Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[ThaFleastyler]

As with 'before', the word 'cause' is also related to time, therefor the concept of cause and effect is part of our universe. The Big bang cannot have a cause, because 'cause and effected' was created at the big bang.

But to say that cause and effect was also created at the Big Bang means that the Big Bang occurred out of nothing - and not just nothing as in "a lack of something", but *nothing* on a level we can't even really comprehend. Thats even a stretch in spiritual terms, let alone scientific terms where it likely cannot be explained.

For something to happen, something has to happen first. Its simple. Why would the Big Bang occur, bringing with it a bunch of rules and laws of physics it didn't even obey itself?!

[Arnifix]

But to say that cause and effect was also created at the Big Bang means that the Big Bang occurred out of nothing - and not just nothing as in "a lack of something", but *nothing* on a level we can't even really comprehend. Thats even a stretch in spiritual terms, let alone scientific terms where it likely cannot be explained.

For something to happen, something has to happen first. Its simple. Why would the Big Bang occur, bringing with it a bunch of rules and laws of physics it didn't even obey itself?!

Because it's a fucking universe-creating event. They don't HAVE to follow the rules.

The big bang occuring out of nothing isn't that much of a stretch.

[ThaFleastyler]

Swearing makes me nervous  :eek:

It just doesn't make sense to me - I guess thats why I'm a tech support guy for an entertainment company, and not a physicist. My thinking is that everything needs to have a causal event - including the creation of everything.

[BerG]

what created god ? it's obvious god is not a simple 'entity' god is complex, and complex things do not just 'occur' they (snigger) evolve.

What are you some kind of idiot!?

God is able to be made from nothing, fool.

But lol at the Big Bang coming from nothing, lol, tools, lol.

[[rEc] NONAME]

isnt the big bang a theory anyways.  wonder when the next big bang would occur.

[Arnifix]

NONAME']isnt the big bang a theory anyways.  wonder when the next big bang would occur.

It is a scientific theory.

[Black Heart]

also you say everything finite has cause an effect, isn't the universe considered infinite?

[Steady]

MY imaginary friend can waste your imaginary friend

[Spork]

I'm sure Maxis has an explanation for all of this.

One day millions (billions) of years ago before Earth existed, God was playing on his Atari 1 (yes thats even before any other thing was invented) and he was playing The Soms City, which is much alike the Sims and SimCity combined, yet in this game you create the world.

So God did this, and we are all a part of his game. And Jesus was a leetzor hack that he found to get his belief increased (sort of like Miracles in Black & White) but right about now Belief in God as christians know it, is quite bloody low.

So he better find that leetzor hack again or else hes fucked. Because anyone whose ever played B&W (2) knows that when a God has no belief he gets the shove.

Cheers

[DDM]

The universe is expanding, when it cant expand any longer it will shrink again and become so dense and full of chocolatey goodness that it explodes in another big bang.. and so repeats the cycle.

It's the lion king version of the universe circle of life.

What is it expanding into?

... Black

Seriously, watch the end of men in black.. then you will know the full truth.

[BerG]

So we're pretty much pwned when it explodes and everything starts again.

[DDM]

Yes sireee bob.

+1spam

[Tiwaking!]

Oh, and keep it concise. A entire page of writing will generally go unread.

Except by me. I've read all the posts in this whole thread after being alerted to it when someone posted on it.

I had some material which i believed was worthy of discussion. My original posts were interesting were they not?

Except they were not on the topic of Evolution or Creationism. You should create your own thread on Nemesis stars

Creationism, or rather literal Creationism (the christian belief that Genesis/etc is a literally true guide to the creation of the universe) does not qualify as a scientific theory on any of the above items. This is because it is essentially based on the belief system described in an ancient document, the bible
"Creation Science" was banned from schools in america. Basically because it's foundation is from a christian religion and is therefore NOT scientific.

"Theocratic Dictatorship" - Frank Zappa

I'm sure the entire fabric of the christian universe would collapse upon itself if god was proven to be anything but infallable.

"The Hitch-hikers guide the Galaxy": Infinite Improbability Drive?

I don't like the term "Evolutionist" - i prefer "Anti-creationist".

:cool:

The brain literally is physically unable to comprehend the alternative. I'll post more on this later.

