Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[Ultrarandom]

Let this boil over in your mind
What if. . . Everyone was right and it all depends on what religion or following you have. if you are a nihilist you just disappear, same with atheists. If you are muslim, you get your 72 virgins, if you are christian you do go to heaven/hell etc.
Just some random thing that popped into my head while I was bored hahaha

[Dr Woomanchu]

You're talking about a Pantheistic Multipersonal Solipsism as proposed by Robert Heinlein. If it's been imagined, it exists in it's own universe.

[Who_ate_my_rice]

the thing is, if there is a God or there isnt, there will still be athiests and people of other faiths. Thats just the way it will always be until the end of days then we'll all know what is right and what is wrong.

i mean hey~ when i die i guess i'd know then for sure whether or not the relationship i had with Christ was real. Or if you guys were right all along!  But like i've said many pages before, i seen to many things in my life and in others for ME to deny the existence of God.

Its fair enough if you feel there's no reason to believe in a higher power. Whether or not you're a muslim, or a hindu. That your choice and yours alone to make.

I have no right to tell you NO YOU ARE WRONG! we all make our own decisions and our own ideas on what what is real and what isnt

I believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the life

CAKE TIME!!!

[Blob_ZPS]

if there was a god then there would not be any atheists - there would be evidence and so god would just be accepted

Just a question, do you believe that there is another sentient life form that exists on any other planet in the Universe? If so, what evidence do you have?

And if you have no evidence, than surely that means humans are the only sentient life form in the Universe.

Thats just wrong.
You have no evidence that I am wearing pants, therefore I am wearing pants.
No.

The objective truth is detatched from the evidence we have of the universe based on our observations.
Just because we havent seen something yet doesnt mean it's NOT there it simply means that we dont know IF its there.

In fact we can probabilistically infer the exisence of life in the universe by working out how many planets in the universe are capable of maintaining life, and although we can't be 100% sure of the existence of life we can say its more likely that theres life than that theres no life.

oh and inb4 "but we havent seen god yet, therefore we dont know if he exists", because although that statement is true, it does not mean god exists, however the statement that life exists somewhere else in the universe is somehow much stronger based on the fact that life exists on earth so we know that life is at least possible and have evidence of it (look in a mirror), as opposed to the existence of "god" which we have NO evidence to support.

[Scunner]

i am agnostic on sentient life - there is no evidence but there is no reason for there to be evidence

i dont believe in alien life that interacts with humans - there is no evidence and there is reason for there to be evidence

the god these people are talking about apparently grants wishes and shit - there would be evidence of this space magic

if you are arguing that there might be this irrelevant god that doesn't have an impact on anything, then hey, there might be, but you are talking about a god which is identical in every way to no god

I would argue that there is a difference in saying there is no god and saying that a god could exist but is currently invisible to us, just as there is a difference in saying that there are no aliens and saying aliens could exist but are currently invisible to us. And you can't say definitively that there is no god in much the same way as you can't say definitively there are no aliens.

Thats just wrong.
You have no evidence that I am wearing pants, therefore I am wearing pants.
No.

You're right, it is wrong, as far as I'm concerned. I was merely asking a question. I have no evidence that you were wearing pants so I can't say that you were. But I also can't say that you are not. Sure, I could say that if you posted from a mobile phone in a public place that it is highly likely you were wearing pants as not many people go out in public without them on. Or I could say that there is a chance that you were not wearing pants if you posting from you computer at home because you like to enjoy the freedom of the pants-less when at home. But I cannot say definitively if you were wearing pants or not.

[Virus.]

Hence you cannot say definitively that there is a God!

Way to prove his point.

[cobra]

i am agnostic on sentient life - there is no evidence but there is no reason for there to be evidence

i dont believe in alien life that interacts with humans - there is no evidence and there is reason for there to be evidence

the god these people are talking about apparently grants wishes and shit - there would be evidence of this space magic

if you are arguing that there might be this irrelevant god that doesn't have an impact on anything, then hey, there might be, but you are talking about a god which is identical in every way to no god

I would argue that there is a difference in saying there is no god and saying that a god could exist but is currently invisible to us, just as there is a difference in saying that there are no aliens and saying aliens could exist but are currently invisible to us. And you can't say definitively that there is no god in much the same way as you can't say definitively there are no aliens.

