The Existence of God

[Shredderbeam]

Who do you think you are to make this assumption? If there truly is no god then how did everything you see around you appear? Just shear luck? I think not, there must be some way that everything we see got here. (and I don't want to hear any Scientology nonsense either).

^_^

Sigh.

Why do you all insist on using the argument from ignorance? "I can't think of any way by which this could have occurred naturally, therefore, God did it". What a lazy thought process.

 

[Shredderbeam]

This, some might say is an example of the God we see in the old testament. The non-forgiving, harsh God. The God that likes to test people and if they fail then he smote then. This is actually a great example of this and how he is testing us to see if we can all just agree with each other and help each other out.

Ok. Then he isn't there for when we need him most.

Also, isn't that a bit of a harsh test? Standing by to let people die because their neighbors didn't help them?

In any case, this is useless idle speculation, as it doesn't provide any direct evidence that a God exists.

 

[Ookami]

Personally I do not believe there is a God. I do, however, open my eyes and widen my range of religions to see what is out there. I'm not one of those people who throw others' religions out the window because of what I think is right. I love learning about all the religions out there, as well as cultures.

I don't think God exists because it's just not something possible. I know there are many odd, unexplainable things in the world, but having a place called Heaven, or even Hell, does not make me believe in it because others say there is. Catch what I'm saying? I can't believe in something that no one can prove besides having a bible at their side. The Bible does not mean it's real. For all anyone could know, the Bible is just another story for entertainment back in the very, very old ages. To top it off, the Bible was written many - hundreds - of years after Jesus. How can we know for sure that the Bible is remotely accurate and not exaggerated.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I hope that it does not cause an argument since the topic is supposed to be a personal thought.

 

[Fable 2]

Ok. Then he isn't there for when we need him most.

Also, isn't that a bit of a harsh test? Standing by to let people die because their neighbors didn't help them?

In any case, this is useless idle speculation, as it doesn't provide any direct evidence that a God exists.

Think about Cain and Abel my friend, think about how he told him that he is thy brother, and then Cain killed Abel out of jealousy, is this not any more harsh than what we see today? What I was CLEARLY referring to is the fact that we all need to wake the hell up and do something. I was NOT saying in ANY WAY that people dieing of starvation is acceptable. PLEASE be more considerate when responding >_<

thanks

 

[Fable 2]

Personally I do not believe there is a God. I do, however, open my eyes and widen my range of religions to see what is out there. I'm not one of those people who throw others' religions out the window because of what I think is right. I love learning about all the religions out there, as well as cultures.

I don't think God exists because it's just not something possible. I know there are many odd, unexplainable things in the world, but having a place called Heaven, or even Hell, does not make me believe in it because others say there is. Catch what I'm saying? I can't believe in something that no one can prove besides having a bible at their side. The Bible does not mean it's real. For all anyone could know, the Bible is just another story for entertainment back in the very, very old ages. To top it off, the Bible was written many - hundreds - of years after Jesus. How can we know for sure that the Bible is remotely accurate and not exaggerated.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I hope that it does not cause an argument since the topic is supposed to be a personal thought.

The Bible was not necessarily written hundreds of years after Jesus, that is just the oldest piece of evidence we have of an actual piece of ancient Greek scripture that was translated then and was proved to be the same words that you will see in part of the Bible.

 

[Fable 2]

Sigh.

Why do you all insist on using the argument from ignorance? "I can't think of any way by which this could have occurred naturally, therefore, God did it". What a lazy thought process.

It's not being lazy, it's the most logical explanation for it. (stupid example...) If you woke up and a chimpanzee was in front of you, would you just expect that it just appeared there? or would you expect that someone put it there... I'm arguing for shear entertainment and to prove a point and give good examples of those. =D

 

[Shredderbeam]

Think about Cain and Abel my friend, think about how he told him that he is thy brother, and then Cain killed Abel out of jealousy, is this not any more harsh than what we see today? What I was CLEARLY referring to is the fact that we all need to wake the hell up and do something. I was NOT saying in ANY WAY that people dieing of starvation is acceptable. PLEASE be more considerate when responding >_<

thanks

Ok.

It's not being lazy, it's the most logical explanation for it. (stupid example...) If you woke up and a chimpanzee was in front of you, would you just expect that it just appeared there? or would you expect that someone put it there... I'm arguing for shear entertainment and to prove a point and give good examples of those. =D

Naïve realism, or common sense, only goes so far. Reality frequently operates in ways that seem counter-intuitive (general relativity, quantum particle/wave duality, etc.). This indicates that the best way to learn important truths about the universe is by careful observation of the evidence around us. Have you carefully observed all available evidence to draw your conclusion of a creator?

