After the suggestion in one of this site’s comments stating that it required more faith to be an atheist than a theist, because the non-existence of a deity can never be proven, I thought it would be fun to see if we can logically disprove the existence of “God”. I picked the Christian God because I am more familiar with the Christian faith than any other, I’ve read the bible and have previously lived with devout Christians. I feel qualified. So let’s see where this goes…
For this to work, we have to agree on the following two statements, and accept that Christians believe them to the true: –
- God is infallible
- The Bible is the true word of God
These aren’t outrageous statements, and in fact, have been echoed on this very blog numerous times in the comments.
The two statements above are clearly interdependent. The Bible tells Christians that God is infallible, and Christians believe the Bible because they believe it was written by an infallible deity. Almost a self-fulfilling prophecy, almost. So the start of our logical deduction must be the Bible, so let’s concentrate on that.
Let’s take the Christian God’s greatest act, creating the world and all who live on it (indirectly). The start of all this, on God’s own words: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day”. Using genealogy, we can roughly estimate the age of the earth, as stated by the Bible, to be 6500 years. The very top estimate would be close to 10,000 years, but that’s a stretch. Science has proven that the earth is closer to 4.5 billion years old. Radiometric dating has shown us this, and has remained consistent with lunar and terrestrial samples. In other words, we haven’t just tested this once in one situation, it’s been extensively tested. This isn’t a guess, or a hunch, there’s a substantial amount of evidence to back this up.
And that’s the geological age of the earth. What about the creatures on the earth? We, as human beings, were created 6500 years ago, according to the Bible, starting with Adam and then Eve. The oldest discovered human fossil is approximately 1,300,000 (1.3 million) years old. That would have meant that humans lived on earth before God created either humans or the earth. In fact, depending on how much evidence you consider to be acceptable, and how you define us as a species, you could place humans at between 1.8 million and 130,000 years old. No one could sensibly claim that humans are less than 130,000 years old. There is simply too much evidence available for our inspection. Either way, much older than the Bible’s claims.
Let’s take another example. God decided that the earth needed cleansing, so he instructed Noah to gather up two of ever species to save. Everything other than Noah, his family (or part of his family) and the animals he chose to save would be killed. There are around 10 MILLION known species of animal on our planet. Male and female, that would be 20 million animals Noah saved. I’ve never seen a boat that big, even with modern engineering techniques. Noah also would have had to travel to different parts of the earth to collect the various animals. You rarely see a penguin and a scorpion living in the same location (zoos don’t count). He then, after the waters had receded, would have had to return them to their original locations. You also have to question to environment on board Noah’s Ark, an environment that could sustain animals that require intense heat and animals that require intense cold, as well as Noah and his family that required a more moderate climate. Impossible.
Just so we’re clear, I’m establishing that that the Bible is inaccurate. Not just inaccurate, but massively inaccurate. There are more examples of course, some which make it clear that the author of the Bible thinks the world is flat, some which make it clear that the author thought the world did not move and then there are more considered examples, such as the value of pi being unknown at the time (surely God would have known it!?!).
So this is my statement, logically derived from the above.
“The Bible is inaccurate – therefore God is fallible – therefore the definition of God is incorrect – therefore God does not exist.”
To add a touch of justification to this, let’s break it down. We know the Bible is inaccurate, in fact the Bible is contradictory within its own pages. The Bible is the only place that defines God, and God is defined as being infallible. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word (albeit written by man, see below). Seeing as we know the only source that defines the Christian God is inaccurate, and at least part of the definition is inaccurate (infallible), we can not trust the remainder of the definition. Therefore the definition of God in invalid and God does not exist.
There will come arguments from Christians that while God is infallible, and the Bible is the true word of God, the Bible was in fact written by man, who is fallible. This does not hold up when you examine the scale and volume of inaccuracies held within the Bible. I can understand man rounding down the value of pi, for example, but to get the entire creation story wrong is a bit of a stretch. Likewise, given that God is all powerful, he surely would not have left an obviously inaccurate account of his greatest work go to press, or was that just another sign of his fallibility?
I think I’ve made a stronger argument, based on Christian beliefs, for the non existence of God than there ever has been for the existence of such a deity.
I’m an atheist, but I’ve always seen this kind of argument disproven by people who consider that God is gradually revealing the truth, according to our own ever-improving logical abilities. So for example when we read “the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” it means that the base element of organic matter is carbon, which is found in the ground. But we were not advanced enough to understand that, so at the time God told us a simplified version of the story, and the Bible was perfect for us at that time.
(remember I’m just trying to play the devil’s advocate here — I’m strongly materialist and believe that such a thing as God is pure foolishness)
Who ever wrote this is a dumbass because the face of god is everywhere… im keep on searching but everytime i say that this can not be happening i can not say conclusively that this did not happen by the ONE and ALMIGHTY… before today ends you will beg for forgiveness and so will i… i know i deserve all of this… but it will be be entrusted to you to set forth the example for all of us
I love how Brad basically says he’s a follower in some way, but then he calls someone a dumbass, good job asshole. And by the way, it’s said that the word of God has to be preached in the four CORNERS of the Earth, how the fuck is that possible being the Earth is round..That’s what I thought.
one cannot disprove God bc for that to happpen, one would need ALL the evidence. which is impossible. as well as the fact that carbon dating has been proved fals. Scientists took a 3 day old dead sheep and used carbon datng. aparently it died 1500 years ago. Wow. thts accurate. not to mention, the fact that athiesm proves God. bc anytime there is authority there is rebellion. the more logical religion would agnostic. or if you are strong. Christianity. Like me. God is real. lets look at our universe. something called um…constant expansion? well if we reversed time would we not find that eventually there was nothing at all? hmmmm. shocking. or maybe irreducible complexity. maybe you know what a rotary motor is? if you take away one part of it, it doesnt work at all. or a mouse trap. or hey maybe even a flaggelum. a cell in the human body that cant have evoloved bc it cant be reduced. maybe a laminin. the protien that holds a cell together? its a CROSS. a 17 year old knows more about God than you. SAD. anyway. try to prove this wrong. [email protected] if you care to try. ill pray for you sir.
You can not say just because there is an atheist there is a god. Atheism is a belief in which there is no god not that they are rebelling against one. Also, I love when people say they will pray for me as if some how that is what I need to change my mind. I don not believe in any one god and I believe in all the scientific proof that discredits the Bible or any other holy book. Science is the only thing that makes any sense.
Great article, great use of logic.
_Robbie
You are Dumb-arse, JD. The designs of rotors and mousetraps changed over time with new features added or old ones scrapped out. Even the bombardier beetles had been shown to share one same ancestors with other carabids.
And even irreducible complexity is correct, IT DOES NOT FOLLOW that all things (with the exception of human-made objects) must be designed. I wonder why theists keep committing circular argument.
“a cell in the human body that cant have evoloved bc it cant be reduced.”
I don’t know how this or that happens, therefore God must have done it.
Argument from Ignorance.
your evidence to back up your case is not factual evidence. carbon dating and other things used for dating are not reliable sources. get the facts right before you try and disprove something.
On irreducible systems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Reducibility_of_.22irreducible.22_systems
your right on one account. that something like the universe can be created out of nothing but answer this. if god created everyone and everything than who created god. he simply cant just create himself, that’s impossible.
@ Justin:
Who said that God was created? If God has always been in existence, then he doesn’t get created. And, if your logic is correct, then how were the basic principles of space, time, etc created? Who created them? If such principals have always existed, then isn’t it hypocritical to say that God must have been created?
I find it funny that in my biology book it basically says “You can’t make organic matter out of inorganic matter unless you’re a scientist”. Although I do believe evolution is true, I think it’s statements like this one that make it difficult to believe.
Ok, well if you have to have all the proof where the fuck is YOUR evidence?! THERE IS NONE!!! There’s no proof of god’s existence, he/she/it is like a unicorn, not there.
Regardless of what you believe, at some point, something came from nothing. While I do not think the Christian God might be entirely correct, there is a God. There is some entity out there that led to our creation, a being of higher thinking/dimensions.. Science “the law of conservation of matter” that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Well then, how the f*ck does matter exist? Also, quite honestly, the big bang theory is more dumber then the theory of god.
God is made up. Truth, in terms of religion, is simply the opinion that survived. You ever read the story of Jericho? He mercilessly slaughters over 2500 Jews. Now consider the amount of actual humans there were actually back in time 3,000 years ago.. A million? Two millions? For the sake of the argument, let’s say.. 50 million, extremely exaggerated in your favor. Now let’s look back about 60 years ago. Earths population was around 5.8 billion, is that a fair estimate? Well, Adolf Hitler massacred around 6 million Jews. In this one of many incidents, Jericho single handily extinguished .0005% of the human race. Great job.. Not hitler massacred around .0001% of humanity. In just this ONE incident in the bible, God caused more harm to earth than Hitler. And I’m not a Nazi, I just know how to do Math and read English.
Now ask yourself this question, if God is omniscient, wouldn’t he know about all the terrorism, murder, war, and rape that goes on on his infallible “masterpiece”? Why would he let it continue? Shouldn’t he love every one of his creations? I’m sure the 12 year old girl getting raped isn’t thinking that..
Again, God is a designer? But what designed him.. If god created evolution to make complex life forms.. What made him! God has to obey his own laws.
Are you familiar with the two cities Sodom and Gomorrah? Well, Lot and his family were spared from the destruction of these two cities.. God sent an angel to warn Lot of the impending doom. Two city guards came to inspect the new “visitor” or angel. The guards saw it as a trespasser and were about to haul I away when Lot proposed that the guards take his virgin daughter and “know” her, sparing the angel. Well what does “knowing” her mean? The two guards raped her, and I’m sure the rest of the city gang raped her too. The next day she was lying “prostrate on Lots doorstep”.. Maybe this is where the idea of rape comes from? We wouldn’t know it even existed if the bible didn’t mention it.
Reconsider who you follow.
Science can’t explain how you get something out of nothing at all. Before anything was created there WAS NOTHING! To it to be natural it would have to have natural causes and materials but there was NOTHING!
Whats really sad is that you have no knowledge of spelling,grammar and punctuation. Before try to defend a religion you might want to learn the basics of English. I am sorry to say but you are just fueling them when you post something so badly written. Other wise I completely agree with your post.
I agree with your criticism of brad’s inappropriate language. However your point about the four corners is easily disproved. The concept of a round Earth was not even thought of in the Biblical era and if God had revealed this concept to them, not only would it be incomprehensible to the people of the time but Christianity would be dubbed an irrational cult. There is also the possibility of a flawed translation since the translators were human and so not perfect.
maybe do a little bible search, before you decide to post something like this again. Ok I never read that the bible stated how OLD the earth was, so yeah nice try. Let me educate you a bit. Lets start, Genesis chapter 1 verse 1. In the BEGINNING God created the HEAVENS and the EARTH. Now the EARTH was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God Hovered over the waters…… Now what are the three things the this existance need to to be formed? Every scientist will agree upon, TIME, SPACE and MATTER. Now check back on the verse IN THE BEGINNING (TIME IS CREATED FIRST) then HEAVENS (SPACE) then EARTH(MATTER)….. Would you disagree? Now change the word “EARTH” to MATTER in this verse and tell me if your High school Science Basic Textbook tells you any different. I have mannny mannnnny more biblical” evidence” but I’m afraid that no one even will read this in all this commentaries. But I will say verse 2 more things. In a time of te biblical era the earth was knowing be flat- Isaiah 40:22 “IT IS HE WHO SITTS UPON THE CIRCLE OF THE EARTH, AND THE INHABITANTS….” the was thousands of years ahead of anyone of its time. And I the time you would be crazy to think the the earth hovered over space, in every culture known it wax the earth was held up. Either by elephants(India) or by Atlas(Greek) or by 5 pillars(ancient Egypt) The bible said states this in Job 26:7 “HE STRETCHETH OUT THE NORTH OVER THE EMPTY PLACE, AND HANGTH THE EARTH OVER NOTHING.” …. So I have many more like these. But I don’t think anyone will read this. But I doo hope someone does, and gets encourage by this. Regardless of what you think of me or my God, as a human being I Love you people. God Bless and take care.
This post is extremly funny, and stupid, you cant refrence carbon dating, it’s extremly inacurate by pressure, temperature, weathering, false, how aobut all of you athiests do some non bias research on the proof of God and creation, and stop being scared of what you will find.
Where is the proof? How does he exist? can YOU prove that? we should discuss this, I would like to see you contradict yourself.
READ THE BIBLE!!!!!!THERE IS YOUR PROOF…WE CHRISTIANS CAN’T TELL YOU ATHEIST ANYTHING UNLESS YOU KNOW AS MUCH AS WE DO!!!!CAUSE THEN IT WOULDN’T EVEN BE AN ARGUMENT DUDE!!!!
“READ THE BIBLE!!!!!!THERE IS YOUR PROOF…WE CHRISTIANS CAN’T TELL YOU ATHEIST ANYTHING UNLESS YOU KNOW AS MUCH AS WE DO!!!!CAUSE THEN IT WOULDN’T EVEN BE AN ARGUMENT DUDE!!!!”
Think from another perspective, MAYBE you guys are misguided from some mass propaganda effort published a long time ago called the “bible”. you know the funny thing? one big reason why there are atheists like me is exactly because we’ve read the bible. Plus, its amusing that you told us bible “is your proof”. Right now, the Bible is the subject of controversy. you have to prove yourpoint with other evidences you can find to prove bible’s credibility instead of just asking us to believe the text.
I am with you 100% Tyler. Here is a true story by Carl Sagan about the dragon in his garage.
Carl: Hey Tyler, did you know I have a dragon in my garage?
