The Existence of God

These aren't human laws, they're laws of logic, which are absolute.

Thanks, I was on holidays.

 

Nice, but needs more sources to the Quran. Also, I don't know about Shredderbeam giving you 34 Quran contradictions so I don't know if I give you some that he already sent you.

Question: Does Allah forgive shirk?
Answer 1: No. - Sura 4:48, 116
Answer 2: Yes. - Sura 4:153, 25:68-71

Question: Which was created first, the heavens or the earth?
Answer 1: Sura 2:29 says the earth was created first and then heaven.
Answer 2: Sura 49:27-30 says the heaven was created first and then the earth was created.

Question: How many days did Allah need to destroy the people of Aad?
Answer 1: Sura 54:19 - One day
Answer 2: Sura 41:16 & 69:6,7 - several days

No creation - evolution all the way.

Also, tomorrow I'm going on vacation and won't be home untill next week, so I'm bookmarking this page and will reply by then.

 

How was "Evolution" created?

 

Evolution wasn't created - it's a natural process that happens with hereditary situations.

 

That's a false question. Evolution can't be "created".

To show this, consider the laws of physics. Seeing as existance has always existed (You cannot contradict this, no matter what religion you are from. If there was no existance, there was no God), these laws are absolute. Nothing known to man can defy the laws of physics - If I throw a ball, the ball is going to go at a certain speed, this is simply because of the potential energy transferred in to kinetic energy. The ball soars in the air, but gravity dictates that the ball will soon fall to the Earth.

You don't need to "create" this, as it is as stated, absolute. You know that if you throw a ball, it is going to hit the ground. Was physics, which is absolute, has existed and always will exist, created? I think not.

The same concept can be put behind any scientific theory which has substantial proof (and believe me, the evolutionary theory has a LOT of substantial proof... But don't take my word for it, look it up yourself). Use the ball, velocity, gravity and other variables as metaphors for what the theory states.

Just to make this clear, a theory is something that has a wealth of proof behind it - it isn't just some concept (i.e. God, no substantial scientific proof) thought up on the spot.

 

Swan, you're mixing beliefs and theories up with each other. The whole point of a God that has no proof is to rely on faith.

 

Who'd u think created heaven & earth.. There must be a god somewhere without we notice
Even spirits & ghosts exist; try search for Derrek in london he can understand what ghosts say

 

So why did god send jesus down to earth to perform miracles to try and prove himself to everyone? I mean wheres the faith when a guy is running around performing miracles on every street corner.

Most religions will say god did this and god did that. if god did nothing then you wouldnt even know about him, or its made up.

 

Try searching for your common sense and logic.

 

Did you ever try and research the question yourself, instead of just jumping to the conclusion that "God did it"? And spirits and ghosts doesn't exist, Derrek is just another "psychic" moron.

 

And here we go.

You're dodging my statements like every believer. Answer me when I ask you about peoples proof being "Storms are when God gets angry" and "If you don't believe this you'll go to hell." Back thousands of years ago. The masses believed that right? Today storms are known as a natural event, and religious people try to sugar coat the latter.

The entire point to knowing something is to have proof of that knowledge. Faith is not proof, therefore faith is not knowing. Not knowing is also an excuse used by a lot of religious people: "What have you got to lose?" Is the ultimate sign that they have nothing to say.

 

There are two ways of knowing truths about the universe: "A priori", and "a posteriori". The first is pure armchair rationalization, logical evaluation, or philosophy. The second is empirical, relying on a study of the universe to determine such things as the speed of light, rate of acceleration, etc.

Faith, an acceptance of a supposed truth without supporting evidence (and often in defiance of evidence) does not fall under either of those two categories. It is not a proper way of knowing truths about the universe. Whether or not one believes that X is true has no bearing upon whether it actually is - they are simply believing that it is, for the sake of believing. Faith is irrational.

 

Whether faith is irrational or not, that's not the point. If I told you you had 24 hours to live, and the only way to survive was to get a one-of-a-kind surgery, never tested before, would you go for it? God has laid his cards out, through the Bible, and missionaries, and God is my one-of-a-kind surgery.

And Swan, not all the believers of Jesus' time believed that storms and sand and such were acts of God. Storms do occur naturally. However, when Jesus' did perform miracles right in front of peoples eyes, that was to instill Christ's work in them. Now, God requires us to have faith in him in order to get into Heaven. A small price to pay rather than have nothing.

 

Nothing can just happen.

 

No... would you seriously believe someone telling you this?

And guess who they where, athiests...
Its written from THE WORDS OF GOD. Its written in the bible, You cannot just take out parts of this book you dont like, because then you admitting its not the words of god, and therefor is worthless.

If you droped chocolate into a pile of shit you wouldnt eat the chocolate out would you? its corrupted. same as taking the good out of the bible

 

I just moved my right hand, I think that happened. What you're ignoring is the fact that we do not know how this universe came to be (all we know is, as I said, existance is absolute), and you're using a made-up concept to fill in the "empty thoughts". This is how people get so sucked in in the first place.