And you never did Im guessing you mean how the brain cannot comprehend disorder

The 'stories' contained in the Bible do indeed contain socialogical truths

Truisms do not a religion make. Obediance, Scripture and Heirachy do

you're supposed to pay attetion to is the fact he was in fact a jew

Which is why all Judeo-Christian religions believe the soul of a Jew is far more valuable than that of any other type of non-believer

mho, jesus was the ancient day martin luther-king

If Ghandi had been born 2000 years ago he most likely would have become a Jesus like figure today

What is more logically plausible?
1. Natural evolution? i.e. the slow evolution from primitive lifeforms to more complex lifeforms.
2. Creation via a deity i.e. An all-knowing being who has the power of creation

Humanistically? Evolution. Otherwise: Creation. Creation is the basis for ALL cultures mythology and is a natural part of cultural developement.

A group of organisms is said to have common descent if they have a common ancestor. In biology, the theory of universal common descent proposes that all organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool.

All organisms have a common descendant: Adam and Eve, then Noah.

Animals today are completely differant than they were several thousand years ago

Since the world is apparently only 5000 years, well 4150(due to the great flood) years old then this statement is probably incorrect.

Perhaps we should be asking why people believe in what they do?

The only thing harder than reading this thread is asking people to justify their beliefs

With anything we don't understand, it's so easy for religious types to go "Oh...yeah, that was us, we did it all." Funny, since at least evolutionists can come up with theories, not just think up some mystical creation story that cannot even be looked at scientifically.

If you've ever seen a book on Modern Islam, you'll find a section about science claiming that ALL sub-atomic particles and the four forces are controlled and created by Allah. No mention of Quantum Mechanics though.

The one thing that really blows me away is how some people can believe that they are walking on this earth "by chance".

You are walking on the earth totally by chance. Its called Quantum Mechanics.

Shown from the most fundamental laws of physics (laws of thermodynamics):

Sub-atomic particles, the basic structure of the universe, are subject to Quantum Mechanics and not physics

It is very possible that Job was describing a dinosaur in Job 40 when he wrote of the ‘chief’ of God’s Creation

Job is a mythological fable which has been a part of Bedouin culture for centuries

You can choose to go on your evidence, and I will choose to go on mine, which makes alot more sense to me

You're not alone. Creation is a theory supported by many people.

Evolutionist theoreticians know this, of course. They know that they must rely on some other process to create the required new information, because the evolution story demands it.

Because otherwise they would have to require the use of divine intervention which invalidates all their findings.

If you're right, I WILL BE DEAD AND HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE of anything, and therefore seriously not care

Actually three philisophies, Absurdism, Objectivism and Existentialism rely on the lack of universal meaning for humanity. They are hugely motivating and creative factors in many peoples lives.

Galileo himself, who first suggested that the sun was the centre of the solar system was a creationist

Because if he got taught anything else, he and his teacher would be burnt at the stake for heresy. He almost DID get burnt at the stake and excommunicated. He was forced to recant, his findings where deemed heretical and taken to the vatican. He was locked away for most of his life

And yes, the Bible gives painstaking details of the average age pre flood being around 850years, which then decreases within the subsequent 500 years to anywhere between 70 and 120

I agree, there was no way the majority of the people living 4000 years ago new that the world was round

Thats because according to your findings, Civilisation would have only been 150 years old after the flood of 4150

Is it just me, or does it seem like I'm repeating myself?

People arent paying attention to what you are saying, they're merely replying to what they think they are hearing(or reading)

You incidently didn't provide a reference so I'm not sure where you got these rules, which are based on the humanistic bias that there is no god

Of course it will be based on Humanistic bias! If science were based on Christian principles, we wouldnt have cloning. In fact, we'd probably all be fighting over which 'science' is the best!

Naturalism is not a tenet deducible by the experimental method, but a philosophical assumption from outside science

So its either: An unqualified outsider commenting on a scientific event. A qualified outsider commenting on a scientific event event. Or philospher commenting about the event? Philosphers say, scientists prove.

And the famous Stephen Jay Gould: Our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. THe stereotype of a fully rational and objective "scientific method" with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots is a self-serving mythology." (Natural History, 103(2):14, 1994)

Kantian philosphy, the cornerstone of ALL Western philosophy, dictates that a statement of position and adherence to neutrality is required for all statements. Without this area of neutrality all you have is statements and ideas which can only be applied to yourself or people like you. Science is exactly the same: Without neutrality or a control, all you end up with is speculation about a result which may or may not be repeatable.