Tyler: A dragon? I don’t even know if they exist.
Carl: Well, I can assure you I have one. Would you like to see it?
Tyler: Well absolutely!
…you two go to his house where he lifts the garage door to display an empty garage with a ladder, some paint cans, and shelves…
Tyler: Where is the dragon you said would be here?
Carl: Oh, I am sorry. I failed to mention he is invisible so we can not see him. I assure you he is in front of us as we speak.
Tyler: Perhaps we could throw some powder on the floor to track the prints he makes from walking around.
Carl: You know what? He floats…We will not be able to track his prints.
Tyler: Ok! Perhaps we could slosh some paint around the garage. Surely it will stick to him revealing his body.
Carl: What a great idea…however the dragon is incorporeal or immaterial. This means the paint will literally pass through him.
Tyler: OK…Does he breathe fire?
Carl: Of course, he is a dragon.
Tyler: They why don’t we use a heat gun to register the temperature from the flame?
Carl: We can try that but we will be unsuccessful as the fire he breathes is heatless and will not register.
Tyler: Carl…It seems like everytime I attempt to gain evidence of your dragon’s existence, you come up with a reason as to why it wouldn’t work.
Carl: I understand. That is why I am asking you to simply believe that the dragon is floating right in front of us. To be honest, he is telling me right now that he is not happy with you because you are denying his existence.
Tyler: Well I want to believe…if you can communicate with him would you mind telling him to do something like knock the ladder over for me?
Carl: …pauses for a moment and closes his eyes…Tyler, the dragon told me that you will know of his existence when the time is right, and in this moment, the time is not right. He wants you to believe his existence out of purity, not because he knocks the ladder over.
Tyler: Carl. I am sorry, but I am more prone to believe you being crazy than an invisible, immaterial, heatless-fire-breathing dragon floating in front of us.
Carl: I can’t believe you would deny this dragon’s existence. I will gather all my neighbors who believes the dragons existence to tell you he is real.
END OF THE TRUE STORY
Do you beleive in the dragon Tyler? Just keep in mind before answering that the dragon knows what you are thinking and will punish you within this year if you deny his existence.
All kidding aside, this is exactly how I (a skeptic) view all of the religious claims that a god exists.
everyone i know that we all have an opinion but may i ask you this what is a explosion for. The answer to create chaos a explosion is made to destroy things not create also what evidence do we have that a past explosion has created anything aside from the big bang
I really appreciate this insight. I wouldnt say im anything but its not something I have read before.
Um…just letting you know that if you don’t believe in God you are making a huge mistake. I don’t understand why you people find it so hard to believe in what you can’t see. you don’t have to see God to believe him. You don’t see air, but you can still feel it. see that’s why a lot of people don’t give people like you the time of day…you sound foolish.All I’m saying is, even if you don’t believe (which you strongly should), what is it going to kill if you just spend time and energy on trying to find the true answers. and maybe, just maybe if you stop looking so hard, they will be much easier to find. see that’s were you atheist people are wrong again! this is just a part of God’s master plan. He knew form the beginning that the world was going to be full of people who chose not to believe in him. He knew that when Eve ate off the tree of knowledge, people 2000 years from then would try their hardest to find the answers to, not only him, but life itself…and that, ladies and gentlemen, is where the sin came in…that’s why we as humans want to know so much about everything, because Eve bit off of the tree of knowledge.See, you can’t just read the lines of the bible, you also have to read in between the lines too.The devil is just tricking you by the hour..just get ready to burn in hell forever. iv’e never met people who where so wrong and backwards about everything… until now.
Vally we do not live in a world of sin because eve ate off the tree of knowledge for she was fooled by the serpant we live in a world of sin because adam ate of the tree knowing that he was doing wrong by god. Ok now if eve did no wrong until adam ate of the tree because she was fooled by the serpant and you are stating that we are all being fooled by satan (adding in the fact that we are born of sin unlike adam and eve)why would we be punished for questioning god and to go as far as saying we will burn in hell this makes very litte sense for punishment is barbaric not something i nor any logical thinking person would think an almighty would do. and as for you’re previous statement to read the bible and this will not even be an argument maybe you’re right but not because im going to feel his presense as surley as i feel the air around me but because that means im more open to calmbly debating these facts (not that you could convert me). i do not like debating these beliefs with many individuals like yourself though for it almost always turns into someone(so far 100% people like you) yelling or walking away because i don’t use theories in my debates.
P.S. why would so many christians start on a comment feed like this where we didn’t ask you to come christians always put us athiests down and say howw evil and fooled we are as if we are all one group I AM A PERSON but the worst part is that christians always say how we put them down but we don’t we just defend are selves and im sorry if that upsets you
Gods Master Plan (God is all knowing) –The ending will prove that any who believe in God is wrong. And if not, they are too stubborn to admit that they’ve been wrong about God the whole time.
God made the Garden of Eden, and he made the fruit that if eaten, would cause sin (and he knew that the fruit would forever cause sin because he made it). Then he made Adam and Eve (which were the 1st two humans on earth). And God knew that before he even made Adam and Eve, that Eve would eat the forbidden fruit, thus leading to the fact that God knew sin would be around forever.
In the Old Testament, sins must be washed away with sacrifices. Skipping through all the killings and wars that he knew were already going to happen, He sent down the final sacrifice that would account for all sins; Jesus. The agony and pain of his death is in relation to the sins that we have committed or would commit. So god knew that he was already going to send his son down to suffer and die for sins that he knew were already going to happen. Thus came the New Testament.
-Now let us be real for a minute.
Right now, as you’re reading this, people are being raped, murdered, molested, kidnaped, drunk drivers taking innocent families, people starving, etc. The Seven Deadly Sins are in every part of the world and his Ten Commandments have been shattered for years upon years and still are. Many people blame sins on the “Devilâ€, which is far from the truth. Do you know who we blame for every sin that has ever happened in the history of the entire world? God.
God is almighty, God created everything… And that means God created sin. And he created sin by making the fruit. If one does anything bad, it is considered a sin. So all the murderers and child molesters, they are here because of God. And yes, humans have free will and we make our own choices, but if God had never made the “forbidden fruit†in the very beginning, then sin would have never even existed in the world.
And some say, “He made the fruit to test Adam and Eve, and they failed so they were banished from the garden. She shouldn’t have eaten the fruit in the first place, God told her not toâ€
God wanted to test them!?!?! God told them not to!?!? God didn’t even need to “test†them nor “tell them not to eat it†BECAUSE HE KNEW SHE WAS GOING TO EAT IT ANYWAY! So it isn’t like God was “disappointed†or anything like that when she ate the fruit because he knew she was going to eat it before the fruit was even made.
So now, your defense may be he allowed humans free will so that we can do right ourselves, so that we can bring good and peace throughout the world. So that we can learn on our own.
And that just takes us back to God being all knowing. God knew that every single human would commit sins before he even made the fruit, and we will forever and always continue. And you and I both know that humans will always commit sins. And we use the word “sin†WAY too loosely. Whoever is reading this will probably never kill someone, or bomb a place or anything like that, but the simplest of smallest things like a little white lie, getting angry, teasing someone, using a curse word, all of those are technically considered sins. And yes, most little sins don’t mean anything from a society standpoint and those little things won’t define your whole life but a SIN IS STILL A SIN. God knew that humans would end up like this, he knew and continues to know that we will never change our ways, and he’s known that since the very beginning. Every single human has sin in them, and its because of God. He knew that Eve was going eat the fruit and that sin would be forever throughout the world. So every single little bad thing that has ever happened in the world since God created it, could have been prevented if he simply would not have made the forbidden fruit.
But do you know what the most sad and scary part it is? God knows that all the sin that has ever happened in the world could have been prevented, that HE could have prevented it. Like I said, God already knew everything that was going to happen in the world to this day before he even made the fruit. So why did he make the fruit forbidden in the beginning?
Either God is not the all loving and forgiving being that we perceive him as or he just simply doesn’t exist.
I missed 1 detail that I will get bashed for if I don’t add it now. The serpent.
Yes,the serpent did trick eve but God still knew about. He is still all knowing so before the serpent was even brought up, he knew that Eve would have become tricked, and that Eve would have talked Adam into eating it. He still knew everything that was going to happen in the world, every crime and every sin. So my point remains valid still, all the sin in the world could still have been prevented, and God knows it could have.
Problem is, we can’t SEE nor FEEL, can’t HEAR nor SMELL ‘god’…what makes things worse, there isn’t even anything, natural or man-made that can even give us a little prove of the existence of god. The only thing that claim that there is a god, comes from a series of book called the “BIBLE”. It’s like asking us to believe that Cinderella existed and so does fairy god-mother because the book titled “cinderella” says so. trust me, the joy or comfort that you find in praying, it doesn’t comes from god. it merely comes from yourself since praying is a form of mental augmentation. it calms you down and gives you hope, which in turn makes you feel better. if i can convince someone to believe that i have a stone that is holy and have supernatural power that can help him/her if he/she pray to it,that person will feel exactly like what you will feel – the “closeness” to god or whatever joy it brings.
“I would just like to state that the laws of science have always existed; by contrast,Christianity has existed for roughly 2000 years. The evidence speaks for itself”
first of all, you’re just wrong. science is the observation of how the world works, therefore, no matter your worldview science wasn’t here prior to people. however, the laws of the universe were here. the law of causality… which always brings everybody back to “how did we get here?”.
if you are foolish and deluded in your own arrogance you might say “it just happened, we don’t need a cause or an origin” however that isn’t intellectually satisfying to me because it flat out doesn’t answer the question.
the bible, however, does. the problem is that you cats don’t like the answer because of what that answer implies. first, the bible does not say “a created god created this world” it says “The eternal God created this world”. that means your cliche “well who created God” question is irrelevant, we don’t believe that He was created.
second, what it implies is that you are in subjection to God whether you like it or not… and you don’t like it… at all.
therefore you blog and try to make silly logically flawed arguments about how God can’t possibly be real (despite all the evidence to the contrary) while claiming to value empiricism while having nothing but wishful thinking to justify your position.
oh, and i know God. personally, intimately, and He is better than anything you’re selling.
Christ is Lord. Repent and trust in Him.
“…silly logically flawed arguments about how God can’t possibly be real (despite all the evidence to the contrary)….”
What evidence to the contrary? Name one piece of evidence in support of god which is unbiased? Name one example of some incontrovertible scrap of truth that has ever been found to support your failing hypothesis!
And don’t say “the bible”, you just make yourself out to be even more of an idiot than previously.
Believing in god is merely a mechanism by which people can avoid having to have their own morals and using their own reasoning.
Unless you can come up with an argument that is ruled in sense, logic and original thinking, just keep your two millenia old, out dated, out classed and patently narrow minded deceptions to yourselves.
You Christians sicken me. We live in a world where we are allowed to make our own choices, where we have been given the freedom to behave as we wish, and you flaunt it by tying yourselves to an ancient doctrine designed simply for psychological control and fiscal domination.
Get a life, get a brain, and catch up with the progress of mankind.
Oh, and don’t seek to frighten Atheists with threaths of torment and eternal damnation. Frankly an infinity tied to a flaming rack and being raped by Satan himself is considerably preferable to spending eternity in heaven with a bunch of intellectually blinded self-serving hypocrites like Christians.
You know, if I’m wrong and there is a god, he can go f*&k himself with a rusty chainsaw.
I have little to say about this but 1, there is no physical proof that there is a god. Every time something comes to light as being a scientific fact it is placed ever so properly in to a new verse or phrase in the bible and wal-la we now have it said by god. Bull shit! I can see how people can not live with out believing in a almighty god. That’s called being scared of being utterly alone and knowing that death is just the end and you no longer exist. There are millions of people that can not fathom that, just as millions can’t fathom how an all mighty can let us have free will. That will aloud us to choose to kill and fight for freedom, but yet at the same time others that are defending them self from us are calling us murderers. so ask your self this. what are the 2 biggest cause for war? Religion and Politics. An yet that will never change so there will never be peace on earth. believe that.
One need not prove “god does not exist” which is so much intellectual rubbish. No, one need only demonstrate the lack of accurate observation consistently logical reasoning on the part of those who claim a “god”. Using what can be observed and deduced from nature – which necessarily includes ourselves – one cannot reach supportable conclusions regarding a “god”, thus leaving one where one started – with ourselves and the rest of nature to examine and understand.
It is unfortunate that today’s theists are indoctrinated with the incorrect belief that there is a very long line of apologetics which conclusively proves the existence of their alleged “deity”. Surely, there is a very long line of attempts to provide such, however, all such offerings continue to fail against the standard of accurate observation and consistently logical deduction from the behaviors of nature.
The “atheist” need not address the alleged existence of a “god” directly. One need only illustrate where theist observations and logic are faulty. What they tend to ignore is the fact there is a very long line of such illustration. Unfortunately, accurate observation and consistently logical deduction are not primary values among theists.
we need not prove there is God, because we can’t prove there is no God. Athiests like to hide behind “science” because people hate a God of love and forgiveness in this world of hatred and violence. This so called “science” actually takes more faith than believing there is a God. Not only to you have to rely on this chance that matter spontaneously combusted, but you must believe in the matter that came from well… nothing. I give atheists and scientists credit for tricking the world into thinking that evolutionism is a science, rather than a religion of its own kind. I really think its rather logical to believe in something glorius and forgiving, than believe we all rot in the ground for eternity. There is still a chance for athiests, but the way the world is going, apparently we are all going to rot in the ground for eternity very soon.
Actually, a fairy that lives in my underwear created the universe and all that we know 20 seconds ago. He implanted all of our memories to think we actually had lives before then. amazing huh. I have faith so that is right. My belief has no afterlife, am i wrong for thinking this? Will i be sent to hell for all eternity?
