bible is right? I don't mean to start a literary/spritual argument, I just wish to nkow how you perceive all this.

"What makes you think that we're the worst?"

War, mainly. And the way we f**k each other over so well and so often. And don't even get me started on destroying species, habitats, global climate change, etc.

"That would be a waste of cheddar!!!"

Would it still be a waste of cheddar if it granted you eternal life in a blissful paradise? Seems like a good religion to follow, if you ask me. Especially if you're the owner af a chedar factory.

"Read Job and tell me how vague the descriptions of the bohemoth and the leviathan are."

If I remember correctly, they're about as close to the description of dozens of other beasts which we understand as mythical. If you could post the relevant passages or provide a link I'd be most appreciative.

"I've heard that question so many times it's not even funny."

And you begin your rant that god has the ability to change everything at will, therefore rendering science useless as it relies on observable constants (namely radioisotopes, amongst others). If this is the case, then we are at an impass; because scientific logic will always fail when faced with "god did it".

"it would make sense that he woudl add age to what he made, wouldn't it?"

Well to me it would make more sense that god didn't exist at all and the age things have is... uh... how old they are.

"Well I'm happy to see that you acknowledge that he existed no matter what his diety was."

I believe he existed... the way you phrased it made it sound like I KNEW he existed, IMO. And I don't regard him as affiliated with any deity whatsoever.

"It's not his responsibility to control us."

Then why bother having a god? If he can't or won't control his subjects, why should I believe he exists if I can still see no evidence for it? At all?

"One in 1*10^75937500000 is easier to believe then God?"

Maybe I should do a bit of maths on this... hmm, what are the chances of molecules combinig in just the right way to make a god?
No, I'm only joking. Like I said above, I'm still trying to find that page (it was on a site with about 3 million pages and I can't remember which heading it was under). Bah.

"And I am tired of people trying to convince me that there is no God."

I am not trying to convert you. See title of topic.

"But let me just say, if you're willing to change your beliefs because of some chat on the internet, then you were never that solid in them to begin with."

So the ability to change your mind automatically makes it weak? I change my outlook on things due to changes in evidence. It has no effect on my beliefs as yet.
And I guess I can take it as read that, by this comment, there is no possibility that you will admit the possibility that you could be wrong. Sigh.

"Many Christains and hypocrats"

Heh... personally, I find it odd that you seperate the two. But no matter.

"Then why should we have to prove something right to prove it is real?"

Firstly: we can't prove anything right. Secondly: we can't prove anything is real. All we can do is say stuff like "things fall down. Why? Dunno. Oh hold on, maybe there's a big magnet under trhe floor. Hold on, it attracts everything though. OK, must be some other kind of force. I'll call it gravity, and work out how it works mathematically". Thirdly: I therefore have to believe what I can see, and everything I see bears the hall marks of having no divine deity involved in it's construction from my POV.

"And this again goes back to proving God wrong or right."

No, it doesn't. I have never tried to prove god wrong or right. It's just that my scientific beliefs are incompatible with any religous ones I may have had.

"I'm not going to try to explain God's mentality because frankly, I can't. And neither can you."

You're quite right; IMO, either god is a total schizo freak who doesn't know what he's doing, or he's actually trying to get people sent to hell. Or maybe the whole "believe in my teachings, or die forever horribly!" just harks back to wanting to get people to do what they're told to.

[next post]

"I'm not sure exactly where you're coming up with that, but I still choose how to live my life."

What I was saying that, if you take many religions literally (as IMO too many people do), strict aherence to one usually totally prohibits knowledge of any others, contact with them, etc etc. It also means that if I do things that my religion specifically prohibits (examples include masturbation, pre-marital sex, eating beef, swallowing a fly, talking in public, reading the paper) I am hellbound. That is how religion controls lives, and by disrgarding this "threat" totally I am free to do whatever the f**k I want. And, it has to be said, I enjoy it immensely.
If you have similar joy adhering to the beliefs you adhere to, then that's fine by me. But bear in mind that the bible has alot to say about how to treat "other" people. If you've transcended these pretty horrible rules, well done.

"Look how perfectly the earth works and tell me that there was no thought or effort put into it and it happened by chance."