so you are uncomfortable saying there is 'no anything' - you are open to all crazy things which people can conceive - you are open to the fact that there might be a horse behind you and you are the only one who cant see it? that leprechauns dance in you backyard at night? if it works for you great, but why fill your head with non-sense

you can not prove non-existence, non-things can not leave evidence. the God people discuss would leave evidence, he grants wishes and those wishes could be measured - the fact that you can not get this evidence means that that god does not exist

[toofast]

you can not prove non-existence, non-things can not leave evidence. the God people discuss would leave evidence, he grants wishes and those wishes could be measured - the fact that you can not get this evidence means that that god does not exist

Yea i agree. God is leaving kgs of wishes lying, which we should be able to find.

Like I said in my previous post.

if there was a god then there would not be any atheists - there would be evidence and so god would just be accepted

Well given we seem to always find more 'evidence' changing our scientific opinions, you can't really say that.

Not to mention if there was a all powerful god, surely he/she would be capable of hiding his existence

There will always be things which we don't understand. To write them off, purely on the whim there no evidence where there should be, makes you no better than those that doubted evolution, or the heliocentric model of the world or anyone of the many theories developed as we found more evidence.

[cobra]

you can not prove non-existence, non-things can not leave evidence. the God people discuss would leave evidence, he grants wishes and those wishes could be measured - the fact that you can not get this evidence means that that god does not exist

Yea i agree. God is leaving kgs of wishes lying, which we should be able to find.

Like I said in my previous post.

if there was a god then there would not be any atheists - there would be evidence and so god would just be accepted

Well given we seem to always find more 'evidence' changing our scientific opinions, you can't really say that.

Not to mention if there was a all powerful god, surely he/she would be capable of hiding his existence

There will always be things which we don't understand. To write them off, purely on the whim there no evidence where there should be, makes you no better than those that doubted evolution, or the heliocentric model of the world or anyone of the many theories developed as we found more evidence.

what "things" am i writing off?, i am "writing off" no-things.

 the whole point is there is no evidence, if there was evidence then you would almost have a point

[Ngati_Grim]

How many times have we had this discussion, Cobra...maybe just point 'them' to read the whole thread rather than flogging a dead horse!

[toofast]

what "things" am i writing off?, i am "writing off" no-things.

 the whole point is there is no evidence, if there was evidence then you would almost have a point

The thing while it may not be 100% correct to say there is a god, because nobody has found evidence to disprove the idea, its definitely not wrong. On the other hand to say there is no god, is wrong, given the smallest probability that it can be correct.

Just in the same extent it would of been wrong to say the earth doesn't revolve around the sun in 14th century, despite the fact they had no evidence that it did.

[mattnz]

what "things" am i writing off?, i am "writing off" no-things.

 the whole point is there is no evidence, if there was evidence then you would almost have a point

The thing while it may not be 100% correct to say there is a god, because nobody has found evidence to disprove the idea, its definitely not wrong. On the other hand to say there is no god, is wrong, given the smallest probability that it can be correct.

Just in the same extent it would of been wrong to say the earth doesn't revolve around the sun in 14th century, despite the fact they had no evidence that it did.

Terrible post, F-, would not read again.

[SteddieEddie]

what "things" am i writing off?, i am "writing off" no-things.

 the whole point is there is no evidence, if there was evidence then you would almost have a point

The thing while it may not be 100% correct to say there is a god, because nobody has found evidence to disprove the idea, its definitely not wrong. On the other hand to say there is no god, is wrong, given the smallest probability that it can be correct.

Just in the same extent it would of been wrong to say the earth doesn't revolve around the sun in 14th century, despite the fact they had no evidence that it did.

When they convict someone on DNA evidence, there is a small, small small chance that the DNA is not a perfect match. Yet they still convict because in all likelihood they did it and the small % is just because nothing is absolute.

Same with your God argument, just because there is a minuscule possibility that God does exist, as we imagine him, does not make it a reality, nor even probable.

I'm with cobra, he doesn't exist, of that I am certain

[Ngati_Grim]

Same with your God argument, just because there is a minuscule possibility that God does exist, as we imagine him, does not make it a reality, nor even probable.

I'm with cobra, he doesn't exist, of that I am certain

I'll stick my oar in and say I'm with these two.