PRETTY MUCH!!!
I love how you put science in quotation marks, like it’s not responsible for everything you own. You can disrespect scince if you’re living in a cave, but not while you’re sitting in you’re computer, reading articles, and commenting, probably sitting in your nice home with central heating. All the work of ‘science’.
Religious people you cannot use the argument that because we cannot prove that there is no god means that you can believe in him. Just because we cannot prove that there is no god is not a good enough reason to brainwash your kids and throw your entire life away praying to something that just simply is not there. Its time to wake up…. the evidence is overwhelming….Pretty much the only way to actually believe in god now is to have been brainwashed since a baby and cover your ears and eyes to everything around you….
but which one do you think is better…Living in a lifeless,boring world but finding hope and inspiration for something that could positively make this world a better place and enjoying the little things that might be true…or taking a chance on not believing it,dying,and burning in hell FOREVER because you so-called thought you were right. thinkkk aboutt it…
No. I would rather live in this vibrant, challenging, beautiful, exciting and breathtaking world without having some out-dated conservatives who are too afraid of change to open their eyes going around telling me to thank an imaginary man on a cloud for creating it. I’ll take my chances with the devil, thank you very much. If he does turn out to exist, I reckon he’ll be a lot more fun than your old git upstairs.
For a Theist to prove their belief is much more easier (therefor easier to “believe” as you say you do)because you do not need evidence to prove your belief, according to you, seeing as a god does not need to follow scientific rules as he is “all powerful”.
Theists will always reply with an argument saying that their god works in “mysterious ways” and will not behave in a certain way just because Man expects that god to.
Besically I’m saying it’s easier to say “I believe” than to prove not to.
Here’s something I find intresting by the way:
Christians believe that God is all-knowing (omniescent) meaning that he knows EVERYTHING. Therefor God knows the whole future because there is absolutely NOTHING that he cannot know. So God knew that Lucifer would defy him and that He would banish Lucifer from heaven and therefor create evil while knowing perfectly well that he is doing so.
God also knows his own future as he is all-knowing, isnt he? So his own life is predetermined to him. Kind of like following a perfectly straight road of which you know every single detail. Nothing will ever change you will always go in one direction knowing everything that lies ahead of you. You have NO FREE WILL… inconsistant with all-powerful.
Condemned…This is the title you have given to yourself, remember that. Now, ive studied all over the world, seen things people could only imagine, a beautiful planet that we inheret. Ive memorized and tested much of what we consider factual science. In a sense, “been there done that”. I need you to understand (along with everyone else commenting of the blog) that to argue an issue you have to understand both sides of the arguement and know the “facts” to make a logical, ethical, non biased argument. The children of God are not religious people, they are a people of faith and Christianity is not a religion. Its simply an intament relationship with Christ. So before we go into what i will assume is your defensive side on the issue you have with submissing to authority and rebelling against the thought of kneeling to anything of a high power (and im sure if you look around you, your rebellion and stubborn attitude is why you are where im sure you are; and this isnt judgement, i gave you the beneift of doubt when i starting reading your comment, your words showed your inability to reason) you have to fully understand God to argue God. The original article that sparked all of this is false by a surplus. One of the first statements made was that the bible was ultimately the true written word of God, and that “god wrote the bible”. If the writer of the original article can make simple errors like this then he needs to find something else to write about. The bible was written by the children of God. Visionaries of the old testament, and the eye witnesses of christ in the new testament. There are facts all over the globe found as relics screaming out the proof that the manifestation of our living and loving god in the flesh had lived exactly as depicted in the Holy Bible. Thus, i dont wish to be active in a petty arguement on this, but an intelligent conversion i believe is reasonable. If you have any questions, please ask. -Thnx
You state that to make an informed argument, one must see both sides of the story, and it is here, in one fell swoop, you blast the bottom out of your own argument. You clearly do not understand the meaning of Atheism!
Atheists are not rebellious – we have nothing to rebel against.
Essentially, it is not us that argues, for we do not even have a side upon which to argue. We don’t have an opinion and we have nothing to prove.
All we know is that we’re damned if we’re going to believe some hokey hearsay just because a load of people tell us to.
Christians must soon begin to realise that they are fighting a losing battle, mainly because the only people they fight are themselves and the representatives of other doctrines.
While you continue to treat Atheists as having opinions or lacking evidence, you are destined to recede further and further into a greater and greater lack of understanding.
It’s pretty ridiculous that you say that scientists “tricked” the world into believing science. First of all, science is logic, unbiased, and based completely on evidence. I’m sorry if that means that some people can’t accept whatever the eff you believe, but that doesn’t mean you can call them idiots, or anything related. Scientists are effing smart as hell for figuring out what they have throughout life, not everyone can do things so extraordinary. Second, what gives you the evidence and ability to say that we’re all wrong and u and alike are correct? I’m sorry, but if us “nonbelievers” don’t have the evidence to disprove the bible (and etc) then how in the effing world do u have the evidence to prove it for itself? Faith!?!? Screw that, if I had to just live on faith, I’d think I could survive falling into a pit of lava. -_- cone on, get real, and pleeeeease, if your going to insult someone’s GREAT work, u better have something even better. 🙂 good day to u, go do some research of ur own.
This is what you said
“This so called “science†actually takes more faith than believing there is a God.”
You bandy about the word “actually” like its a given and well researched fact. Please educate me where you found this statement and why you think its an undisputable fact.
Also from what did god make the universe out of, what material existed that was malleable enough to make this vast universe from. Or did he also create something from nothing?? Smells like magic and wishful thinking with a huge smattering of self delusion to me. And it actually takes more faith to believe in religion than not!
i see now that you are angry because you think christians are condemning you to hell for all eternity. Well, i believe you will be in hell for all eternity, but im not condemning you. You have all of your life to change your mind and that is of course up to you. Secondly i apparently am wrong for believing the world came from something and am an evil person for thinking about an afterlife. Am i to rot in the ground for all eternity? Am i wrong to believe matter did not appear and then spontaneously combust/evolve into what we are today? I believe in a world where money appears right in front of my eyes and i don’t have to work for it. Ahh if only. I would also like to confirm that you guys realize it is still the “theory of evolution” hence the “quotations” (none of this was sarcastic)
What? Are you even slightly familure with the process of scientific theory? Or let alone the word theory itself? Because you are obviously mistaking a hypothisis for a theory.
For something to have a theory, there must be an event to have a theory about in the first place…for example, There is a murder, the murder took place, detectives build theories on how it happened to find out who did it by gathering and studying the evidence found at the crime scene, along with any other outside data that could contribute.
Evolution DID happen, we have UNDENIABLE PROOF that it happened… we don’t know exactly HOW it happened .. that is why it is called the theory of evolution. One day when science finds out how evolution works completely it will then be called the Law of Evolution.. or even the Laws of Evolution… the same as we have the Laws of Gravity.
Gravity existed, Newton noticed that and tried to find out why. He built theories, so at one time there WAS a Theory of Gravity, we’ve since then found out how and why gravity works so it is now a Law in the scientific world.
REMEMBER and i’m tired of fighting against this moronic statement of “but evolution is just a theory”, A THEORY is an attempt to explain how and/or why an event takes place/has taken place. A theory is created from gathering the information and facts surrounding the event that is taking place/has taken place. We do our best guess work and build from their until we know for certain it is a fact, or come across facts and information that make us dismiss a theory FOR A BETTER THEORY.. a theory can only lead to fact as information is gathered and studied, never a falsehood. This is Pure fact, just as the event of Evolution is pure fact, we’re just trying to find out how.
A HYPOTHESIS is a wild shot in the dark guess as to what will happen in an experiment before ever gathering evidance to lead you in one direction or another. Which is what you are accusing scientists of doing with evolution.
I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but like it or not, Evolution took place, and that is proven in many museums, books, websites, studies, articals, television specials… everything that takes a serious look at evolution proves it happened. I have not come across a single so called “proof” that evolution is false that hasn’t been rebuttled efficiently and repeatedly. So the Bible is wrong as to how we as humans came to be. This is fact, and no matter how you feel about this it does not change fact to falsehood. Your Bible is wrong, and proven wrong in much more than just this one event.
There for, if your Bible has been proven wrong in many places *which is has been repeatedly if believers would just listen and take the time to study it themselves* It is 100% safe to assume that the Bibles assurtions about God are also wrong, and further more it is safe to dismiss Christianity on the whole as false.
This does nothing to prove or disprove the existance of a diety, God, the afterlife or anything like that… BUT it is a step toward disproving Christianity.
Believers are always yelling at athiests for “denying the truth”… well I challange each and every christian that reads this post to do just that… Openly and honestly go forth and seek out the truth! Do the work yourself, look into the FACTS, not the opinions and propaganda that is spread all over the net. Look up multipul resources, read books and information from BOTH sides, not just your own. Compare and contrast and I promise you that what you find will completely change your life. It will be very frightening at first, but you will come to find that it is a life change that is definitly for the better.
The problem with your explanation of what a thoery and what evolution are is your mistake as to what “event” took place. We do not “know” that macro evolution happened. It has never been observed. The thory of evolution exists to explain how we got here…how everything we see around us got here. Yes, people are trying to figure out how evolution could have happened, as a means of explaining our existance, but it is our existance that we are attempting to figure out, not evolution. Again, macro evolution is not, and has never been, observable. It is not science. We know we are here. We know all of nature is here. That is observable. Evolution is merely an unproven thoery attempting to explain how we got here. I hope that helps clear things up for you.
Believing that God created the earth is not proven either. It cannot be observed or repeated. But it does make a more logical conclusion than believing that something came from nothing, exploded, got organized, CAME TO LIFE, and gradually became more and more complex. This line of thinking, which is what the thoery of evolution teaches in essence, is completely contrary to the laws of science we KNOW to be true.
Meow, I am a declared Christian. I have faults and admit responsibility in my own life. For many years I have struggled with doubts about Christianity, many before I became a Christian. I’ve read numerous books on both ends. Probably many more books regarding atheists views on God than any other books. I read because I am fascinated by the view. It makes a lot of sense, but you can’t claim without a doubt that it is all true, and that Christianity is all false. Doing that would be doing what many ignorant Christians do in proclaiming that atheists are all wrong. It is being intolerant as many atheist would say about Christianity. If we are wrong (and I am speaking about TRUE Christians here not just one’s who have said the sinners pray and got their fire insurance) what we have tried to do in our lives is not bad. We have tried to live to be better people and help others do the same. Your anger should not be towards Christianity as a whole but towards those individuals who are not trying to live their life out for Christ. I apologize for their ignorance and mine at times. Without believing in God even you know that this world is messed up. We cannot get anywhere without realizing we have different views and be okay with those.We can’t fix anything by trying to prove who is correct and condemn those who think they are. That is ignorance in and of itself. We cannot know everything. Even reading numerous articles is not going to give us the ability to explain everything that happens. Sometimes “mysterious” things happen. Sometimes scientific events occur. Whether we develop theories or gather facts we cannot know fully what the truth is. Evolution is only a possibility not fact. Facts are what have been gathered about what appears to be the way life on Earth could have come about. Not saying that it absolutely positively came about that way. Even many atheist scientist can admit that there are parts of the process that don’t make sense. Certain events such as the cambrian explosion are such things. The appearance of animals species out of nowhere, which is stated by accredited scientists to which there is no explanation, and to which an educated guess (yes a hypothesis) is all that can be used to think of how it could have happened. In our generation and future generations we most likely will never receive an answer because we weren’t there when any of this happen and our arguments are only as good as what we can prove. I can’t prove there is a God beyond a shadow of a doubt, and you can’t prove that science and all it’s theories and laws are true beyond a shadow of a doubt. And just one last comment, even laws of science have changed over time when more information is found, so even those aren’t for sure perfect.
“A HYPOTHESIS is a wild shot in the dark…..”
What, you mean like the Bible?
🙂
I think more than anything it’s silly to go back and forth about if God is real or not. A) If I believe for a fact that God works in my life, how is anyone regardless of how many degrees they have going to tell me different? Has science also evolved into mind reading and such? B) Science can’t DISPROVE God is real no matter how many tests people do, so by that logic people that don’t believe in God have a 50/50 chance of being right, putting believers and atheists on even ground. Most interesting to me is science has become the NEW religion, you all knock God and people that follow him, yet you totally outright believe anything that science tells you is true, even though science is constantly wrong and changing. This means your religion is one that is KNOWINGLY faulty. Do we still use the same science books from the 30s? No, because a lot of it might be outdated info. And what has all this science done for the world? We are slowly destroying the Earth because of what we create. Look at nature and everything has a balance, we live off the Earth we die back into it, and so goes the cycle, but with all our “Smarts” we have developed things that disrupt the cycle, and kills the very planet that sustains us. All you goofy intellectuals sitting out there with your black rimmed Armani glasses, and goofy polo shirts need to get over yourselves. Your science religion will discover something new tomorrow that will negate whatever you think today, and you will still remain ignorant. It’s just pretty sad you’re so arrogant and full of yourselves that you can’t use your “free thinking” to be open to anything other than what you already believe. Atheists are more closed mined than believers. Have a good day!
First of all, science has FACTS proving evolution happened, where the bible does not have ANY facts proving that humans evolved from adam and eve. Second, the main reason that we don’t use the same science books that were used in the 30s is because scientists have found more facts and have to add them to the books. How can you be so blind as to believe something that can’t be proven, as to something that has FACTS to back up the theories? If you can find even one RELIABLE website with FACTS proving any form of “god” exists, email it to me at [email protected]. I can guarantee you will not be able to find even one reliable website.