God is intelligent though, right?

There is no evidence of this. Either God is so intelligent that we cannot comprehend its vastness OR it is so random and capricious that it is impossible to fathom its function/motive

Your going beyond what we are capable of understanding. But i would say yes, god and the universe are one.

Then that would support my 'random and capricious' statement

I _think_ that Catholicism encourages "earning" forgiveness through your hail-marys and other tasks

Causistry, which was practised by the Catholic Church is the basis for 'earning' forgiveness. Catholicism has two motive driven agendas to forgiveness: Perfect Contrition, wishing to be forgiven in the eyes of God for misdeeds and Attrition, confessing/performing your punishment for misdeeds to avoid a worse punishment(hell)

[Tiwaking!]

For starters, has anyone ever heard of string theory?

Yes. So I guess it means I dont have to explain it to you

So if you want to think your a peice of rotting meat then thats all you will be, id say your wasting your life

Actually, Absurdism, Objectivism and Existentialism found their basis on the meaninglessness of life. That is, death is oblvion. They are powerfuly creative philosophies due to the fact that what you do in the here and now is more important because it lacks importance.

as for ape = thats only the big bang theory, if the beginning was just god then there would be causality because god is the cause.

God is the beginning and end. Its in the bible. A non-causal-causality

I would rather a discussion where we could come up with something that uses true brain power and originality, something we could all agree on: A 3rd theory as to how everything started

Why would anyone promote a third, more complex theory when you(the thread) cant even discuss these two simple theories?

I also have more concern over how the world will end, not how it begun

Sun expands. Envelopes Earth. All life dies. The end

if evolution is true then nothing has a point. you may as well kill yourself now, because we are all unnecasary. i could go in forever but il hold my rants for now....

Actually if nothing has a point then the importance of what you do now means more to you than it does to the universe. The point of what you do now is how it affects what you care about, which makes it important enough to live for.

now you see, evolution was only created to explain what happened in our past.

The theory of Evolution an attempt to understand past events. Past is future is present. It can be used to prevent past events happening or to forsee future events(VIRUSES, BACTERIA) and prevent or plan for them.

i think creationist are being zealous if they want creation taught in schools, but if they know as much as i do, they are fools to let evolution remain taught

Why? Creationists would believe that they were created to believe it. Evolutionists would have evolved beyond the need for creation.

God wanted evolution to take place.

evolutionists have almost universally maintained that any change in genotype (or even phenotype) is an "evolutionary change." As such, any biological change of an organism, including antibiotic resistance, would fit within this definition. However, mere biological change also fits within a creation model, and thus this "vanilla" definition does not readily distinguish itself from creation

More support for the idea that God is capricious and random

Therefore logically is makes sense to believe in Heaven, you have nothing to lose by doing so.

Covering all bases

There is also one clear piece of evidence that proves of life after death, we humans are aware of our existence, but it's impossible for this awareness to come from the physical world

That is a very Vitalist statement. A mechanist would completely disagree. I guess you believe in the "Ghost in the shell" theory.

but it's impossible for a computer to be self-aware

...that we know of.

Despite what we know about the brain, it is still limited to the physical universe, anything that happens in the brain has to obey the physical laws of nature

Incorrect: The brain is electrical and therefore subject to the laws of Electromagnetism and Quantum Mechanics. Anyone studying Neuroscience is required to learn Hsienberg's Uncertainty principle.

I believe in God because I have nothing to lose in not beliving in him, and becasue there has to be something more to our existance

Why must there be more to our existance?

How can you be so sure that when you die, that is it? What if we were in fact just a brain floating in a vat of goo, connected to an advanced computer which runs a program which simulates our life.

The problem is there can be no such thing as 100% conclusive proof, any thing can be fabricated to look real, and the fact that we could be all part of a 'matrix' add an uncertainty to any evidence, which is reason enough to disbelieve it.

or maybe the matrix IS real, and we are all just living a dream plugged in to some machines battery?

I *hate* the Matrix! IT SUCKS! Its based on a crappy book from the 80's and the whole premise is based on Decartes!!!

I would argue the other way around, what if we're right - sucks to be you as there will be no heaven.....whereas if I'm wrong ie evolution is wrong,there will be a heaven and I *may* go there, if not I'll be nice and warm down in hell.