Look how perfectly the world works? Hello, am I missing something? Only last time I looked, it was on the verge of a total mental, physical, chemical, biological, economical, environmental etc etc collapse. From everything I've seen of it, it appears far from having any thought put into it at all. It is a system with deep, almost innumerable flaws.

"I'm trying to see from your point of view but I can't get my head that far up my ass."

This should either be directed at no-one at all or at everyone altogether. Otherwise, you're singling out a single person/group of people and criticising for them for their beliefs.

"There was a case a while ago of a recently dead snail being dated at over five million years old."

Oooh well lookie here, an error in a single radiometric dating result?! Surely, then that's conclusive proof that every single radiometric dating method is all totally wrong? Do you even know how many radiometric tests have been made? Cos I doubt if I can count that high in a day without getting terminally bored of counting.

"I do know how carbon dating is done... What's to prevent more of one of the isotopes then the other?"

Then you obviously don't know how carbon dating works.
See my posts above on how it doesn't even apply to fossils. You may also see me refer to carbon dating as being one of the more inaccurate methods as it relies on some assumptions which we are only 70% or so sure of. These don't apply to other methods due to the nature of the isotopes in question.

" i meant like lutherans, catholics, mormons, baptists, etc. like which of those is right."

So buddhism, paganism and all the rest are wrong?

"now to answer the question which religion(all religions) is right, well, i dunno"

Ah, an improvement at least. As for your research as to which one is "right" I wish you luck... you may need several billion dollars to spend on weaponry as well, because once you "prove" one to be right or wrong, there are going to be plenty of people who disagree with you, and have alot of very sharp sticks to emphasise their point.
Hence why I think you should just accept that every belief system has it's own merits, and if someone chooses to believe in one over another, thenthat is their choice and they should be left to it.

"how does one prove the scientific method scientifically?"

The scientific method isn't based on science, it's based on logic. Science is merely the application of observation, experimentation applied logically to the universe around us.
As an example... science sees something which looks like a petrol engine. It smells like a petrol engine. It makes a noise like a petrol engine. When you take it to bits, it looks like a petrol engine inside. When you put petrol and oil in it, it makes a shaft spin around. Hence science calls it a petrol engine and feeds it petrol in order to keep it running.
Religion however is perfectly happy calling it a sausage and saying it draws its power from the cosmic rays. Although when it suits them, it's a petrol engine.

Onto Joeiss...

Afterlife I suppose is one of those unknowns. If, like me, you believe there to be no spiritual afterlife, then you either accept no afterlife or you choose to make up your own in life. I imagine everyone has nique thoughts on this. But this is a theological/psychological discussion, so not really applicable here.

"I think that there should be a religion that just promotes peace and unity."

Well, if you want a religion like that, Buddhism is a good one. Or Universal Unitarianism. Or Secular Humanism. They, after all, both preach and practice it.

"and they will be great people if they join this "help everybody" religion."

For me, it's a belief, not a religon. A very important distinction.

" I think about this alot, and I still am confused, very, very much confused at that."

And it's something that only you can decide as well. Accept only what you see as truthful and good and helpful to all others. Yes, it is confusing when you come to doubt some or all parts of your faith. It is just something that each and every one of us has to figure out themselves.

As far as god vs. big bang (or any of the other scientific theories based on the creation of out universe), you're right, nobody knows which is true. But only science is actually seeking to explain them with evidence. Given time, I would say an answer one way or another is inevitable.

"Love all. Strive to be equal to all. Respect all nations, religions, and nature. Follow the plans that Marting Luther King jr. did. And most of all, do not think that just because somebody is not up to your standards, or do not follow the same views as you, do not think less of them. Because everybody is unique, and precious."

Yep.

"god always was"

[Insert]I believe...

"science... can't speak on issues of ultimate origin, meaning, or morality"

Philosophy, psychology.

"science is dependent on the values and personal beliefs of those who use it"

Which can be rationalised scientifically... but the actual execution of the scientific method requires the absence of any persoanl beliefs or values (which are known as "bias" amogst the scientific community).

"science can be used for both good and bad"

And surely this depends on the nature of the people using it's products? Again, not part of the topic.

"it can be used to argue for God or against Him"

There are very few ways of using science to argue for a god...

"science by itself offers no moral guidance or values to govern our lives. all science can do is show us how natural law works, but it tells us nothing about its origins."