I find it funny that all Christians arguments seem to lead down to “I dont want to rot in the ground forever”.. basically religion is their mind choosing that they are too scared to face an unsure afterlife..So they make all this crap up.
Religion is the human response to being alive and having to die.
Theories are not easily discarded; new discoveries are first assumed to fit into the existing theoretical framework. It is only when, after repeated experimental tests, the new phenomenon cannot be accommodated that scientists seriously question the theory and attempt to modify it. The validity that we attach to scientific theories as representing realities of the physical world is to be contrasted with the facile invalidation implied by the expression, “It’s only a theory.” For example, it is unlikely that a person will step off a tall building on the assumption that they will not fall, because “Gravity is only a theory.”
You obviously don’t even know the definition of a scientific theory.
i am not atheist i am agnostic, not too much of a difference. I have been born into the catholic-Christian faith, and opened my mind and now i have, well i consider it as freeing myself from followers of the status quo. We live in america a dominant Christian nation, if you believe other you are different. We are not choosing to believe in the Christian faith, we are either born into, have some sort of miracle happen, believe the bullshit stories of other Christians or we believe it because of fear. Now i do not believe in the Christian faith because i am not afraid of “god”, and besides he forgives everyone who chooses to accept he is real, right? Now i dont know if he is real but i do know the Christian faith isn’t. What makes this articles argument more compelling is that there are not only faults in the bible but also in the beliefs. They say that god is perfect, he is completely divine. well not only in the bible but in ideology of the Christan faith is this faulty. In the bible many times it portray’s god as being angry and jealous. Now correct me if im wrong but those are human feelings right? But he is all divine? What is also the point of prayer, i mean its always said that god will help you if you help yourself. So prayer really does nothing because your helping yourself in the first place. Also in the bible it talks about god telling prophets to send armies to rape the virgins of the village and kill the children. Now whats said most is thats from the old testament, but its still the same god correct. Now in my conclusion its all crap, not because im trying to disprove the faith but because of the obvious lies in the faith. It all is just a religious pattern, horus,dionysus,attis etc then jesus. Its all the same one thing especially is there is really no historical evidence of jesus, its all people wanting to believe in a higher power, blame their sins on evil and their happiness on good. all these religions are based on the sun the literal sun, the symbols, the names, the words, the passages,all relate to the sun. Jesus was never real, therefore the Christian faith is shot. I believe something made us, i dont believe it does the world any good, nor bad, that is our own faults. I’ve spent my whole life in the christian faith and never felt any connection, not because i didn’t try i did, its just my intellectual side and my free thinking brain caught the best of me and showed me to not follow and pursue the truth.
I grew up in a very christian home. My brother is a minster and a missionary and has been since he was a child.My father who beat me and my mother for years and smoked meth was the youth minister at our church. My mother was always the keep quiet and pray about things kinda person. Thats what she did while she was cleaning the floor from where my father had literally just kicked my face in. Just kept quiet and prayed. She said god worked in his own time and that he was working on my fathers heart and things would get better. All i want to know is how much of a dick is your egotistical (God) that he would allow that to continue just to get his point across? The whole Idea of god sounds like a power trip to me. We have to bend over backwards to please something we never see just so he wont destroy us and send us to eternity in a lake of fire. Now how loving is that. Christians need to come off high horse and face facts. THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!!!!!!
I am sorry for what happend to you and the childhood you had, but you can not blame God for what his followers do. Man sins, it isnt God who caused those horrible trait it was Saten. This reminds me of some friends I have who won’t trust in Christianity because Christians are “judging” or “hypocrytes” So? You arent following them you are following God, they are sinning the same as you do. No one who believes in God is showered with any more blood then another. I trully am sorry for how things were for you.
What? Haha, are you serious? God is all powerful. Why doesn’t he just get rid of Satan, if Satan is doing all the evil? And don’t say: “He Will.” or “Eventually.” because that makes me think that God likes watching 6 year old girls get raped. Why doesn’t he stop that from happening? My mom always told me (I grew up in a Christian family) that God works in mysterious ways and things happen for a reason. So, me being raped had to happen for a reason? God wanted that? Meanwhile, millions of other people in this world suffer- and Christians continue to blame Satan!
There are way too many loop-d-loops in Christian theory.
Jesus of Nazareth was pretty much proven to have existed. It’s whether or not he was the son of god and the messiah that is th question. Just sayin. ( i’m agnostic)
Nazereth has been proven not to exist but has been proven to be a burial ground, therefore Jesus of Nazereth does not exist…. also in many books of the bible there has been false stating of kings that were not around in the time the bible states…therefore the bible is wrong again…. the aurthor of the book states preach to the four corners?? Duh the earths round…obviously the aurthor did not know this cause their lack of knowledge at the time…people open ur eyes look at our world….99% of a monkeys gene matches us…and people who are saying anything about well why aren’t monkeys still evolving cause evolution takes millions of years…it doesn’t just happen…. people you make fun of people on the other side of the world cause of what they believe in and guess what they’re doing the same… what makes you right…there is no scripture that has a signature stating who wrote the books of the bible only the scriputre stating who did…how do u kno some guy or girl didn’t just write it….if I gave a group of kids a harry potter book and made them read it and told them this is what the real world was back in the day of harry they would believe it cause that’s what they were taught and they would fight to the grave about there believes just like u fight for urs…. why is it that god showed the people back in the day of his existense and can’t today…why?? What did I do that causes u not to show urself… I went to church for 20 years and never did I feel god or felt tempted by the devil…if someone offered me crack that’s not the devil..that’s a man made substance and its a man offering it to me… and same if I offer crack to someone, I don’t feel the devil in me tellin me to offer it… its me goin hey this is good shit try it out(not saying I do crack, its an example) point is religion is just a grasp for the human mind to think they kno where they are goin…if a dog dies they get cold and stiff…if a human dies they get cold and stiff…were all species of the earth and the universes biggest accident
How about we check out our “facts” first, Chris?
Check out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazareth
Bottom line:
“Nazareth is the largest Arab city in Israel.”
It is still around today:
“Modern-day Nazareth is nestled in a natural bowl which reaches from 1,050 feet (320 m) above sea level to the crest of the hills about 1,600 feet (490 m).[21] Nazareth is about 25 kilometres (16 mi) from the Sea of Galilee (17 km as the crow flies) and about 9 kilometres (5.6 mi) west from Mount Tabor. The Nazareth Range, in which the town lies, is the southernmost of several parallel east-west hill ranges that characterize the elevated tableau of Lower Galilee.”
If we share 99% of genes with a monkey, it just goes to show that the difference between us and them can not be explained purely by genetic means. We have art and culture and language and civilization and technology and… and … and …
Regarding the origins of scripture, there is considerable internal evidence that many of the books were written by a number of people all from within the Jewish culture. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exegesis to understand a little about the science behind this. ie this can be a helpful tool when analysing any ancient text not just the Bible.
Thus it would not take long for Harry Potter would easily be discovered to stem from the imagination of J. K. Rowling.
Regarding God showing people his existence, I think you will find that this has always been mysterious. God is (even by definition) beyond us and so we can only get periodic glimpses of what he is like, until, of course, the advent of Jesus.
What’s your point about the “crack”? You are, of course, correct, that you are the agent each time (either receiving or providing the drugs). Temptation is a lot deeper than this superficial explanation, however. How is it that we are attracted sometimes to things that we know are bad for us? There is so much you leave out in even purely human terms to understand this phenomenon.
Death is also much more profound than you think, even for animals. But for humans, you can look at burial rituals (for centuries) and through different cultures and even the way people react today towards death (the modern mind is basically fearful and avoids the issue) is quite profound. It is not simply a matter of going from warm and supple to cold and stiff!
Lots more to think about, mate….!
ample) point is religion is just a grasp for the human mind to think they kno where they are goin…if a dog dies they get cold and stiff…if a human dies they get cold and stiff…were all species of the earth and the universes biggest accident
About God send people to rape and kill in the bible can you give me the chpater and verse. Just want to read the prove for my self.
Rape and Sex Slave Passages:
Judges 21:10-24
Numbers 31:7-18
Deuteronomy 20:10
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
2 Samuel 12:11-14
Deuteronomy 21:10
Judges 5:30
Exodus 21:7-11
Zechariah 14:1-2
Murder:
(Deuteronomy 17:12
Exodus 22:17
Leviticus 20:27
and many many more. go to evilbible.com
Proving and disproving god would take a lot of effort, but the fact is – those who say that God exist can only rely with the scriptures and for some – the otherworldly miracles. How sure are we that everything we read in the scriptures are actually true in the first place. All the scriptures in all sorts of religion was written by man. Since we have no recorded evidence of God ever existing, and we only have our “faith” – to justify that he exists… It’s a very flimsy proof.
Just because a whole lot of people in the world are theists and the remaining are either agnostics or atheists – doesn’t mean that God truly exists.
There is also something fundamentally wrong about the idea that God will damn whoever that doesn’t believe in him.
I know I don’t believe in whatever all the other religions out there – has to say to him, but what I do believe in is that – god may or may not exist.
Because, who am I to say that God is good, or evil.
At one point or the other – all religions are used to control people – to set common values for the rest of us to live in some sort of harmony within our own cultures. We get these people who believe that their God is better than the other gods that other religions believe in.
Fact is there are too many contradictions, and we refuse to see them because we have not tried to study it… and since everyone around you in the community believes it, then it is also likewise that you must believe it in order to fit in.
Taking a leaf from Robert Ingersoll, we are christians because our fathers were. We are buddhists because our fathers were. We are muslims because our fathers were.
I’m not saying that this is bad in a way. It’s just the culture we are immersed in – the religion that you practice makes you refuse to see and understand what others have in mind.
What is wrong with a person who lives in a morally and upright manner. For example, If by some way I did not believe in Jesus Christ, and I die, I would not be granted salvation?
And how sure are we of the existence of heaven and hell. We don’t even know what happens to the collective consciousness when it passes on. It is much like how a person slowly looses their memory… Where is the person that you once knew before? Would that person still remain in the theoretical soul? Or is it forever lost?
Most of us want to believe that there is something good waiting out there for us… but face it, after waiting for so many years – most of the things we did and discovered – it was through our hands alone.
oh, God didn’t magically come up with a way to create a nuclear bomb. It was not God who made the computers.
Saying that we are his creations therefore it was God’s will that we made all these discoveries is even more of a bluff.
If….
If God is “good”, then why is it that in the bible or perhaps in other religions – there is always “violence”. Good is only a human concept. We can’t judge… his existence.
Man is fallible. Our scriptures our Fallible.
Most of the time, it only preaches of a way to live our lives.
This is one of the reasons why I really want to study all sorts of religions out there… Because I’m mortified by what each faction has to say to the other faction. I will not be naming names but I had to sit through a seminar where our speaker is talking about a problem somewhere in the world and he then suddenly spouts out that the root cause of it is religion. Though that might be true, the thing is it’s not the only reason.
4 hours I listened about how he started listing out all the faults of that certain religion and then, finishes with a subtle message that when the time comes – it’s kill or be killed .-.
If religion actually inspires peace and is actually something worth believing in… if I could find a faultless religion, I would practice it. But most of what I’ve read and seen and heard is that – it’s a major source of conflict.
All because each of us has an idea of “God”.
Moving on, if this God truly exists, and he truly has a divine message for us… when we are but a mere speck in the universe… Then, why not show himself to all of us for these arguments to be done and over with.
I do not want to follow any religion that says that I will be sent to hell for not believing.
What is the difference of a morally upright citizen that does not have faith in any god from a morally upright citizen that has faith in a certain god.
Thomas – I’ve heard similar arguments, but they are ultimately self-defeating. If they accept that the Bible was a cut-down version of events, that their chosen deity decided to hide facts from them to aid understanding, then they have to question every single verse of the Bible in a similar manner. Perhaps their deity was actually an extraterrestrial being, from another planet, but shielded the truth from the authors of the Bible because he feared they would not understand it. If they accept that the Bible is full of mistranslations, inaccuracies and approximations, then the entire foundation of their religion must be brought into question also.
Naumadd – Of course you’re right and I completely agree with you (I have a draft article waiting to be finished on this very subject). However, we must live within the confines of our society which, unfortunately, has been raised on a foundation of lies which have become so ingrained in their consciousness that it is difficult for them to assess such points logically and without prejudice. I thought that by making the argument I did, I would call into question the Christian God, and thought it appropriate as it is inevitably the Christians who spout the “cannot prove non-existence” line. And while yes, it is true that we cannot prove the non-existence of any deity, I think I can logically disprove (not that we need to) the established definition of the Christian deity using their own teachings. A bit of fun for a Sunday, if you’ll indulge me.
If god was a alien and people excepted this then there most be more than one all trying to influence us for thousands of years perhaps without them we might be still living in caves and the good and evil which I see means I have been telling the truth.And perhaps this planet has memory both past/present/future and they chose me and others that we psychics are the chosen ones how would we police the evil ones.Perhaps the powerful bankers Politicians top scientist are all involved science as moved at an alarming rate conspiracy theory could be true and my guardian angel is a Alien and his encouraging me to wright this.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the literals of the bible. Not only do you have to account for human error in the original writings of the bible, but also translational inaccuracies. To believe that the earth is only 6-10 thousand is kind of absurd, figuring that even though humans reproduce at a rather large rate, it would take more time than that to get to our current population.
In the original Hebrew, the word day is yoÌ‚m, which can be translated as “a time”, much like “age” or “era” in English. Replacing the word day with era makes much more sense. Alternatively, the original Genesis was written by Moses. Being that he was a human living in those days, such long times may have been incomprehensible to him. Therefore, when God related these events to him, it may have seemed like only days for creation. Think about it, if you were to have the entire history of creation up to that point beamed into your brain, what would it seem like in the terms of an ancient Israelite?