Actually you are both wrong. Hell is a place where God's presence cannot be felt. The idea of hell as a place of burning fire and brimstone is based on Armageddon, a valley where trash was thrown and sometimes incinerated.

in other words we have evolved into this highly intelligent, adaptable being that we are today

There is no 'you' in 'we' Xt1nct

Live life now, as you're a long time dead - that's my philosophy.

Or as Necromancers say "You're a long time dead, so lets live instead!"

I think therefore I am

I think therefore, you ARENT

I am aware that I am typing this. And that awareness comes from where??? My head, and what's in my head?? Yep, well done, my brain.

Perhaps. The side-effect of a brain may perhaps be sentience, but sentience may exist without a brain. Without proof to the contray, it is a valid theory.

But the whole religious premise is that if *you* are good you go to heaven. If *you* are bad but repent *you* go to heaven. If not *you* go to hell.

If you accept the love of Jesus as saviour, you go to heaven in mainstream Christianity. Funny thing is, the Inuit(Eskimos) believe that everyone goes to heaven and that heaven is a nice warm place. Inuits live in the worse place in the world. Why would anyone go to hell if life is so hard?

But I always answer the same. Why does there have to be a point? To me that's something religious people say to justify religion.

Actually its justifying existence, not religion. The point is the incomprehensibility of the lack of a point.

But if heaven and hell do exsist, and God is meant to be the all forgiving and died for our sins, then doenst that make every sinner elegiable for heaven anyway? regardless of how good or bad we are?

Yes. If Adolf Hitler accepted Jesus as his saviour when he died, then he's in Heaven now. "What is a Good man but a bad mans teacher? What is a bad man but a good mans student?" - Tao Te Ching

hehe well i told him that his religion SUCKED cos he needed to go knocking on doors to get people to join

Actually Mormons are too late. Only 144,000 are allowed into heaven in the original doctrine. There are many thousands of Mormons and millions have lived since its inception. This means that heaven is full, and you're not invited.

christianity was created to control people. the devil is a ploy to control people

Theocratic Heirachy was created to control people. Religion has always held sway over nations. Incan blood sacrifices, Greek oracles, Japanese seers. Religion+Knowledge=Control

Somehow creationists think people will 'switch' to beleiving in creation. But why would they? Theres no indisputable proof of creation.

Because Creationists are created to believe in creationism. Its a terrible cycle

Do you realise how many generations of people have lived repeating the theme 'the end is near?' Theres nothing to say its near, it could be 4000 years away, or 30 minutes away.

The world has ended many many times. Hit by a meteor in 1996, earthquake 1900. Flood 1800. Just because it didnt come about doesnt dull the faith in armageddon.

[BerG]

Arnifix made far bigger posts about 20 pages back.

[Tiwaking!]

Which is sad, because the inverse is that you choose your beleif out of fear. Which revitalises my ascertation that if god does exist, it is the embodiment of the most powerful evil to ever have existed and has created us solely as slaves and prisoners of biology

If God exists then you have nothing to fear by being on his side and everything to fear by not being on his side. This encroaches on free will and is beyond our comprehension in relation to Gods motive for us: LIve and worship me so you can die and worship me in heaven.

I repeat evolution is a theory - creationism is a parable

I liked Aesop's fables better

Hi its JayKay, Laurs fiance.

Hi Jay Kay! I havent seen you online since the Buttertrolls moved to Iconz

Unfortunately the idea that we can believe whatever we want and "that its all ok" may actually be a very stupid idea, as there is only one reality, therefore not everyones beliefs can be correct.

Correct. So interference with other peoples possibly correct beliefs is a BIG no-no

in my opinion, by far the most unprobable of the two theories is evolution

"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Sherlock Holmes

Regardless, doesn't it strike you as pretty funny how its taken them this long (150years or so since evolution really started to take root in western society) to find one intermediary fish/reptile?

Doesnt it strike you funny that the cure for small pox and penicillin had been staring people in the face for 3000 years? Or that many inventions are pure accidents?

The only 'truth' I subscribe to is that "all fact is faith." i.e. one can never really know anything, we all just believe in our 'truths'. If you want to label my beliefs then I guess you could call me an agnostic nihilist.