No. Science can already explain how it is possible for us to have evolved from a bunch of inert matter... this accounts for our origins, I believe. As for moral and value systems, again, these can be explained by science (namely sociology, anthropology and psychology). Is it beneficial for society to allow those within it to kill each other? No, because it lowers genetic diversity, although it can be essential in the competition for resources to ensure the survial of the best adapted genetic lineage. Can we have sex with our own parents? No, becuuse this leads to genetic monoculture which leads to the proliferation of latent mutations and disease susceptibility. Believe it or not, even something as subjective as "human nature" can be explained scientifically.

"Can you prove there is a god? If so, please prove it to me. You can't. So if I can't prove it wrong, and you can't prove it to be true, then I'll go by logic. And logic says that there isn't an all-powerful being who can control everyone in the world."

And there was me thinking that I'd never be seen agreeing with nwoChris... ;)

"Staying on the topic about odds, what do you think the odds that your religion is right over every other religion?"

That's easy Chris. My god says I'm right, and they all worship false gods and are mad infidels. Too easy. [/sarcasm]

"It's impossible to make somthing from nothing"

Well... theoretical quantum mechanics have proved this not to be the case I believe.


Have people yet comprehended why I don't believe in god? I am not trying to convince anyone that their beliefs are wrong. I am just trying to show you why I believe mine.

Exactly.

:: Slowly works his way through three bags of chips, a Whopper, a medium cherry coke, a bowl of icecream, a glass of milk, and an altoids mint as he reads Chris's long and winded post. :: I'm about to deem your post not worth arguing because it's-- annoying-- to argue with nitpickers. But I have some spare time and a couple shots of Jamacian rum left, so I might as well.


Oh come now-- you don't need to stoop to insults, my friend. And do try to take things in context. If you would take a second look and read my post more carefully, you might catch the small fact that I said that in response to one of the atheists in here saying "I am tired of Christians trying to convince me that there is a God." Ahh, here it is. now read again and try to look at the bigger picture instead of finding every little problem you can with my posts.

<< --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I too am also annoyed at attempts to "educate" (read: convert) me to believing in a god
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And I am tired of people trying to convince me that there is no God. But let me just say, if you're willing to change your beliefs because of some chat on the internet, then you were never that solid in them to begin with.>>>

Now read the WHOLE post, and maybe you'll see that I had a point that was not directed at you or anyone else here, but was just something that we should all keep in mind in general.

Quote:

Who says you have to? This is a topic about why we DON'T believe in god, and I'm telling you. You're giving us a lotta crap about odds and what John 3:19 says for no reason. I said "I don't have to prove something wrong to know it's not real." Key word: I

:: Raises a brow. ::

John three nineteen? You mean three sixteen, right? Again, TRY to take things in context. The only scripture I quoted was for Justin to set him straight about several common misconceptions he had. Now I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack me for that, but perhaps if you read Revelation 40:93, everything may become clear for you. :: Sarcasm. ::

As I said before, I don't expect to get the answers from a bunch of kids. I don't expect to be able to solve every Biblical paradox and every arguement ever brought against Christainity. Let me spell this out for you-- "I don't expect to get all the answers from a video game forum."

Quote:

And how exactly could we prove you wrong if we were right? We can't because like I said millions of times before, you'd have to die first. Everything about religion is just so convenient for the people who are arguing in favor of it because there's absolutely nothing we can do to prove it wrong. But ask yourself this: Can you prove there is a god? If so, please prove it to me. You can't. So if I can't prove it wrong, and you can't prove it to be true, then I'll go by logic. And logic says that there isn't an all-powerful being who can control everyone in the world.

Hmm-- can I prove there is a God. Tell you what-- look at the other hundred or so posts here and read a little. You just might see that everyone here understands that there is no way to prove that there is or isn't a God. After that, look at your post again.

And once more, I do believe your logic is flawed.

Quote:

And of course there's that question again that NOBODY can answer: Who made god? Does god have a god?

I'll admit that in these arguements, many times, the Christians overlook the Atheists posts and simply ignore the details-- but seeing an atheist ignore a Christian's post-- that's something new now.

Who made God? Nobody, he always has been and always will be. That is the best answer you're ever going to get from anyone and you should probably accept it as so.