As for the Noah’s Ark argument, the animals came to Noah, not the other way around. Taking in to account tectonic activity, micro evolution for different species (i.e. crocodiles and alligators, basically the same, but small differences based on their locations), it’s entirely plausible for the required number of animals to have been saved. It’s even evidenced by the number of species of aquatic vs. terrestrial and avian animals.
Please let me know of any other specific proofs you have for the non-existence of God, I will be happy to discuss them with you.
You sir, are a fool. For what reason do we need to account for human error? The writers were taking direct guidance from Jesus himself. How is it possible to get 6500 hundred years mixed up with anything else anyway? It’s a number. Not a sentence.
How do we know the Bible is truly the Word of God?? There are over 25,000 archeological finds that verify the Bible, there has never been one, I repeat there has never been one archeological find that disproves the Bible!! That is a pretty good track record. Many secularist and other non-believers in the Bible will say that the N.T was not complete until the end of the 2nd, the beginning of the 3rd century A.D. This is another lie that the evolutionist and non believers conjure up to discredit what God has said. The fact is, if you go to the writings of the early church leaders (who wrote from 90 to 127 A.D.) you can from their quotes and their sermons compile the N.T. in its entirety!! So that says the N.T. was complete and was in good circulation before the end of the 1st century. Another indisputable proof t the validity of the Word of God.
Yet the strongest argument for the authenticity of the Scriptures is the fact of fulfilled prophecy. This is truly the nail in the coffin when it comes to whether or not the Bible is truly the Word of God. Isaiah 46:9-10 says “I am God and there is no other, I am God and there is noone like Me, I declare the end from the beginning.” So God says He declares what is to come, the future. Do we see this in the Bible. Isaiah 45 names King Cyrus by name 200 years before he was even born. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that Isaiah wrote that before and not after Cyrus came to power. Ezekiel 26 God says that the city of Tyre would never again be rebuilt and the only thing it would be used for is to dry fishing nets, the very purpose it is used today!! Psalm 22 is a Messianic Psalm, it mentions some of the last words Jesus spoke from the cross “My God My God why have Thou forsaken Me?” It says they divide My clothes and cast lots for them, this Psalm says dogs have surrounded Me (speaking of Gentiles), it says they have pierced My hands and My feet. This was written 1100 years before Christ came to this earth. It was written 800 years before crucifixion was even practiced and yet it says they have pierced My hands and My feet. Micah 5:2 says Christ would be born in Bethlehem, Zecheriah 12:10 says they will look on Me whom they have pierced. All written before Christ came into the earth.
Jesus fulfilled hundreds of prophecies when He lived here on the earth. The mathematical odds for Jesus to fulfill 7, (keep in mind He fulfilled 100’s) would be the same odds as you someone covering the entire earth in 4×4 white tiles. Hiding a gold star under one of them, and you walking up on the very 1st try and finding that gold star. By the way, you are blindfolded!! This would absolutely be impossible, think about the mathematical odds of Jesus fulfilling all the prophecies that He did!! It would be impossible yet with God all things are possible. Matthew 19:26
A little light reading for you, Chris. You seem to have a pretty faith based idea that a man named Jesus Christ was a real person. The historical record pretty conclusively argues against that. http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm
I was hoping to get more sound reasoning against Christianity with that article link you posted, but instead I was too distracted by the obvious misinterpretations of the Christianity and twisting of information by R.G. Price. Are you serious, no historical record of the star of Bethlehem discredits the historical Christ? And he basically proved exactly why Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah with those references to the OT. It’s so bad that I can’t even begin to describe how little he understands about Christianity. It’s so clever, of course any man who has never heard Christian theology in depth would be convinced by his bias with those random verses and facts.
I’m an Atheist, but I have studied the Bible for years, also in an academic setting, and spoken with Christian theologians. Did this guy get his information peer reviewed, or critiqued by historians, Atheists, or Christians? Apparently not. If he did it would’ve greatly improved the quality of his reasoning and maybe make it a worthwhile read.
Sorry, articles like these are frustrating for honest Atheists that don’t have a vendetta against others or an agenda to push.
“… there has never been one, I repeat there has never been one archeological find that disproves the Bible!!”
But, of course, although there are some disputes regarding the historical significance of the Jewish old testament and Christian new testament of the bible, there is ample reason to believe much of it is generally accurate historically. No doubt, more will be found to verify this event or that event as mentioned in this book. But that is of little matter because the real issue is the existence or non-existence of a “god” of which there has never been one, I repeat, there has never been one archaeological find to confirm the existence of such an alleged deity.
The christian bible is somewhat of a mixed bag of historical accuracy, however, it is of no assistance at all in proving the existence of a “god”.
If you know of an archaeological find that can be examined today to prove the existence of this alleged deity, please share.
sir your completely right. But the thing scientists or thinkers tend to overlook, is the faith aspect of religion. If everyone knew there was and is a God for sure, this discussion would not be happening and everyone would be a follower. Instead I believe God conceals himself to find out which people are his true believers.
he is all knowing, he wouldn’t have to do this little experiment to find out who is non believers. All religions are a communist way of controlling weak minded people with addiction problems.
I was a Christian for several years,and tried my hardest to feel god, never was his presence felt once by me. I am no longer associated with the religion. Your statement, if everyone knew god was real, everyone would follow him is false. If everyone knows that drugs are bad and can kill you,why do they still do it. They choose to rebel. If everyone knows that eating is necessary and not eating can make you sick, why is their anorexia. If people know that there is an authority, there will always be rebellion. If god was real, why does he make it easier for the people in the old testament by showing himself and harder for us. Is this a sick mind game he plays on us? is he experimenting to see how far he can take us? the definition of christianity says he is all knowing. if he is omniscient, why then does he not just know that i wont turn to him, and show himself so i dont have to burn like christians say i will.
I know athiests have a hard time with understanding the bible. Evolution is outrageous, if humans evolved then there would still be humans evolving from something. So that makes evolution a bunch of bull. If the big bang is correct then there would still be worlds exploding into existance, the only logical explanation is that there is a more powerful higher being, space did not evolve itself, you cannot get something from nothing, that is a scientific fact. So, if you beleive in evolution, why do we not see humans still evolving from other species? Because it is impossible, we may share some of the same dna makeups as other species of animals, but we cannot evolve into anything other than a human being, and an ape cannot evolve into anything other than an ape. T he reason i say the bible holds true is because people in bible times did not write untrue information, just to pass the time, writing in those days took skill, time, and was a way to preserve the truth. It took so much time and effort to get the materials to even write with, they did not have modern materials, these things were hard to come by, so anything written was definately worth writing. I hope that all atheists keep an open mind, and do not let themselves fall into these rediculous attempts to disprove that there is indeed a creator, some power of a magnitude that we could never caculate, an alpha and omega, created all that is known, and all that is unknown to humans, like I said, outer space is too massive and did not poof itself into existence. think about it!
Our genetic coding from NEANDERTHALS FOUND is rougly 2-3.5 percent off. There is evidence of slowing developing species from chimpanzees to humans. HUMANS ARE STILL EVOLVING TODAY. EVOLUTION ISN’T A F***ING 100 YEAR PROCESS YOU BRAINWASHED CLOSE-MINDED F***. WE WONT LIVE TO WITNESS IT F***FACE.
id like to interupt this ignorant conversation with some peaceful words. One, both of you are wrong, neither has been proven. Im a christian, and it is very possible that evolution is occuring right now. The problem is, “scientists” can’t form a scientific theory that matches an all powerful creator. Cosmic evoution (the big bang) and other theories rely solely on matter coming from nothing, which is impossible, then then little spec of matter suddenly exploding into billions of galaxies, which im not sure if i have ever made a house out of exploding a grain of sand. Where did God come from?, well thats why it is religion. Where did this matter come from…thats why it is science? Woa Woa Woa i think were getting the two mixed up. And there is no reason to sware to prove your point, when the angrier you get, the more ignorant and quick to conclusions you become.
Actually they found out recently from sequencing the Neanderthal genome that there is no difference between their genome and our genome. That’s not the sequence changing based off the environment idea. It’s just how certain genes are turned on and off, and scientists don’t know how that happened based off of the environment yet. Also, you should know that Christians argue that evolution does happen. According to them, they believe that microevolution occurs, changes between species or even up to the family level. But they don’t believe that on a higher scale of evolution, like from an elephant to a turtle. You should be wary of that if you ever get into an argument with a Christian.
Kevin – Yes, of course you’re right about the original wording potentially having more than one meaning. But it is obvious from the Bible that it is meant in the literal “24” hours sense. I also can’t buy into this theory that there are subtle inaccuracies in the Bible and it shouldn’t be taken literally. If that’s the case, then why do you believe any of it? With regards to the age of the earth, and the Bible’s view of it, I’ll leave it to some Christians to answer for me:
Source: Christian Answers
Chris Sanford – I hope you realize the absurdity of your argument. Do you believe Harry Potter is real because it gives an accurate representation of an English housing estate? There are, of course, historically accurate parts of the Bible, but they aren’t the contentious parts. There’s absolutely no proof for any of the so-called miracles, any proof of Jesus as a person ever existing (the first record comes a few hundred years after his supposed death, which leaves plenty of time for the fable to spread into common culture. If he was a real person, you’d expect some record of his existence at the time he was alive, there is none) nor any proof of any Gods. Ever. Anywhere. As for the references to Jesus being made before he was supposedly alive, perhaps they came from the numerous other prophets and deities in the region that shared the same basic story as the Christian Jesus (born of a virgin, resurrected, performed miracles etc.). The stories had been circulated for centuries before the period in which Jesus was supposedly born, except they were used by different religions. The Christian story is far from original.
godinus – There are two important points you don’t understand regarding evolution. Major changes take massive amounts of time, and given the typical length of a human generation, they would be near as imperceptible to us. If you take species with shorter life spans, we can see evolution in action. In fact, it’s been shown to take as little as 44,000 generations to show significant changes (a large enough change that a species lost one of its defining characteristics) to a species in a reproducible laboratory environment (44,000 generations for humans, with an average life span of 70 years, would take approximately 3 million years). Evolution is now scientific fact and has been proven. The second thing to remember is that evolution is happening to humans at the moment. Even though the threat of natural selection is diminished due to modern healthcare and our more cultured society, you can still observe generational evolutionary changes. Take the palmaris longus muscle for example. It’s clearly left over from a time we required more flexibility and strength in our arms (say, for example, if we were climbing trees regularly). Yet this muscle remains underdeveloped and unused in humans, and because of that, less people are born with that muscle every generation. There are similar muscles in the legs and feet. Actually, the foot is very interesting from an evolutionary point of view as there are muscles similar to the palmaris longus that remain from a time when our feet were far more dexterous than today (look at a primate’s foot and what it can do with it). Yet these muscles remain in out feet, albeit undeveloped and, like the palmaris longus, appears in fewer humans each generation. But, of course it’s all bull despite there being a boat load of evidence for it, while there’s ZERO evidence for creationism.
The interesting thing about everything I’ve said above is that you can go out and verify it all. I wouldn’t expect nor want you to just believe me blindly, so go out and do some research with an open mind, a truly open mind, and I hope your eyes will be opened.
You say that you hope atheists keep an open mind, which has never been an issue. Atheists want proof, we don’t believe in fairy tales we believe in science and truth. Your argument for the existence of a creator falls short when you say in one breath that “you cannot get something from nothing, that is a scientific fact” without offering the source of your creator, which presumably is a “something”. And of course, the experiments currently being undertaken at CERN to discover the Higgs Boson particle may very well prove that you can indeed get “something” (matter) out of “nothing” (energy). And I’m sure you can guess by now that your point that the Bible must be true because it was difficult to write books at the time doesn’t hold water round these parts.
I sincerely aprreciate the logic of your argument. You took the words right out of my mouth.
Ironically, what most in the so-called “Evolution vs. Creationism” debate seem to miss, creationists being the worst offenders, is the fact evolution did not stop. All forms of life here on Earth continue to evolve – yes, including human beings. This lack of understanding is most evident in the creationist argument regarding “transitional forms”. The fact of the matter, because evolution cannot be said to be complete for any form, ALL organisms, living and deceased, have been transitional forms. Neither the species nor any individual human being is fully evolved. All are evolving from moment to moment.
Some a bit slower than others.
Atheist, I’ve been really keen to see an argument proving the non-existence of God, but was immediately disappointed to see that the scope was reduced to Christianity. The question of existence and essence are necessarily separate from our perspective (even if they are identical in God).
Nevertheless I liked the fact that logic dominated the discourse (as opposed to the more usual sneer). OK so I accept your two premises (ie God is infallible; and the Bible is the true word of God). But they are not necessarily “interdependent”. I don’t need a Bible to know that God is infallible, but it is also too fast to say that I believe the Bible because it was written by an infallible deity. In fact the Bible is clearly written by humans. It is quite unlike the Qu’ran which is supposed to be a direct dictation to Mohammed. In fact the Bible is ‘inspired’ which is rather different. It means that God is the author through inspiration, and various human writers are the true author (using their own linguistic style etc..).
OK, onto your example: the creation myth. This has always been accepted as pre-historical. There is so much in the first three chapters of Genesis that it is truly the most remarkable piece of writing apart from the Gospels, but it is not intended to be a scientific portrait. It is clearly not written that way. Long before any atheists roamed the earth, Origen and others pointed out that the sun and moon are created after light. Additionally, anyone who tried using Genesis to date the earth would be barking up the wrong tree. God has no interest in informing us that the earth is 4.5 billion years old or otherwise. These are mere facts, and as such, are not very interesting except in trivial pursuit games or if you are involved in archeology or something.