Technially a Nihilist wouldnt believe in anything. Agnostic-Nishilist is an oxymoron

People should have the humility to admit it when they don't understand something.
And the courage to live with the uncertainty that it brings.

"The only true wisdom is that you know nothing" - Socrates

I'm not convinced that Hawking has got it right.

Because he didnt. Or hasnt. Yet. He's still working on it.

I've actually heard it was a collection of stories or a library of books. As in it didn't all get written at once for the purpose of being a 'Holy book'

The Torah, being the books of law which are the fundamentals of the Jewish faith are the basis for the bible. The new testament is the most fragmented parts of the bible due to the fact that there wasnt an 'official' bible until its formal appearance(after diocletians purge?). Many books which made the new testament have been lost forever and its currently debatable just how much of it has survived repeated translation efforts.

Creation= Faith in the unknown, Evolution= Faith in logic. I like logic.

Unproven Logic is biased, arrogant and based entirely on falsehoods

The creationalists are never going to believe our facts about evolution because they are so devoted to their religion, and we are never going to believe what they say about creation because, well, it's laughable.

Facts which attack faith is very rarely wholeheartedly accepted.

Creation has issues, evolution has facts.

Both have issues. Evolution has promise

This is a non-event. Your blind faith in a supernatural will warp your views on everything to conform to your ignorant mindset

And blind adherence to scientific mantra will not change his viewpoint

Word to your buddhist monks. Eastern religions are just that little bit... better.

Eastern religions are ALOT worse. But thats not a point of the thread

Presuming that the Roman Catholic church, being the oldest and strongest form of christianity practised, and that all other protestant forms of christianity have branched of it at some form of time, you must wonder - for what reason have they split? Do they no longer share the core values of the faith? Has they bible's interpretation changed in any way?

The Lutheran/Presbeter/Etc split occured due to indulgences. Dont know what they are? Read a book

If you really think there is no God, I've got a billion people worldwide who would love to disagree with you.

....and five billion who disagree with them.

God is dead.

ROFL!!! I laughed so hard at this. Im still laughing!!

P.S To bloodyYOKEL: I looked at your tree of life and laughed. Its upside down! The Nature of Causation article I've read before, though in a different and much more informative form

[Tiwaking!]

Arnifix made far bigger posts about 20 pages back.

Oh really? So. The 10,000 word limit was bigger than my 2.5 pages? Im midly irritated that you somehow managed to rudely and pointlessly interrupt, plus its 12:30am almost

EDIT: IN FACT you somehow managed to interfer when the SECOND page went up! I guess this is why you....bah. I should go to bed. I was going to say "you shouldnt post on forums late at night" but Im too tired to do so. Wait. I just printed it. Okay now Im too tired. Night BerG

[Spork]

So we're pretty much pwned when it explodes and everything starts again.

But seriously who cares, no one will suffer.. Well not for long anyway, because if the earth Implodes or Explodes or what ever nooblodes we will all die fairly quickly.. So who gives a crap about worrying,

Although by the looks of it, many countries could be decreasing in quality quite slowly... So we could quite possibly die very slowly and painfully.

Cheers

[BerG]

Oh really? So. The 10,000 word limit was bigger than my 2.5 pages?

Yes. He had about 3 posts of solid writing.

Sorry to ruin your glory But it was fun

[Arnifix]

And blind adherence to scientific mantra will not change his viewpoint

Eastern religions are ALOT worse. But thats not a point of the thread

Lol. You think I don't know I can't change his mind? He's a fucking fundie. Also, I disagree with your phrasing. I don't "blindly adhere" to "scientific mantra". There is no blindness involved. I adhere to the reality of the universe as modern science, ie, the work of the most intelligent people in the world, states.

And eastern religions are alot worse? Hmmm, if you say so. That's an opinion based one. I have certainly not heard of any eastern religions inciting the bullshit that western and the middle-eastern religions have. Not to say shit hasn't gone down, just that its effect on the world hasn't been nearly as noticeable.

And it is the point of the thread. This is a religion "megathread".

[Arnifix]

Oh really? So. The 10,000 word limit was bigger than my 2.5 pages? Im midly irritated that you somehow managed to rudely and pointlessly interrupt, plus its 12:30am almost

EDIT: IN FACT you somehow managed to interfer when the SECOND page went up! I guess this is why you....bah. I should go to bed. I was going to say "you shouldnt post on forums late at night" but Im too tired to do so. Wait. I just printed it. Okay now Im too tired. Night BerG

If I were you, which I'm not, I would have expanded more on the important shit, rather than just quoting book names and making single sentence statements. I've read your posts, and don't understand half of it, because I can't see the context, and I can't be bothered finding the original posts.