Quote:

Nope, I can't comprehend that... Because it would be too good of a place compared to what we have now. Religion just starts fights, wars, and causes millions of deaths. The attack on the WTC buildings wouldn't have happened if it weren't for religion. WWII? Religion. Should I go on?

Oh come now-- there he goes ignoring my post once more. No, there wouldn't have been a 9/11 attack, because odds are the WTC wouldn't have existed. How can you blame WW2 on Religion? Do you really think that Hitler would have stayed silent if he had no "religion." NO. He would have easily found some other foothold.

Quote:

What the hell are you trying to say here? I said the universe is all around me... IT IS. It's a fact, if you wanna argue this then you're too stupid to have an opinion on anything anyway. It's also a fact that I don't see god, and neither do you. I don't hear god, and neither do you. I don't feel god's hand helping me when I need help, and neither do you. So if you can't see him, touch him, hear him, then you have no clue if he's real do you? No, you don't. So why do you believe him?

Once more, let's not result to petty insults.

Prove to me the universe exists using scientific methods. Prove to me that there is space out there. Prove to me that my senses are not decieving me and that we're not all riding on a disc shaped world on the back of four elephants who in turn ride ont he back of the great turtle a'tun. Prove to me that what we see is really here. I don't feel the universe, but you believe it's there. Go ahead, feel the space. Tell me what you see. Take a look at space. Is it real? Or are your senses just decieving you?
So if you can't feel space, and if you can't touch it, smell it, hear it, or taste it, then you have no clue if it's real, don't you.

Quote:

And you seem to like to talk about odds. Well, you never mention that odds of there being a god... And using simple logic, I think you can agree with me that the odds are too horrible to even comprehend. I mean, have you ever seen an all powerful being that can do anything he wants? Have you ever seen someone who just lives in someplace we never see? Have you ever seen someone create millions and millions of people before? I'll assume you answer "no" to the questions, then the odds of there being a god is pretty damn bad. So giving the odds you gave about the science crap, yes, I'd take them odds over the odds of there being a god.

:: Raises a brow. ::

Have you ever studied probability before? Take a course or two. I did. You should too. It might clear this gross misconception that you seem to have about being able to estimate the odds of there being a god.

Now understand that to measure the odds of something, it must be possable. For God to create something, He Himself must exist, therefore, in a very subtle on your part and nitpicky on my part way, you've admitted that he does exist.

The gory details aside, as I said before, take a course or two on probability and perhaps you'll understand what i'm talking about.

Quote:

Staying on the topic about odds, what do you think the odds that your religion is right over every other religion? Have you tried every religion? No you haven't, because that's impossible. So the odds of your religion, being right over every other one that you've never even heard of aren't very good, are they?

Oh come now-- I do believe that this was addressed in the other posts. As I said before, dont' randomly skip parts of a post. You might miss something.

:: Claps sarcastically ::

Let's give this man a hand-- he understands the most basic part of propaganda and debate. :rolleyes:


Actually it was written by a variaty of authors spanning the last tenthousand or so years and put together by the council of carthage in-- 414 AD I believe. Then again, I could be wrong about the date.

Please, do be a little more intelligent in your posts.


Would it shock you if I said yes? Isn't that what this debate is about? I understand you were using that as an example-- as poor as it is-- but when you have undeniable proof that the Bible wasn't just written off the top of someone's head, then you kinda think a little bit differantly.

The origional manuscripts are still around-- for the most part anyway-- and I welcome you to take a gander at them and tell me that all of the books of the Bible were written by some village idiot who wanted to keep his friends in line.


As I said before-- which you seemingly overlooked in your haste to respond-- I don't intend on proving it. I don't intend on giving you all the answers. I guess I should make it clear that "IIII Dooooon't haaaaave alllll theeeeee aaaaansweeeers." And neither do you.

Again, using the same logic, you can't prove that he doesn't exist so I come to the conclusion that he is real.


Chris-- I'm getting the feeling that I may have created some animosity between our two selves. This is a good thing.


Joeiss-- if you get the chance, IM me later and we'll talk about some ofyour questions. My AIM handle is LeonMagnolis, and MSN is LeonMagnolis@hotmail.com . I can't give you all the answers, but I'll do what I can to help you reach them yourself.