Myths, however, are not the same as pure fiction. They provide a message in a deeper way than prose can. Genesis does teach us that God is creator (ie from nothing), that his creation is good (not malevolent – in fact this is the reason why science developed out of a Christian cosmology and not, say an Hindu one). It teaches that the apex of creation is man, created as male and female, with free will and endowed with personal dignity. This freedom also explains how sin and evil are possible in a world created by a good God, and so on… These are not simple ‘facts’ to stow away for a rainy day, but vital, important realities that effect our lives, unlike the value of ‘pi’ (which is not rounded at all – it’s not stated).
Some other inaccuracies:
1. The Bible is the only place that defines God,
2. and God is defined [in the Bible] as being infallible.
3. The Bible is also stated as being of God’s word [another claim not found directly in the Bible, nor even which books the Bible contains]
So I think you have only established that your understanding of the Bible is massively inaccurate.
Hello,
I have studied intensely Atheism & Theism. And I’m proud to inform everyblogger that, I a disciple of Christ.
Now it’s true, science has served as a valuable tool for mankind. Through science alot has be learned. But science best answer to the question, “Is God real?” science says, “I doubt it”. Science provides enough facts to cause doubt but doesn’t prove there is no Almighty Being. And it’s true, no one (including believers in God) can prove there is a GOD because what’s real to mankind is known by our five (5) senses (sight, hearing, smell, taste, & touch). And speaking for myself, my senses testifies like an atheist because I have not witness the existence of GOD.
But, Thanks to Christianity!!! I now understand and want to share, like atheism, I overlooked the truth about….. L-O-V-E!!! LOVE is real and is known only by faith: LOVE can’t be seen naturally, but by faith there are visions of Love that can be brought to plain sight; Love can’t be heard, but by faith Love utters it’s voice and is heard like a natural voice; Love has no smell – taste – or touch, but by faith Love smells like a rose to many – love taste better than honey to many – and love can be felt within. Love has created the world: it was love that created a husband and a wife; it is love that brings children into the world, by being intimate; it was love that made the trees, water, sun, and all the things needed to live, Love acted as a provider (I’m convince). I believe God is LOVE and I pray faithfully everyday hoping I find his eternal Love before his temporal love in this world runs out & death ends my chances of living in God’s Love.
from a disciple of Christ, Phair W
Wow, that makes me throw up!!
..Love is an emotion. It’s part of the human brain. Just like those five senses you listed, those can be de-activated in the brain. Some people are born without them. Just like 100% of people are born without a God and are TAUGHT about one. Please, please, go back to school- college- wherever. We do not need people like you on this planet who try to link a God to parts of a human’s brain. You’re literally just proving that Atheist are correct. Thank you. I love stupid Christians like you.
Jonathan – I always thought the Bible was God’s word.
2 Timothy 3:16
As for the infallibility of God, are you then saying that God makes mistakes? Are you saying that he is fallible and therefore should be questioned, doubted even? While not explicitly stated in the bible, the implication is obvious. Your statement flies in the face of the “God has a plan, don’t question God’s plan” line that I always hear from people of religion who are having a tough time.
I don’t understand why you think that estimating the age of the earth from the old testament is “barking up the wrong tree”? Are you saying it’s inaccurate? Incomplete? Fictional? If not, then why can we not use it as a basis for these estimations? And for what it’s worth, I agree with you on the value of pi, which while not directly stated can be derived from the dimensions given of circular objects. I don’t think this is a valid (or fair) argument to make, and unlike some other atheists, I don’t partake in it.
Phairw – I honestly can’t tell whether you are being sarcastic or not!?! Obviously love is an emotion, and like other emotions is caused by electro-chemical reactions within our bodies that occur under certain conditions. Love, or what we now perceive to be love, is clearly a method that has evolved in order to allow us to more easily sustain the species through breeding. That, of course, is the sort of love you feel for a partner, whereas you may also have love for family members, friends, children – the sort of people you would want to keep alive if you lived in a difficult and dangerous environment. Animals exhibit similar behaviour when protecting their “packs”. Much like fear – an emotion which has the purpose of alerting us to dangerous situations and preserving our safety.
The Atheist – No, I’m not being sarcastic, and your right, Love is an emotion, and thanks for your scientific knowledge as to what causes our emotions. But, your statement has not proven anything. I still believe God is Love. Love is REAL!!! Love is Alive!!! If you remove this emotion from our being, the human race couldn’t survive. We wouldn’t reproduce; we won’t care about people; we wouldn’t create life and have friends & family without Love. Remove Love and I’m convince the world would simply die. Now I don’t believe Love has evolved. Maybe peoples idea of what is Love evolved but pure Love has not changed. Love for family, friends, children, caring feeling for the poor and helpless, and love in a marriage: Where’s the evolution of Love??? Has not everything we understand about Love been the same in the past, present, and shall be the same in the future. If not, please explain!!! I need examples.
Atheist – the Bible is God’s word, but not in the same sense as “The Lord of the Rings” is Tolkein’s word, though actually by chosing a work of literature I come closer to explaining what I mean. I referred to inspiration, and that is exactly what “God-breathed” means in 2 Tim 3:16.
God doesn’t make mistakes, but then he is not writing a text book, and he is writing from within the context of a truly human author.
Trying to estimate the age of the earth from the Bible is a little like asking how historical Shakespeare’s portrayal of Henry IV really is. The dramatic truth is something independent from that. Now of course there are times when the Bible means to be historical (just as in Shakespeare), but the context must be taken into account. The Bible may be God’s word, but it is not God. Phairw is much more along the right lines in that it is more of a kind of love-letter, and not meant to teach science at all.
Which leads me to an interesting point about love. It is certainly true that love is an emotion, but love is also more than an emotion. Love can be in the will as well. Greek and Latin have several words for love that express its various nuances well, where English must make do with one. So I think it is much more than merely “electro-chemical reactions”, even if I don’t deny that that is partly true. Human emotion is much richer than animal emotion because it also has a rational component.
Sorry, I can’t help going back to the point on emotions. One way to see that it is more than just a chemical reaction is that it is felt. Chemical reactions don’t feel anything. Nor do electrical ones. This also implies that the mind can not be reduced to just the brain, even if it is necessary for human thought.
The other non-emotive aspect of love I didn’t mention is that it is always unitive: the beloved object/person is intentionally present inside the lover. This is another way of seeing that it goes beyond biophysics. In Latin, this is expressed by “caritas” (from “carus” = dear), while the purely emotive aspect of love is called “amor concupiscentiae” (roughly: desire).
Phairw, this actually has an important consequence for your argument. If God is love, do you want to say that God is an emotion? The Latin text reads “Deus caritas est”; the relevant verb is, of course, agape in the original Greek.
Jonathan – I saw your second response before I went to Church today. I’ve been thinking about how I would reply intensely…,
Is God an emotion……??? YES indeed, God is an emotion and more!! God has to be an emotion because an emotion is something you feel. And in order for GOD TO BE REAL YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FEEL HIM. But, God is not limited to just being called an emotion.
Now, we were talking about LOVE, Love is something you can feel.
The Atheist, explain that Love is an emotion and he explained scientifically how we feel Love or any other emotions. So we all should agree that Love and the rest of our emotions are something we feel (regardless to the explanation), and if we can feel Love than it’s REAL.
Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life. Every human being today is a form of love. (Love takes on the shape of a husband, a wife; Love also takes on the form of a family) Many people in jail today, are there because of hatred that took on a form of life (Murderers, thieves, rapists, and gangs).
So now Love and all the rest of our emotions, comes from within us. They are the expressions of the Heart. Love is unseen, invisible to the natural eye unless it takes form or has a body to express itself and be seen. All emotions have a force of nature classified as spirits. LOVE reign supreme over all emotions and the Spirit controlling it is called HOLY (holy meaning, set apart and above all).
Everyone who can logically disprove my statement, I’m waiting to hear from you. Also I hope we are still having a logical blog because I’m sure I won’t stay long if this blog leaves the realm of common sense, logical, and well thought out/Rational statements, which may prove or disprove the Christian God.
Jonathan – To me, someone who can read the text of the bible and take it at face value, “breathed-on” sounds like “spoken”. And as for the estimated age of the earth, please remember that it is not I who has done the calculation, but rather John Lightfoot, an Anglican clergyman (his calculation was later roughly confirmed by Bishop James Ussher. He obviously thought it was valid to estimate the earth’s age based on Genesis, perhaps because there was no scientific evidence around at the time to prove him wrong? So these clearly aren’t atheists out to prove a point, members of the church, senior members in the case of Bishop Ussher, believe the Bible, and in particular Genesis, should be literally interpreted. I’d also be interested in knowing, and I know I’ve posed this question to you before, in a different comment thread, how do you select which parts of the bible you believe literally, and which you decide to treat as the author using poetic or dramatic licence? I don’t see markers in the bible surronding genesis stating it shouldn’t be interpreted literally, nor do I see markers around the new testament stating it should be. So how do you decide, and how do you resolve, within yourself, the fact that different readers of the bible interpret it in different ways?
As for “feeling” love, do we not feel fear? Would you argue that God created fear so we should be afraid of crossing him? Or would you logically deduce that in the early days of man, natural selection would dictate those who possessed the ability to feel fear would be more likely to survive?
Phairw – “Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life. Every human being today is a form of love. ” I’m confused by this. Clearly not every human being alive today is an act of love, as you yourself said, babies have been born after the mother has been raped, teenagers have gotten drunk at parties and become pregnant, women have used sperm from sperm donors, prostitutes have conceived after taking a “customer”. Breeding is very different from love. I’d also question whether emotion is driven spiritually. We can, of course, trigger and suppress emotions using drugs and manipulation of the brain. Feeling an emotion is very much a scientific process, we can witness it through monitoring the electro-chemical reactions in the brain, we can even control it. I don’t need to logically disprove your statement, it’s been scientifically disproved.
The Atheist – Breeding is a physical act contolled by Love or Lust(Lust is a bad copycat of Love). So yes, someone gets raped or will get raped; yes teenaged pegrancies happens (young people confusing Lust for Love); Yes, mankind developed the ability for women to have sperm donors. So what’s your point. All I see is a woman finding Love in the form of a child thru sperm donations (similiar to adoption); and prostitutes is making money using Lust. Does this end your confusion???
Also, your scientific answer for feelings and emotions is okay and helpful BUT, why does science check for truth about our emotions in our head and not our HEART???
Shouldn’t the HEART be the best study for answers??? hmmm….. Let me know!!!
This “heart” you speak of is nothing but a metaphor for feelings and emotions.. usually of a possitive nature.. which all come from our mind.
Love, compassion, patientence… values, morals, ect… all of these things come from within ourselves alone.. and before some believer starts spouting how morals and valures come from god or the bible.. stop with that bull right there because the truth is morals and values are completely situational.. that is to say Morals and values are different from person to person, and change from situation to situation.
but back to the point, to study the “heart” of humanity would be a waste of time, as the “heart” is completely different from person to person as well as situation to situation… I could love someone with all my “heart” but someone else could wish the worst possible death on that same person…
Now the eletrical pulses and what not that happenes within our heads that causes these emotions are for the most part consistant from person to person therefore we study what is the same for almost everybody to better understand what this so called “heart” among many other things that are more noteworthy.
Meow – I like your answer! It was the best answer given (I think), in my long debate about L.O.V.E. with others
So you say my use of LOVE is a metaphor…, Okay two questions:
1. Why is the heart used in a metaphor as to where mankind feel their emotions, when it isn’t true accord to science? (the metaphor shouldn’t make sense, for example: I love you from the bottom of my heart…? Shouldn’t we say, I love you from the bottom of my mind or brain or something else?)
2.Why are the metaphors of LOVE widely accepted, even in the atheist community? (according to science, logically this should make no sense, since love does not come from the heart but the mind)
As I understand, Atheists are all about FACTS, LOGIC, & PROOFS, right.., So please explain.
Jonathan – To me, someone who can read the text of the bible and take it at face value, “breathed-on†sounds like “spokenâ€.
Atheist – in what way does “breathed-on” sound like “spoken”? An analogy would be an artist who is inspired to create a certain art work. There are certain ideas that come into their mind. God inspired such ideas into the authors of the Bible, who then wrote them down in their own language and cultural milieu. In the process, we do believe that God also ensured that the message that he wanted to impart was faithfully received in the process. So it is a kind of joint work, just like the work of having and raising a child is meant to be. Perhaps the closest image I can provide of Biblical inspiration, is the way in which we educate children. God uses our language and expresses things in a way that they mean something to us even though it is rather banal to him.
Indeed it is impossible to interpret it outside the mentality of the family of God. If I read a series of letters that your parents wrote to each other, say, there would be many things that only someone from within the family could understand because of the family traditions and experience that may be contained therein. It is not being obtuse to say that you should not expect more from the Bible than what is intended, and that you should look to those for whom it was written to understand it.
So now the estimated age of the earth. I would have to respectfully disagree with the Rev. John Lightfood and the Most Rev. James ussher. I don’t think that our relationship with God has any relation to the age of the earth. This is my opinion, and I am happy to let the good clergymen have theirs. I am persuaded by scientific arguments that the earth is much older than their calculations allow. As Cardinal Beronio once said in connection with the Galileo issue: “the Bible teaches us how to get our heads into heavean, not the heavens into our heads.”