 

[Fable 2]

Ok.



Naïve realism, or common sense, only goes so far. Reality frequently operates in ways that seem counter-intuitive (general relativity, quantum particle/wave duality, etc.). This indicates that the best way to learn important truths about the universe is by careful observation of the evidence around us. Have you carefully observed all available evidence to draw your conclusion of a creator?

That's a good point. I have to give you credit for bringing that into the clear here. I don't happen to know everything there is to know (and that I should know) about this topic before discussing it. I guess it's the community we grow up in. Although there are a few instances where one who grows up in a certain community could question their ideas. But back to my question that you never answered.. "What would you suggest if something was in front of you that you were not expecting when you woke up?" would you just disregard all ideas and not give a shit? Or would you try to carefully observe each piece of evidence to make you're final decision on which "theory" you believe is correct?

 

[FreedomFight]

Either way, a belief about reality should be somewhat justifiable. If it isn't, the holder of that belief is being irrational.

It's not like accusing a theist of irrationality is going to be a more powerful statement then eternal damnation.

I'm defining God so that we know what we're debating about. It's a good idea to specify exactly what is meant by certain important terms beforehand.

Well, if you are speaking of the literal "invisible" man in the sky, I would also find it improbable. As science progresses, religion itself becomes much more figuative, IE: How many people actually believe that if you dug a deep enough hole you'd find a creepy red fiend with a large point tail pop out?

How do you evaluate that probability?

Well you can't, which is why I'm surprised you have chosen to mention a so-called "degree of probability" throughout this argument.

Are you referring to "we can't prove it" as a paradox? If so, how is this not seen in God?

I'm referring to the paradox of omnipotent benevolence.

 

[Shredderbeam]

That's a good point. I have to give you credit for bringing that into the clear here. I don't happen to know everything there is to know (and that I should know) about this topic before discussing it. I guess it's the community we grow up in. Although there are a few instances where one who grows up in a certain community could question their ideas. But back to my question that you never answered.. "What would you suggest if something was in front of you that you were not expecting when you woke up?" would you just disregard all ideas and not give a shit? Or would you try to carefully observe each piece of evidence to make you're final decision on which "theory" you believe is correct?

If I awoke to find a chimpanzee in front of me, and I was certain that I was not dreaming/hallucinating, then I would probably assume that somebody had placed it there, as chimpanzees are not known to spontaneously generate.

Nobody is suggesting that any species suddenly appeared overnight, though, so your analogy isn't really valid.

 

[Fable 2]

If I awoke to find a chimpanzee in front of me, and I was certain that I was not dreaming/hallucinating, then I would probably assume that somebody had placed it there, as chimpanzees are not known to spontaneously generate.

Nobody is suggesting that any species suddenly appeared overnight, though, so your analogy isn't really valid.

I'm not sure you're understanding what I was trying to point out to you, it's essentially the same thing as earth, and the universe and everything as a whole just appearing. Somebody "placed it there". God created everything, everything didn't just "spontaneously generate".

 

[Shredderbeam]

It's not like accusing a theist of irrationality is going to be a more powerful statement then eternal damnation.

That's IF they accept Pascal's Wager. If they don't, if they simply think that God exists, just as I believe that Neptune exists, then they should have some solid reason for their belief. If it's just because they were raised to believe, as so often the case is, and they are reasonably intelligent, then it is not that difficult to convince them of an atheistic worldview.

Well, if you are speaking of the literal "invisible" man in the sky, I would also find it improbable. As science progresses, religion itself becomes much more figuative, IE: How many people actually believe that if you dug a deep enough hole you'd find a creepy red fiend with a large point tail pop out?

Enough to unnerve me, that's for certain.

Let's just define God then as a powerful, intelligent super-natural being of sorts. Let's not include benevolence, omnipotence, or worthiness of worship for now.

Well you can't, which is why I'm surprised you have chosen to mention a so-called "degree of probability" throughout this argument.

I don't recall, where did I say this?

I'm referring to the paradox of omnipotent benevolence.

Ah, ok.

 

[Shredderbeam]

I'm not sure you're understanding what I was trying to point out to you, it's essentially the same thing as earth, and the universe and everything as a whole just appearing. Somebody "placed it there". God created everything, everything didn't just "spontaneously generate".