Not to say that some of the stuff you've mentioned isn't pretty sweet though!

[ThaFleastyler]

Truisms do not a religion make. Obediance, Scripture and Heirachy do

One mans opinion. My opinion is that religion is founded on the truth of, and a personal faith in, a higher spiritual being - God. The rules and heirachy was invented solely by man and goes against the metaphorical "grain" of what God wanted for His people.

If Ghandi had been born 2000 years ago he most likely would have become a Jesus like figure today

So you're implying that 2000 years from now, people will regard him as such? Lets not forget that Jesus Christ had an immediate impact on history. I mean, He did RISE FROM THE DEAD! Or did you miss that part? Personally I can't remember Ghandi turning water to wine, or healing the sick, or rising from the dead, for that matter. Not only that, but books started popping up about the life of Jesus Christ almost immediately, and became known as the Gospels, plus His closest followers (the 12 apostles) went into all the world and caused an almost-immediate explosion of the Christian Church. Ghandi has had none of these effects on society at large, and in this information age, I'm sure we would have heard if he had.

Since the world is apparently only 5000 years, well 4150(due to the great flood) years old then this statement is probably incorrect.

Its actually closer to around 8000 years, according to the latest biblical-based estimates. The latest scientific estimates place it at closer to 4.7 billion years - just a slight difference.

Job is a mythological fable which has been a part of Bedouin culture for centuries

Centuries? You mean like the 3000+ years since it was originally written?

"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" - Sherlock Holmes

Awesome - quote a fictional character when trying to prove a real point

....and five billion who disagree with them.

Actually, I was just firing off a number off the top of my head. While a truly accurate source of such a thing is more than likely unobtainable, this page at Wikipedia states that currently people who don't believe in God or don't subscribe to any particular religion are only numbered at 1.1 billion people worldwide. So really, I should say "I've 5 billion people who disagree with you" and then you say ...

[Arnifix]

So you're implying that 2000 years from now, people will regard him as such? Lets not forget that Jesus Christ had an immediate impact on history. I mean, He did RISE FROM THE DEAD! Or did you miss that part? Personally I can't remember Ghandi turning water to wine, or healing the sick, or rising from the dead, for that matter. Not only that, but books started popping up about the life of Jesus Christ almost immediately, and became known as the Gospels, plus His closest followers (the 12 apostles) went into all the world and caused an almost-immediate explosion of the Christian Church. Ghandi has had none of these effects on society at large, and in this information age, I'm sure we would have heard if he had.

Awesome - quote a fictional character when trying to prove a real point

Actually, I was just firing off a number off the top of my head. While a truly accurate source of such a thing is more than likely unobtainable, this page at Wikipedia states that currently people who don't believe in God or don't subscribe to any particular religion are only numbered at 1.1 billion people worldwide. So really, I should say "I've 5 billion people who disagree with you" and then you say ...

Ever played Chinese whispers? Say hello to the bible, bestest game of chinese whispers evah. Your grandparents and possibly even your parents were alive while Ghandi was, so it's a poor comparison. Jesus "lived" over 2000 years ago, when records were not kept nearly as well as they are today. In 2000 years time, nobody will believe that Ghandi did that crap because we'll have solid, irrefutable evidence that he didn't. Jesus could've been a freaking puppet for all you can prove.

The Christian church hardly exploded (though I wish it had). It took hundreds of years before there were a significant number of Christians. Initially all they really did was spread.

Sherlock Holmes is as fictional as the risen-from-the-dead Jesus. It's a good quote, and I'm sure a real person has said something similar. Besides, he's using the words of a fictional character, not the character themselves.

And no, you don't have 5 billion people who disagree. You have about 5 billion people who have faith in some form of religion. That doesn't mean they believe in a god, and the majority of them certainly do not believe in your god.

[Black Heart]

actually you have 5 billion that don't really agree much with anyone, including each other.

[Arnifix]

actually you have 5 billion that don't really agree much with anyone, including each other.

What?! Who the fuck let you out of the vodnik! Goddamnit!