Have you had any experience with textual analysis? There are all kinds of non-Biblical texts that experts examine to ask these very questions: is the author being literal, telling a story, quoting someone, cracking a joke, etc…? There are tools for discerning these. In fact they are quite scientific: it involves studying the culture, history, comparative texts etc… I have no expertise in any of these fields, and to an extent, have to rely on their guidance in these matters. In addition, as a Catholic, I belong to a Church which believes that it has a divine mandate to give clarity on some disputed points like this. I do accept that there will still be disputed areas, and indeed there are passages that theologians love arguing about. I don’t see how that matters – theologians gradually resolve them in much the same way that scientists gradually resolve difficulties to be explained. My Church teaches nothing at all about the age of the earth, so Catholics are free to come to their own conclusions as best as their intelligence permits. I don’t see why faith and science should be seen as incompatible in this regard. On the contrary, they can be mutually beneficial, especially if their respective provinces are respected.
The emotion question really requires more space. All emotion is based on love as its foundation, ie attraction towards a good. Fear is the emotion that directly opposes this, ie repulsion from an evil (or something we dislike). It is therefore consequent upon love since you can’t have a negation before an affirmation – this is true of atheism too by the way.
By the way the other emotions except one are also in positive/negative pairings: desire/aversion; pleasure/sadness; hope/despair; fear/courage; and finally anger which has no opposite. But this all needs to be unpacked in a great deal more space than is available here.
Phairw – I also have difficulty understanding many of your comments. I suppose my point to you was simply to ask whether you thought God was an electro-chemical reaction if that is all that love is. I agree with you that God is love, but dispute that love can be reduced purely to the emotional level. I also dispute that God (at least the Father and the Holy Spirit) have emotions, since that requires having a body, as you rightly say. Being a man, though, Jesus does have them. Maybe you can clarify your ideas if I have misunderstood them.
Okay- Let me rephrase – (Now every emotion takes on a form and is driven spiritually which will confirm its Reality in Life.)
Rephrased: Now every emotions which is spiritually controlled or influenced; these emotions take form (or expressed in a body) which confirms its Reality of Life or Living. is this better understood???
Jonathan – An electro-chemical reaction is the best answer the brain can give (if it’s true) and if it’s not true, still I expect the brain to give a similar answer because the brain can’t explain better than the heart what the body is feeling (I believe). Now if you look carefully I said God is an emotion and more. I thought I showed how Love can develop into more than just an emotion. And the Bible teaches Man was made in the image of God and Jesus is the image of the invisible God, so how do you say the Father and the Holy Ghost have no emotions and body??? Doesn’t the Bible say God was greived and the Holy Ghost can be greived??? Check these scriptures and let me know [Genesis 6:6; Ephesians 4:30]
Jonathan – Perhaps I chose the wrong word when I said spoken, as a common definition of “breathed” is to “utter without voice”. I have the suspicion that we are actually in agreement on this point, we just differ on how closely the Bible would represent God’s word. I just wanted to briefly explain why I find your point of view difficult to resolve.
One of the biggest hurdles is the vastly differing accuracy and level of information within the bible. I find it difficult to believe that a God would leave the origin of the universe, surely one of the most important parts of any teaching, so badly defined yet go into so much detail in other parts of the work. It seems, at best, to be a misstep. I also find it difficult to believe that a God would allow such inaccuracies to be published in a holy book that effectively has been written in his name. There seems to be this acceptance that the Bible was written either under the influence of God or taking dictation of his word, either way I would have thought that such a being would have the power of influence such that the descriptions within the book were less open to interpretation. With regard to that, I don’t buy in to the “language is ambiguous” argument, given that we seem to be able to ably describe such concepts now, with a language that isn’t significantly more complex. And surely a God could make the most of whatever language was available at the time, or inspire new ways of describing his magnificent acts so that we could all accept them.
Phairw – I’m afraid I’m becoming awfully confused by some of your points. You state that you want a logical debate but then go on to discuss emotions felt within the heart. The heart is but an organ, made mostly of muscle, that pumps blood around the body. It is effected by emotion, for example when you sense fear, the heart rate quickens in preparation for a “fight or flight” response. Of course it is not just the heart that is impacted by these emotions, the adrenal gland also kicks up a notch. All physical, real, observable reactions, and easily explained by science. I fail to see how fear of an alligator is “spiritually controlled or influenced”, and as stated earlier, animals aren’t considered complex enough to understand the idea of a deity, yet they feel fear of alligators, and experience many of the same physical reactions as us.
I would also question your assertion that breeding is controlled by love. Breeding is driven by our need to continue the species, not by love. To say lust is a bad copycat of love (I’d prefer ugly bedfellow, but that’s the dramatic writer in me) is to undermine one of the primal urges that has allowed out species to thrive.
And if God is an emotion, and you accept that emotions can be observed as electro-chemical reactions in our brains, why can God not be observed in our brains as an emotion?
The Atheist – I knew you would define the heart in a scientific manner… And that’s the problem with science! For example: If my wife ask me, “What’s in my heart”, I would say “Love”. I wouldn’t say blood that’s being pumped thru my body! She would think I’m crazy but blood is in my heart, RIGHT??? What if, someone said to you, I Love You; I can feel it in my heart!!! Would it be better said this way, I Love You; I can feel this electro-chemical reaction in my body effecting my heart organ at a certain rate which causes me to response with a kiss…, Would that be better, and the first one wrong??? I think not though it’s true! The Heart, our emotions,and life in general has far more meaning than what’s explained and providing thru science. Science is good but it can’t answer fully everthing! Somethings shouldn’t be answer by science at all.
Now, Every emotion is caused by someone or something (and remember I said your emotions takes a form to be real). In this case, it’s the alligator causing fear. The gator give off a spirit that causes or influences fear. The fear simply took on the form of the alligator.
Also your right, animals are without knowledge of God and can never fully know LOVE. But, fear is different animal are very knowledgeable of fear. If they wasn’t they wouldn’t survive.
Now, you said, Breeding is driven by our need to continue the species, and not Love??? That’s completely wrong!!! I don’t think while people are breeding they are thinking about continuing the species. I believe Love or Lust is on their minds. What about all the birth contol that exist? What about abortions? What about those who don’t want children? What about those people who believe death is necessary so the world won’t be crowded? Seems to me Love makes more sense!
And Last, science have observed God as an emotion! They said, God is an electro-chemical reaction called Love. And their RIGHT!!! The problem is, their more and it can be scientifically discover. Plus I believe in GOD, and his knowledge of LOVE is far superior than science and only discover by faith.
The Atheist – I’m sorry, I mean “theirs more and it CAN’T be scientifically discover.”
In the last paragraph
Phairw- On “Faith”
Faith was created by man to explain circumstances they could not explain with fact simply because they did not have the means in which to discover reasons.
i.e. “There must be an all powerful creator that created this huge world because how else could it have gotten here.” A deduction made by people without the means to observe the cosmos so they had to have help explaining it using words like “Faith” and “Belief” and “God”.
On the flip side things that people could observe and explain are accepted immediately as fact.
i.e. “If someone sticks a sword through my body I’m going to die.” This explanation needs no help from faith or a god because it is obvious and easy to see.
For you to say science can’t explain everything means that you need to question everything science and fact have proven. (medicine, health care, fossils, weather patterns, planets, stars, anatomy… the list goes on and on)
As for me religion and faith explain nothing other then people’s weakness for understanding (“I can’t explain this so it must be the product of some magical force or being”). Because faith explains nothing; I question every word spoken by someone who skips through life blindly and uses the word “faith” and “belief” to justify it.
Open your mind to knowledge it is a wonderful thing to see! Don’t close your mind and seal it up with the word faith simply because it is easier then seeking fact.
Jana – “Faith was created by man” ??? Are you sure? or is faith apart of human nature? Yesterday at the superbowl, the [Pitt Steelers] believed they would win as well as the [St. Louis Cardinals] before the game. So are you saying, St. Louis was weak for not knowing or understanding the Steelers were 4points better? and how would you explain the Steelers faith? Where was there weakness for believing they would win? — Faith comes for within like our emotions and is a major part of our lives. Even you believe or had faith in someone or something (whether you admit it or not). I don’t believe in magic and there’s nothing magically about faith. Faith is powered by historical knowledge and trust, and that’s real not magically.
Now it’s true some things can be explained very well through science. But, not everything like LOVE! And science will never be able to fully explain what is LOVE! But faith has explained LOVE far more superior than science can ever try.
Now let me share with you my open mind to knowledge for I agree! it is a wonderful thing. It was LOVE that created our world. Not the big bang theory, evolution, and any other scientific explanation. These scientific reasonings maybe right to a degree, and I do believe they played a role in life. But, LOVE is the ultimate reason for life and the creation of it. It’s driven by a unseen force of nature classified as a spirit. God is LOVE and God is a spirit. — So there you have it my mind now seal with the word faith and my heart consume with the word LOVE, because I have been skipping thru life too long not seeing nor hearing anything about life beyond death. And I want to live!!!
Everyone knows faith is just another word for “i don’t know”.
I would first like to apologize for my grammar and sentence structure it seems i haven’t these gifts as most of you seem to posses…with that being said id like to be given some information from both sides of the argument here….you see my father committed suicide about a year ago just after i returned form fighting in iraq(i was an infantry marine for four years and fought in fallujah during operation phantom fury) i want readers to know this because while in the mist of war it is difficult to find atheist i in fact was a religious leader in my platton since i had the most knowledge of the christian bible…thats not a boast most marines don’t much care for religion until they are faced with death…i believe it helps make death more acceptable. what im really asking for is for some one to explain to me how with all the inconsistancies of the bible and many other controversies it can still be held as a truth?
i asked my mother this (she is a devout christian) and her only answer was faith further more she told me it was easy to be atheist because you dont have to atone for sin. in my opinion it a lot easier to dismiss the unkown by claiming a leap of faith or that “things just happen according to god’s design” rather than seeking fact,truth, ect.
on a side note …ha ha ha god is emotion love i can see love sweat in your palms the beating of two hearts synchronized the look in my lovers eye the word i hear….i don’t feel god and i recognize that the feelings of “conviction” was only the fear of god, put into my mind by my family not my own experience.
also if god is so powerful than how can a person refute him, insult him, hate him and not be struck down like the bible promises?
i know this has been a rant of sorts with no structure but please comment and im looking for atheist literature if you have any suggestions let me know.
Here you go mate, try reading this, it will go a long way to helping you along. some of you other believers on here may want to read all and i do stress all the way through.
http://www.christianitydisproved.com/
Seeker – I always value passion and honesty over grammatical flair! And all of us who like to discuss and debate are greatly indebted to people like you who actually go out and “do”.
I can respond from an atheist point of view, and if we’re lucky one of the other readers will respond from the opposing side.
I clearly don’t believe in the teachings or stories in the Bible. Given the scale of the tales you would expect at least some of the miracles to be recorded in historical works. Even more so, a single person travelling performing miracles and gathering followers would have a life interesting enough to warrant documentation. There are no records of Jesus, or his miracles from the time it is claimed he lived. The first documents came about 200 years after his claimed death, which is plenty of time for the tales to make it into popular culture. The inconsistencies and contradictions are too numerous to ignore. My question has always been that if God existed, and commanded (or inspired) the Bible to be written to spread his word, surely he would not have allowed such glaring mistakes to be published. After all, it dilutes his word and causes people like me (and by the sounds of it, you) to question the validity of the Bible and, in fact, his very existence. The only explanation (reasonable explanation) is that either God is not powerful enough to exert that level of influence over the human authors of the Bible, or the Bible is a work of pure fiction. Considering the first option, if God did not have this power, can he really be considered a God?
As for the discussion you had with your mother, my view is similar to your own. If you subscribe to a religion that believes God has laid out plans for your life, and will ultimately forgive any misdemeanours, you are never really taking responsibility for your life. Atheists, on the other hand, have to accept that they make choices and are responsible for the outcomes of those choices. We don’t have to wait for forgiveness from a God on judgement day, potentially ignoring those that we actually wronged, we have to confront out problems and take action to resolve them. Surely the atheistic approach is truly atoning from wrongdoings, where the religious approach is deferring them to a higher being and avoiding any responsibility.
I just want to finish by saying I admire you questioning the beliefs you were raised with, especially given some of the difficult circumstances you’ve clearly found yourself in. Many people would have buried their heads in their religion, to avoid confronting such situations. And even if you ultimately decide that you do believe (it’s not my job to convince anyone, just to voice my opinion), questioning something can never be a bad thing.
Okay, Hello Seeker — your “on the side note” I didn’t understand fully so I won’t commit…… Now there is nothing inconsistant about the Bible, if you’re a true believer! But someone who don’t believe or have trouble understanding will find the Bible to be very inconsistant.
For example: in the Bible, Jesus taught you must HATE your Mother, Father, sister, brother, wife & CHILDREN, and yourself to be his disciple. And in the same Bible, Jesus taught his disciples to Love their ENEMIES.
Now here we have what seems to be a very inconsistant, controversial, and it seems to prove what non-believers say all the time about the Bible; it had contradictions. Love my enemies but hate my Children??? Love my enemies but hate my family??? Sounds wrong and stupid Right….
The Bible is a book that is impossible to understand fully without excerising faith in it. It’s a book design to teach believers how to live in the hereafter. Atheists don’t believe in a after-life, so they will have no future beyond death. Any teachings of life after death may sounds foolish to an Atheist. Since we all know that once you die that’s it. But faith in God provides hope in living again.
Okay allow me to challenge you and anyone else with this: The world in which we live, is governed by TIME Right? (Years, months, days, hours, minutes, & seconds)Now if you agree the world is rule by TIME, then you must understand TIME has a Golden Rule: it Begins and it Ends; it has a Start then it Finish….Right? If you still agree, doesn’t Judgment take place at the End of TIME??? from races, completions, and tests I have seen it all judged at the end of the duration of TIME. And if the world is on a TIMER Why wouldn’t we believe in God and his Judgment Day???