I understand the point that you are trying to make, but the chimpanzee example is not relevant. The earth supposedly formed over a billion years or so from an accumulation dust cloud, life evolved over some 1-2 billion years, give or take. There are unanswered questions, certainly, but you need to look at the evidence and not just surrender and say "God did it".

 

[Fable 2]

I understand the point that you are trying to make, but the chimpanzee example is not relevant. The earth supposedly formed over a billion years or so from an accumulation dust cloud, life evolved over some 1-2 billion years, give or take. There are unanswered questions, certainly, but you need to look at the evidence and not just surrender and say "God did it".

I agree, but you're the one just surrendering and saying "it just happened" rather than someone creating everything. also you never answered my question about you contradicting yourself when you said you need to carefully observe everything before you make your conclusion.

This indicates that the best way to learn important truths about the universe is by careful observation of the evidence around us. Have you carefully observed all available evidence to draw your conclusion of a creator?

That is what you said, and clearly you haven't carefully observed all of the suggested solutions to the creation of earth and all things around us. otherwise you wouldn't just surrender and give up hope on any solutions possible, unless you are an extremely selfish human being that does not wish to follow the ways of anybody else and disregards what others say because they are clearly right. (wow...I am seeming to be a hypocrite right now aren't I?)

 

[Shredderbeam]

I agree, but you're the one just surrendering and saying "it just happened" rather than someone creating everything. also you never answered my question about you contradicting yourself when you said you need to carefully observe everything before you make your conclusion.

This indicates that the best way to learn important truths about the universe is by careful observation of the evidence around us. Have you carefully observed all available evidence to draw your conclusion of a creator?

That is what you said, and clearly you haven't carefully observed all of the suggested solutions to the creation of earth and all things around us. otherwise you wouldn't just surrender and give up hope on any solutions possible, unless you are an extremely selfish human being that does not wish to follow the ways of anybody else and disregards what others say because they are clearly right. (wow...I am seeming to be a hypocrite right now aren't I?)

>_>

I haven't surrendered, or said "it just happened". I generally go by mainstream scientific views, as these are what the evidence points to.

 

[Fable 2]

>_>

I haven't surrendered, or said "it just happened". I generally go by mainstream scientific views, as these are what the evidence points to.

So you're a Scientologist, not an Atheist?

 

[FreedomFight]

Let's just define God then as a powerful, intelligent super-natural being of sorts. Let's not include benevolence, omnipotence, or worthiness of worship for now.

Well it seems arrogant to discard the possibility that there is something more intelligent or powerful than human perception...

According to the definition posted above, a high-tech alien of sorts could be deemed as God. Given that life is improbable, and intelligent life even moreso...but a near-infinite universe....

I don't recall, where did I say this?

Perhaps I'm being misguided, but I recall you mentioning that we don't know whether God exists, but only that his existence is improbable. If this is not true, I apologize(I tried searching this thread, but it's enormous).

 

[DropKick Murphys]

So you're a Scientologist, not an Atheist?

Are you unaware of what "scientology" is? It's anything but science.
I'd describe him as a rationalist I suppose.

 

[Shredderbeam]

So you're a Scientologist, not an Atheist?

Not at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Well it seems arrogant to discard the possibility that there is something more intelligent or powerful than human perception...

According to the definition posted above, a high-tech alien of sorts could be deemed as God. Given that life is improbable, and intelligent life even moreso...but a near-infinite universe....

All right, fair enough, let's scratch super-natural from that definition.

Perhaps I'm being misguided, but I recall you mentioning that we don't know whether God exists, but only that his existence is improbable. If this is not true, I apologize(I tried searching this thread, but it's enormous).

Oh, if I said something along those lines, what I would have meant is that however improbable the existence of the conditions favorable to life are, an intelligent designer's existence would have to be at least, if not more improbable.

Are you unaware of what "scientology" is? It's anything but science.
I'd describe him as a rationalist I suppose.

I think I'm partly rationalist, but more of an empiricist.

 

[Esuom]

I am looking for the Athiest version of where the actual Universe came from. I understand the basic concept, but where did this original material come from?

I'm not arguing that this point would prove if god does/doesn't exist, because it could also be asked, "Where did god from?".


If you understand what I am asking, feel free to fill me in. (Shredder)


What I am saying is...

Christian View - ? > God > Universe
Athiest View - ? > Universe