Now keep the dubloons coming. I want to start a gambling club here and I'm gonna need at least a thousand to get that up and running. :D :roll:



Euch, I just saw the other posts and I'll get back to them tomorrow. I need my beauty sleep-- and you;d aggree too if you took a look at my ugly mug. :(

*reads posts*

Not one thing in that glob of words proved a thing. All you did was insult Chris with sarcasim. Good job. I really believe all your ideas now. Wait- what were they? Oh, that's right: nothing.

Ugh, nobody is gonna prove anything to anybody in this thread.

look at Pickachu's older posts, they proved nothing... now Leon is taking the same defensive stance as Pika.... and you make a sarcastic post about it?

Explain.

As for Pika....

If Scientists discover somthing that gives conclusive evidence that God does exist, and he did make this planet, and half of the scientist are still skeptical about it, which stance would you take?

Yeah...this topic is kinda pointless. No one's all of a sudden going to be like "How could I be so stupid. Now I believe there is/isn't a god." Everyone expressed their beliefs and now people are getting angry. I suggest closing the topic.

"Oh come now-- you don't need to stoop to insults, my friend"

That right before you insult me three or four times. You're an idiot. :eek: Oh look, another insult! Wah-wah! It doesn't take anything away from my post, and it's not exactly an insult if it's true.

"And do try to take things in context. If you would take a second look and read my post more carefully, you might catch the small fact that I said that in response to one of the atheists in here saying "I am tired of Christians trying to convince me that there is a God." Ahh, here it is. now read again and try to look at the bigger picture instead of finding every little problem you can with my posts."

I think YOU need to read over some things sometimes... READ THE TITLE OF THIS TOPIC. It CLEARLY states: "Don't believe in God? Why not?" So what the hell do you think we're gonna do? This WHOLE topic is about us non-believers telling you why we don't believe. I tell you I don't believe in god because it's what the topic is about! I don't give a **** if you do believe in god, because that's not what this topic is about... So you saying you're tired of people telling you there isn't a god is STUPID. If you were so tired of it, then why'd you come into the topic about it? That's like somebody going into a topic called "Dogs" and saying "I hate talknig about dogs." Do you see how retarded that is now?

"Hmm-- can I prove there is a God. Tell you what-- look at the other hundred or so posts here and read a little. You just might see that everyone here understands that there is no way to prove that there is or isn't a God"

...What in the blue hell is your point? That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about! I can respond with the exact quote that you responded to because you didn't answer a damn thing. There is no way to prove there is a god, and who was arguing that point? Like I said in my other post that you ignored (yet you tell me I ignore some of the things in your post) nobody can prove there isn't a god because you religious people conveniently made the story that you have to die to know if god is there or not. If you can see god anyother way, then please do tell because sdtpikachu, millions of other people, and I haven't seen him yet. And if you're dead, how can you possibly tell people he's not there? YOU COULDN'T. And that's my point...

"And once more, I do believe your logic is flawed."

Oh, really? Ya know what... I don't give a ****. It's MY logic, I (*I*) think it's logical. And what exactly is flawed about my logic? Have YOU ever seen am all powerful superbeing? What is that, you haven't? Okay great, so we haven't ever seen something like it, but because you read about it in a book you believe it. Yet, you think MY logic is flawed. Did you ride in the short bus to school?

"but seeing an atheist ignore a Christian's post-- that's something new now."

Do you get stupider by the post? This topic (read: THIS TOPIC) is about why we don't believe in god (read: DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD). It's not my job to answer all your stupid questions about science and the bible, because that isn't what this topic is about, and sdtpikachu did a pretty fine job of that.

"Who made God? Nobody, he always has been and always will be. That is the best answer you're ever going to get from anyone and you should probably accept it as so."

LMAO. THIS is probably the biggest reason why I can't stand most religious people's arguments. You believe god "always has been" yet it's impossible to believe that the universe "always has been" ? The universe always has been, and you should probably accept it as so.

"Oh come now-- there he goes ignoring my post once more."

What did I ignore?! And like I said above, this topic isn't me telling you why there isn't a god, it's me telling you why I don't believe god. Read the topic title once more, please.

"Do you really think that Hitler would have stayed silent if he had no "religion." NO. He would have easily found some other foothold."

And how the hell do you know? Oh yeah, I'm sorry, you know everything and everything you say is a fact. You don't know and I don't know, but as it stands we pretty much know that what Hitler did was caused by religion, so let's put up "One big bad thing that killed millions of people" on the "because of religion" list.