I was comparing to how the masses have been wrong before. Second, you completely avoided my second paragraph. For the sake of convenience, allow me to repost it.

You have been either unsuccessful in dodging what I said, or just plain ignorant.

A small price to pay? Fufufu, are you telling me you like to be deceived?

 

That certainly is the point. If faith is irrational, believers who rely on faith have no place in any intelligent debate.

I would regard some chance as better than no chance at all.

God != surgery.

It's not something that "just happens", it's a natural tendency, such as the tendency in closed systems for order to transform into disorder.

 

Here's to all the people that say things about "faith".

So basically your only defense is you should be able to believe what you want...? That's not really considered debating, which is what the Something For All section is for.

If you have faith in God, why dismiss all other gods? If your only evidence is "faith" why not just randomly pick a god? Why did you choose God? My guess is that you feel insecure being atheist, which is different then most people so you just go with Christianity, or you were raised into it, or you never thought about it.

This isn't really a miracle or any evidence, did it ever occur to you that maybe out of all the universes and galaxies that there is ONE perfect planet. Ours. One was bound to be perfect, and that isn't a miracle.Probablity mate..

Why not Allah?

Ignorant people, such as small kids believe in him, only because they no no better. Similar to Christians, except they should be able to conclude there is no God from our evidence.

Did you ever consider miracles are just things we are not advanced enough to see. For example, have you ever seen a magic trick that was so complicated you felt you could never figure it out? But, once you know how it's done, it all sounds logical. Maybe we just have no means of knowing how these things happen, I'm sure science can explain ALL "miracles" recorded at some point in time

Personally, from past experiences, all the people that I know of, that has "seen God" were a Christian before. I have never heard of some random person seeing God then turning Christian. People will see what they want, or to "fit-in" at church, to tell their friends "Oh yea I saw God", just another person under peer pressure. Tsk Tsk.

This was probably either a lie, or it was similar to a dream, or we can't explain it. That's not evidence. Sounds similar to a dream, considering he was dead his mind must have filled in the gap with what he wanted. Which was God because before he died he thought he was going to Heaven.

Actually sir, it's called oxygen, of which we have proof. Praying has never helped me I was Christian for 12 years, nothing conclusive, some things did happen, aye, however all by my own doing, nothing supernatural, or having to do with miracles.

On the topic of free-will: So far every Christian I know that I've argued with irl has always hit me with that free-wil bullshit. Let me explain free-will. Basically free-will means that you can do what you want, right? And according to Christians he isn't influential to our decisions at all. Your decesions (supposedly free-will) are based on 2 things.

1. Your genes. (When mommies and daddies really really....)
2. Factors around you. Wind, other people, sound, rock, any noun.

Here's an example. One day a young boy pet a dog, the dog got happy so he barked, the insane step-dad gets pissed, he ends up beating his kid, he kills him, winds up in prison, stabs a guard, the guard's wife cries.
This is a short made-up story. The dad beat the kid because of his genes (he had a bad temper) he was drunk, and the dog barked. Everything we do sets of a chain reaction that can eventually cause things we had no idea we were responsible for. Our thoughts aren't random, they are affected by factors and genes. Right? Knowing that, and that God is "all knowing" "powerful" such as what this gentleman has posted

God could have made Adam's and Eve's genes, and the factors around him in anyway. Therefore he knew who would go to hell, who would be atheist, etc. Owned pl0x?^_^

 

Did you ever consider God as a thing we are not advanced enough to see/acknowledge? Furthermore you have no proof that those miracles are fully explainable by science. You are simply expecting us you "believe" it can be explained solely because other "miracles" have been explained in the past. Isn't "believing" exactly what you're arguing against?

Where is proof, beyond a doubt, that God does not exist? I see so many times people using the argument "where is your proof that God exists?" That argument could be used both ways.

Also the question of whether an all powerful god could "create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it" is a ridiculous argument. You claim that if can create this rock, than his inability to lift makes him not all powerful, however if he cannot create this rock, then he, once again, is not all powerful. Either way, God would not be almighty.

That is not an argument against the concept of god, but rather, an argument against the concept of Omnipotence. "This question cannot be answered using formal logic due to its self-referential nature" - Omnipotence. Besides, if a being is incapable of failing, is he/she truly Omnipotent? The "rock argument" is simply a liar paradox. It has no place in a debate regarding the existence of God.

Additionally, we need to define what "kind" of God we are talking about. Does the term "God" refer to the Christian God? Yahweh? Allah? or some sort of superior spiritual being? Furthermore, do we consider "God" as a being superior to ourselves? If so, is it truly inconceivable that this being chooses to reveal itself to only some people (if anyone at all)?

It sounds like many people are debating against one particular description (the Christian one) of God, rather than the concept of God. The original question in this thread was "Do you believe in God?" Not, "Do you believe in the Bible's description of God?"

Also

 

Did you ever consider the flying spaghetti monster?

No it cant. Things that dont exist dont produce evidence. Its no different to not being able to prove the flying spaghetti monster isnt real.

No, it proves that nothing can be "all powerfull". its a paradox.