The thing while it may not be 100% correct to say there is a god, because nobody has found evidence to disprove the idea, its definitely not wrong. On the other hand to say there is no god, is wrong, given the smallest probability that it can be correct.

Just in the same extent it would of (sic) been wrong to say the earth doesn't revolve around the sun in 14th century, despite the fact they had no evidence that it did.

Uh, there has always been evidence that the Earth revolved around the Sun, just really bad observation skills and a load of brainwashing.

[Scunner]

Same with your God argument, just because there is a minuscule possibility that God does exist, as we imagine him, does not make it a reality, nor even probable.

I think my point is that if there exists that possiblity, no matter how small, than it is not entirely correct to say 'there is no god'. Even those athiest bus advertisements in the UK just said "there's probably no god".

[toofast]

Same with your God argument, just because there is a minuscule possibility that God does exist, as we imagine him, does not make it a reality, nor even probable.

I think my point is that if there exists that possiblity, no matter how small, than it is not entirely correct to say 'there is no god'. Even those athiest bus advertisements in the UK just said "there's probably no god".

This^

I think some of you are mistaking my argument about probability, for something about god. All I am saying is you can never say "there is definitely no god".

[mattnz]

In the same way that you cannot say there are definitely no underpants gnomes?

[Ngati_Grim]

...but matt, there are!  My one wears a purple helmet and a wrinkly coat.

[liquidpain]

Fcuking sigh... this is why more 1/3 of americans dont accept evolution.

[video]dGxBUyHbn2E[/video]

[Who_ate_my_rice]

LOL what if there was a God. What will you say to him if you were standing before him?

[Ngati_Grim]

"Where were you in my hour of need, Arsehole?"

[Blob_ZPS]

LOL what if there was a God. What will you say to him if you were standing before him?

So, Mate, Is mary still a virgin or have you already buttered that muffin?

[Dr Woomanchu]

LOL what if there was a God. What will you say to him if you were standing before him?

So your god is a him, that's cool. What happens if you end up standing in front of someone elses god(s)s. What will you say to her/them to explain you were following that other dude. The one over in the corner that none of the other gods get on with very well.

[Blob_ZPS]

LOL what if there was a God. What will you say to him if you were standing before him?

So your god is a him, that's cool. What happens if you end up standing in front of someone elses god(s)s. What will you say to her/them to explain you were following that other dude. The one over in the corner that none of the other gods get on with very well.

You could have a hard time saying anything if it was Cthulhu or Azathoth you were standing in front of.

[Who_ate_my_rice]

LOL what if there was a God. What will you say to him if you were standing before him?

So your god is a him, that's cool. What happens if you end up standing in front of someone elses god(s)s. What will you say to her/them to explain you were following that other dude. The one over in the corner that none of the other gods get on with very well.

oh pies on a hat, you know what i mean   and in response to your question. I'd reply... i saw the sick healed in the God i followed. I saw lives changed becaus eof the God i followed. i saw the dead get raised because of the God i followed. My family followed a few of you other Gods before the God i follow now found us, and you did nothing to help. But the God i follow now gave my mother an extra 7 years when she should have died in 6 months from breast cancer. Stopped my fathers seizures dead in its tracks as soon as i called him.  

and about the him thing

John 4:24 “God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” Since God is a spiritual being, He does not possess physical human characteristics. However, sometimes figurative language used in Scripture assigns human characteristics to God in order to make it possible for man to understand God. Anthropomorphism is simply a means for God (a spiritual being) to communicate truth about His nature to humanity, physical beings. Since humanity is physical, we are limited in our understanding of those things beyond the physical realm; therefore, anthropomorphism in Scripture helps us to understand who God is.

stolen from google search

but yer!  What would you guys say to God if you foudn out he's real =3

i know one of the guys on queen street kept saying, "but he's not! but he's not! but he's not! but he's not! NOOOO PROOOFF  HE"S NOT REAL!! NOT REAL NOT REAL NOT REAL NOT REAL!!"

thats not really discussing much :/  and ppppppplllllllleeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaassssssssseeeeeeeeeee remember im not preaching to you guys i like havign discussions coz this interests me. im sharing what i believe in. im not stamping my foot down sayign stfu noob stfu noob stfu noob!!