"So if you can't feel space, and if you can't touch it, smell it, hear it, or taste it, then you have no clue if it's real, don't you."

Now don't go cry that I ignored your post once more, I just quoted this sentence out of that big paragraph where you go on about the universe being fake.

I understood the universe to be all around me. That's what it is, isn't it? I can touch things around me, I can see things around me... You can't? Well maybe you have some type of mental disorder then, I'm not sure, but trying to prove the universe is fake is (and this isn't a "petty insult") retarded.

"Now understand that to measure the odds of something, it must be possable. For God to create something, He Himself must exist, therefore, in a very subtle on your part and nitpicky on my part way, you've admitted that he does exist."

Don't put words in my mouth.

I said "the odds of there being a god is pretty damn bad." Now could you point out just where the hell I said "the odds of god CREATING something..."? Stop acting like an idiot, it's one thing to "nitpick" and it's another thing to make up things and pretend I said them because it's convenient for you. But then again almost all religious people do it, so it's not only you. Of course, either way, it's a petty insult to you.

If you're so high and mighty on odds, you tell me the odds of there being a god. I'm sorry not everyone had the chance to study odds for a year.

"I do believe that this was addressed in the other posts"

Yes, and in other posts people have said they believe their religion "because it works." Well if you haven't tried every religion, then how would you know if another one didn't work better?

hmm.... *reads Chris' post*...

Danchastu: "Yeah...this topic is kinda pointless. No one's all of a sudden going to be like "How could I be so stupid. Now I believe there is/isn't a god." Everyone expressed their beliefs and now people are getting angry. I suggest closing the topic"

I second that...... or would it be third..... or.... Ok how about this....

I agree...

:unsure:

I agree, there shouldn't be any debating in here, but since the topic is about why I don't believe in god, I'll tell you. If someone wants to argue with me, they're the ones making this topic difficult, I'm just doing what the topic is supposed to be about.

":: Claps sarcastically ::

Let's give this man a hand-- he understands the most basic part of propaganda and debate"

*claps sarcastically*

No no, let's give YOU a hand, you've realized I'm right so you insult me. This isn't a debate idiot, it's me telling you why I don't believe god. If you don't like it, get out of this topic that clearly states what I just said in the title.

Now you better call the cops because I'm "ignoring" the rest of your post! It's all about how you don't have all the answers to why I don't believe god, and you know what, WHO CARES? This ISN'T a debate, it's us telling you why we don't believe in god for the eighth time. Don't like it? Suck an ass, or leave.

Calm down, Chris. You were doing all right, but insulting is never called for in this forum. Don't argue with me. It's against the rules, period.

I was hoping this topic would manage to stay open. Maybe it still can. I'm leaving it open for now.

But hey, I just got an idea! I'll let someone who believes in God (i.e. BigJustinW) look over this topic now. And if he thinks he should close it, he will.

I'll still be able to reply to it, of course. :D

guys, a lot of you said this topic was pointless and its not going to convert somebody. well, those weren't my intentions. i just wanted to see things from a nonchristian point of view and see what you guys think. then i'm taking these posts and researching anwers for them, for me. so please don't turn this into a big debate. i'd just let it dye. if you want a debate, start your own thread.

"I am tired of Christians trying to convince me that there is a God."

The reason I said this is that certain forum members who shall remain nameless have tried to turn this thread into a debate on religion. I posted why I didn't believe in god, with an explanation. Then some people have the audacity to tell me that I'm wrong, and that I am ignorant and stupid and obviously haven't "understood" the bible properly. I was just trying to get them to shut up about it all.

Can you point out the bits in my post that try to convince you there isn't a god? All I am doing is saying why I don't. Though it seems some people have a problem with that.

"But let me just say, if you're willing to change your beliefs because of some chat on the internet, then you were never that solid in them to begin with."

And I still see this as either an invalid argument or arrogance of the highest order. Being solid in your beliefs surely comes as believing them yes? So if someone casts a new and convincing light on this evidence, then you wouldn't change them? Despite being "solid" in them? Saying that you won't change your mind is just a tad stubborn, don't you think?

"I don't expect to be able to solve every Biblical paradox and every arguement ever brought against Christainity."

And yet I am expected to solve every single argument ever brought against the scientific community, it would seem. Sigh.

"And once more, I do believe your logic is flawed."

Not as far as I can see. It goes something like this:
You cannot prove there is a god
You cannot prove there is not
So what do I believe?
Do I believe what I can see with my own eyes, or do I believe what my faith teaches me?

Chris and I have merely taken the former option, and we are just trying to explain why we do so. The words "brick" "head" "bang" and "wall" spring to mind.

"Who made God? Nobody, he always has been and always will be. That is the best answer you're ever going to get from anyone and you should probably accept it as so."

No. We have already explained to you that we both believe the best answer to be god does not exist in the first place. To me at least, that makes a billion times more sense that the "well god exists really but obviously there's no real way to tell" method.
Why should we just accept it because that's the best answer the religoius community can come up with?

"No, there wouldn't have been a 9/11 attack, because odds are the WTC wouldn't have existed."

Irrelevant.

" How can you blame WW2 on Religion? Do you really think that Hitler would have stayed silent if he had no "religion.""

Hitler was a devout christian. He believed in the moral, spiritual and physical superiority of the Aryan race. He used both of these to convince the people to go to war with him. Not only did he tell them they were the finest race on earth, but he said they had god on their side too. Seems like a pretty god incentive to me.

"Now understand that to measure the odds of something, it must be possable. For God to create something, He Himself must exist, therefore, in a very subtle on your part and nitpicky on my part way, you've admitted that he does exist."

Good example of a non-logical assumption.

"Let's give this man a hand-- he understands the most basic part of propaganda and debate."

What was this for? It serves no rational purpose, therefore I cann only conclude that you too are indulging in petty insults.

"Actually it was written by a variaty of authors spanning the last tenthousand or so years and put together by the council of carthage in-- 414 AD I believe. Then again, I could be wrong about the date."

You could also be wrong about the monkeys. Please, be a little more intelligent in your mercurial way of deciding what is fact and what is fiction and what cannot be determined.

"The origional manuscripts are still around-- for the most part anyway-- and I welcome you to take a gander at them and tell me that all of the books of the Bible were written by some village idiot who wanted to keep his friends in line."

Oh I believe quite the opposite - IMO they couldn't have been written by an idiot. They are too well a crafted method of control.

"Again, using the same logic, you can't prove that he doesn't exist so I come to the conclusion that he is real."

This is not logic. This is faith. Logic would dictate "I cannot determine if there is or is not a god. Therefore I shall start from a blank slate and see if I can find out how the universe works, and perhaps that way I can determine which is true"
What you are saying is I don't have an answer, therefore this question must be the right one. To me, it makes no sense to say that just because you don't have an answer for something then it must be due to a god. Maybe it's just me.

"but I'll do what I can to help you reach them yourself."

Surely it would be better if you just left him to do his own thinking?

"If Scientists discover somthing that gives conclusive evidence that God does exist, and he did make this planet, and half of the scientist are still skeptical about it, which stance would you take?"

Why would half of the scientists still be sceptical about it? Again, you misunderstand the scientific method.
The stance I take ios based on reliable material evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. If irefutable evidence were shown of gods existence, then yes I would believe it, as would every scientist worth their salt. This paragraph I imagine will lead you into "then what would prove that god did exist for you then?" I imagine. Sigh.

" I suggest closing the topic."

He's got a point. People are getting too aggressive over all of this. It is not meant to be a debate about religion, it os meant to be explaining to the theists why I am not one of them.

"This WHOLE topic is about us non-believers telling you why we don't believe."

You would have to say that this logic is irefutable, Leon and BJW.

"It's MY logic, I (*I*) think it's logical."

This is a good pint, that I don't believe anyione has made yet. Logic is as much a personal thing as belief. You may think I am illogical in assuming there is no god, I of course take the exact opposite stance. Logic is as much a matter of opinion as whether you prefer Heinz or HP sauce on your chips.
Simply put: I can no longer understand how anyone in possession of the knowledge that I have can believe in a god, because the two are mutually exclusive in my mind. To me, science has disproved god and I can no longer accept that gods exist, because it is in contradiction to observable facts and my logisitical procedure.

"and sdtpikachu did a pretty fine job of that."

Not fine enough I imagine. Give it a few posts and I'll be expected to explain quantum mechanics in how matter can form from nothing. As well as all the rest of it.

"The universe always has been, and you should probably accept it as so."

Why stop there? sdtPikachu always has been, and you should probably just accept it. ;)

""So if you can't feel space, and if you can't touch it, smell it, hear it, or taste it, then you have no clue if it's real, don't you.""

Like I said, on a fundamental level it is impossible to prove that anything exists at all. This however is not a very useful standpoint. So we just have to accept that what we can see does exist. And for me, by extension, things I can't see, never have seen and never see any evidence of DON'T exist.

"Well if you haven't tried every religion, then how would you know if another one didn't work better?"

You would have to agree this is a fair point, Leon. Who knows, you may find becoming a member of the natural law party more fulfilling than your current beliefs. Who knows until you try?

"I agree... "

I fourth... but it would be nice to see if the people who want to know have actually figured out why I think like I do first.

"This isn't a debate idiot"

No Chris, it isn't and wasn't ment to be. It may be galling to be insulted, but it won't get you any further by retaliating in the same fashion. Chill man.

"guys, a lot of you said this topic was pointless and its not going to convert somebody. well, those weren't my intentions"

Ah someone with their head screwed on at last. For all those of you having difficulty understanding THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ON WHY RELIGON/SCIENCE IS RIGHT/WRONG. The chap just wants to find some stuff out for himself in order to understand people like me better.

Surely this isn't something that should be vehemently argued over?

Carbon dating

Half scientist belive that it's very accurate, half scientists believe it's very inaccurate. I'm sure you have taken a stance on this issue.

If you believe in the scientific method, stating that you are on either side would make your whole arguement a contradiction. (which it already is)

So once again, if a scientist who is studying evolution sumbled upon a building block that would have been impossible were it not for a god, and half scientist believe, and half don't, which stance would you take on the issue?

Skeptisisim or Acceptisism(<---I made this word up)

"Who made God? Nobody, he always has been and always will be. That is the best answer you're ever going to get from anyone and you should probably accept it as so."

Exactly the problem with religion. You can't explain everything. Christianity is 2000 years old. I'm sorry, but things change. We know better on a lot of issues now, and now religion has run out of answers.

Just what is it that you don't understand BJW?

"Half scientist belive that it's very accurate, half scientists believe it's very inaccurate."

I'd like to see your evidence. Unless of course you're referring to creation "scientists", who don't adhere to the scientific method.

Every single scientist I know he knows anything about carbon dating will admit that is has it's faults - it is useless on anything over 20-30,000 years old. This you could term as a failing, rather than an inaccuracy. As far as more recent specimens go, it will give us the correct date to within a margin of about 3% in 99% of all cases.

But you still seem to think that these "failings" in carbon dating render all other methods of radiometric dating as useless too. This is the same logic that creation scientists apply, and I think even you would be able to see its fallacy. Our theories about the nature of the earth DO NOT rely on carbon dating in any way, shape or form.

"If you believe in the scientific method, stating that you are on either side would make your whole arguement a contradiction. (which it already is)"

Firstly, you are again stating that I am wrong, and are showing a grand total of zero for respect and understanding of my beliefs.

Secondly, I am not taking sides. What exactly is the purpose of this comment, other than to call me a stupid twat? Explain please.

"So once again, if a scientist who is studying evolution sumbled upon a building block that would have been impossible were it not for a god, and half scientist believe, and half don't, which stance would you take on the issue?"

If a scientist studying evolution came across something that could not in any way be attributed to a naturally explainable event, then it would be every scientists duty as a scientist to accept this finding. I believe what the evidence shows. For the billionth f***ing time.

"Skeptisisim or Acceptisism"

Scepticism always. Never stop asking questions.

What do they rely on?

Well, let's see, you claim to be skeptical about everything, but you believe in things you haven't seen or studied for yourself.

temper temper

When you get pissed off, you lose the debate, period.

When you learned about Gravity, were you skepticle?

do you believe that the world is round?

Have you been to outter space?

Do you know that outter space is real?

has man landed on the moon?

from the abouve questions, what personal experience proves it?

do you believe thing through the personal experiences of other people (astronauts etc.)?

and don't tell me these questions are pointless, because the point is coming after the next post you make.