Also Seeker, God is all powerful and will deal with everyone accordingly. In this world everyone has free-will to chose want they want to do with their life. God is looking for love from mankind. And true love comes by freedom. That’s why people can hate and insult God, it their chose. But trust me, God will have the last laugh when it all over.
“The Bible is a book that is impossible to understand fully without excerising faith in it. It’s a book design to teach believers how to live in the hereafter. Atheists don’t believe in a after-life, so they will have no future beyond death. Any teachings of life after death may sounds foolish to an Atheist. Since we all know that once you die that’s it. But faith in God provides hope in living again.”
I have never seen a poorer apology for the rubbish thats written in the sentence above!
And to go further into your response, who says time will ever end? If time never ends that no Judgment. Please provide proof positive about knowing time will end without using the bible as proof.
Dont forget, a lot of atheists began life as believers, so that meant that afterlife was available to them, does stopping believing now mean that they are magically stripped of that right?
Seeker your better off sticking to not beleiving, if you start this is the kind of convoluted thinking and delusion you need to believe in to make your belief fit how you want
Im sorry Phairw i find your logic is flawed. You have not given one bit of proof nor one shred of evidence to prove your claim. All i have seen so far is wishful thinking and feelings from yourself to prove your own argument . You need to do better than that.
Phairw – An honest question, do you believe because you fear that death may be the end of your existence? Your comments above certainly give that impression. I do not fear death, in fact knowing that this life is “it” is somewhat liberating. It frees you of the feeling that there’s more to come and allows you to enjoy your life for what it is. I’m also intrigued by your faith comment. You say that you must read the bible with faith, but what do you put your faith in? Is it the part of the bible that says to hate your family or the part that says to love them? And how do you know you’ve chosen the right one?
As for your time question, the world is not governed by time, far from it. Time is just a variable. As for the end of time, well that depends on your definition of time. There is a school of thought that says time cannot exist without something with which to witness its affects. It’s the “if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise” debate.
But playing along, at the end of time, there will, by definition, by nothing around for your God to pass judgement on. Because if we exist for judgement to be passed on us, then it is not the end of time (because we are still around to witness its affects). But even playing along further, if we could somehow be around for the end of time, the fact that time has ended does not mean that a God exists. We wouldn’t believe in a God and his judgement because the finite status of the world, humans, animals, the universe etc. has no explicit or implicit link to any higher being.
A reply to GODINUS.
Evolution does not continue within humans as evolution relies on the survival of the fittest and natural selection. For example when you breed two strong horses you will likely get a stronger horse, Or research dog breeding ( through generations of breeding dogs with for example small ears, the result is a dog with even smaller ears ).
Humans now look after each other meaning those who are not so fit no longer die off so the human race will remain at a constant as the fittest arent the only ones surviving.
Evolution can be seen all around us, certaina animals and fish that adapt to the ever changing environment around us. You cannot deny the theory of evolution if you have enough knowledge on the fact.
The Atheist – You said, “I do not fear death, in fact knowing that this life is “it†is somewhat liberating. It frees you of the feeling that there’s more to come and allows you to enjoy your life for what it is”. — I totally disagree with you. You’ll never comfort anyone who has been sick or disable all their life with this statement. What about someone imprisoned for life, theirs no joy in living like that. And because your not afraid or think your not afraid of death, doesn’t stop the average person from being fearful. Because death simply isn’t a good thing. The average person doesn’t want to die. Why do you think people go to hospitals??? Why is birth celebrated & death morned??? So yes, my fear of dying has caused me to believe in God. And my belief in God is guided by the Bible. Because the Bible expresses and teaches God’s eternal Love for us. And God’s love is stronger than death. So why wouldn’t I believe??? You should believe in this kind of Love also. This is what the Bible teaches. This is why the life of Jesus Christ is so important. The life of Christ teaches the world their is a Love that comes from God, who’s love can make us alive again if we would only believe in his son, and become his disciple.
Now I believe everything the Bible teaches and I understand mostly, what is said therein. I understand enough to know the Bible doesn’t contradicts itself. And I have experienced the Holy Ghost and know for myself God is real.
My testimony of God is my only proof. And my testimony plus other true believer’s testimonies is sufficient proof in this present world. Even if you don’t believe.
Here another question: How does mankind prove Love without faith in it??? When a man tells a woman he loves her, how does she proves it without belief in his love??? Likewise God is Love and his Love is eternal, but how can you know it except you believe in it???
PhairW said: “Here another question: How does mankind prove Love without faith in it??? When a man tells a woman he loves her, how does she proves it without belief in his love??? Likewise God is Love and his Love is eternal, but how can you know it except you believe in it???”
__________
The “love” you speak of is a human emotion rooted in human biology and personal experience, thought, belief and value. “Love” is simply a value one holds like “I like the color red” or “I love cheesecake”. Certainly, the more complex the object of one’s love, the more complex the reasons or justification for that love, the more complex the emotion. Nevertheless, nature of the emotion is the same as “love of football”. It is simply what you value over something else. Whether or not you are truly conscious of the reason why you love a thing, you do in fact have reason. It need not make complete sense to another but it absolutely makes sense within your own experience. What theists usually propose is there is somehow a universal “love” which is somehow detached and can exist separately from they who do the loving. But, of course, they offer no evidence or logic that sufficiently justifies such a proposition. All love is necessarily individual love and defined individually which means, because no two lovers are the same, no two loves are or can be alike. There cannot be a universal love and certainly no “love” disembodied from they who love. How does one explain a “feeling” without the feeler? Because what love you feel in mind and body is only a result of your very unique personal experience, personal thought, personal belief, personal value, your personal belief in the theistic notion of a “god” indeed has much to do with the love you feel regardless of the object of that love, however, it has nothing at all to do with the love a non-theist feels. You both love, but you both love for very different and individual reasons. Again, the reasons why you love need not make any sense to others, however, they always make sense in your own experiences and with regard to who and what you are as an individual – your values. That, indeed, is the only kind of love there is. Your belief in a god helps to define your notion of “love”, however, it is not and cannot be a universal definition of “love” felt by every human being.
Can I prove that I love a thing or a person, a place or time? Certainly. I can outline to anyone who asks what I value and why I value it. Just because proving you “love cheesecake” is difficult – primarily because we are unaccustomed to being confronted in that way – is no implication you cannot prove it. I happen to believe one can prove it simply and beyond any reasonable doubt but, for most of us, only with practice. Science can also easily show the physiological symptoms of “love” versus when one is NOT “in love”. It makes me wonder what the response of persons like yourself would be if shown through science that the atheists you denigrate are quite capable of love without the slightest dependence on belief in a “god”.
On the other hand, the response is predictable – “science is unreliable on the issue of love” you are likely to say. That is always the response of the theist – dismiss the proof altogether without a rational reason for doing so simply because it doesn’t fit into your very narrow universe.
Naumadd – I never said Love couldn’t be proven! My question was purpose to expose the fact that mankind must believe in Love. Now from your response, I gather you can prove Love without faith in it. Right??? Well here your chance, prove it!!! If you want, use your cheesecake example, and prove to me you love cheesecake!!! Or use whatever example you want to prove Love beyond all reasonable doubt. (remember you can’t use faith & belief)
Also, I never said Atheists aren’t capable of Love or feeling Love. Everyone knows or experienced Love one way or another. That’s why Atheism should not be because God is Love and life is created by Love. Now the fact that we must believe in it is the reason why theirs Atheism because you don’t have to believe in it. For example: If a man doesn’t believe he should only love one woman, chances are he will never get married unless he can have multiple wives. Why! because he doesn’t believe in Love that way. Likewise I’m telling you, God is Love, and the Love of God can overcome death. The love of God is the greatest Love of all. And in order to have this love and feel this love you must come to church, learn about Christ Jesus, and receive the Holy Ghost. Otherwise this Love will never be known and God will not be real to you. And to live without the Love of God is to live for a moment in time. The Love you do know is temporal and will fail you and will pass away. But, the Love of God will restore life after death. Now God is the pure source of Love! And the world which is created by God is seperated from him and his love. Now it’s in our best interest to believe in the love of God. But, you don’t have too. Continue to trust the knowledge of science if you want. But I’m telling you, it will fail you!!! and you will wish you had believed in God and his Love. Now is the time to learn and get a better understanding before death finds you. If you die an Atheist it will be too late…..
God is Love.
So god is 3-(19-amino-13-sec-butyl-7-(carboxymethyl)-4-(2-(1-(carboxymethylamino)-5- guanidino-1-oxopentan-2-ylcarbamoyl) pyrrolidine-1-carbonyl)-16-(4-hydroxybenzyl)- 6,9,12,15,18-pentaoxo-1,2-dithia-5,8,11,14,17- pentaazacycloicosan-10-yl)propanoic acid, more commonly known as oxytocin?
Psy – according to science YES!!! According to me, Love means much more than your science project answer!!! And is this how you would answer if someone ask you, what is Love??? I’m sure this answer would be frown upon!!!
=And is this how you would answer if someone ask you, what is Love??? I’m sure this answer would be frown upon!!!
Actually my daughter found it interesting. She has a habit of helping people break their drug addictions and was curious about the similarities between people who are emotionally dependent or had their heart broken and people going through drug withdraw.
PhairW –
“Love” is not a belief. It is a feeling and a very complex one at that. You either feel it or you do not. A feeling is a mental state – think complex chemistry – in which one values another life, a thing, a place or time. Conscious or not, there is always reason to that value. When one is speaking of “love” or speaking of any other value, one must ask three questions – what is of value, of value to whom, and of value for what purpose. There is always a mental process involved with a value and it is so every time with “love”. Of course, most of us do such things seemingly without thinking about it, however, whether or not the process takes place primarily in your conscious mind, it does in fact take place and most often with, of course, the lightning speed of thought.
As to the proof that I love cheesecake – the “what is valued” and the “who values” – why I love cheesecake is indeed a very long thought process with no small amount of physical evidence one must examine which makes proving that love in this forum impractical. Suffice to say, my body regularly needs nourishment – fact, there are certain foods that are nutritious and others that are not – fact, cheesecake has many nutritious elements – fact, because of my unique body chemistry, certain types of foods appeal to me while others do not, i.e., I experience a very uncomfortable revulsion to certain foods while my response to others is the physical rumblings of hunger thus indicating those foods appeal to my physical needs – fact. Cheesecake, in repeated comparison with other foods that appeal to my physical needs, always induces a stronger physical reaction to its presence than most other foods – fact. I happen to value physical pleasure over physical pain – fact. Cheesecake induces physical pleasure in me – fact. I value the eating of cheesecake because of its pleasure inducing qualities – think chemistry again. After many repeated pleasurable experiences involving the eating of cheesecake in contrast to the eating of other foods, my value of cheesecake is more intense than my value of other pleasure-inducing foods – fact. I therefore “love” cheesecake as opposed to simply “liking” cheesecake. Repeated real pleasurable experiences involving the eating of cheesecake has created a great amount of what we call “experience” attached to the concept of “cheesecake”. Not only does the actual real eating of cheesecake induce pleasure, through experience, the mere thought of eating cheesecake induces pleasure. This is the nature of love.
Also, I’ve been a so-called “atheist” all of my life. I have committed to and married three different women. The love I felt for each was genuine and intensely passionate. That the first two dissolved was for complex reasons. It had nothing to do with a lack of love and commitment on my part and had everything to do with a lack of love and commitment on theirs. I love them still because, like the cheesecake, there were many pleasurable experiences with each one despite the later difficulties. My memories of those experiences is what causes me to continue to love them from afar. More accurately, one might say I love the women in my memory rather than the actual women as they are today, but that’s a longer conversation.
All in all, I do not have to believe in love – I feel it or I do not.
The only reason I can immediately see for needing to believe in love is the fact one does not feel it. That seems rather sad to me. Each of us ought to be in a constant state of love for many things, not the least of which, and in my considered opinion the most important of all, is love of ourselves. I have no doubt, although it may seem such, NO one is actually in a state where they do NOT feel love and must therefore believe in it.
Hello again Naumadd – Now listen, I never said Love is a belief…, I said you must believe in Love! Likewise God is not a belief, you must believe in God. For example: haven’t you ever said or heard someone said trust me or believe me???
Now, your proof of Love for cheesecake is not proof!!! All you provided was an general explanation as to why a person could like or love cheesecake. Now what happen if I said I understand your explanation but I still don’t believe you. You could be a good actor who expresses Love for cheesecake. What now??? How do you prove Love???
Now you said, “All in all, I do not have to believe in love – I feel it or I do not.
Your Right!!! you don’t have too… But you’ll never experience and feel the Love of God without faith in it.
Also, I don’t like cheesecake!!! I never had or taste cheesecake. Yet I tell people I don’t like cheesecake when I never had it. Now don’t you think I have to be convinced it’s good and I would like it. And how would this be possible without me believing I would like it???
Phairw- in regards to your March 3 post at 8:31 PM….you said, “Now listen, I never said Love is a belief…, I said you must believe in Love! Likewise God is not a belief, you must believe in God…”
if you believe in love, then you have a belief in love…and if you believe in “god”, then you believe in “god”….which makes your statement 100% contradictory….just sayin “god is not a belief, you must believe in god…” is the same thing as ‘you must believe in god, but god is not a belief’?? …just sayin…. i would have followed your argument with more interest as i love to analyze things, but you not only seem to contradict yourself, you also seem to be trying to press your religion on others….i am all for stating your opinion, and i will listen and respect it, but to force something or try to….no cool….in my opinion…
Phairw- in regards to your March 3 post at 8:31 PM….you said, “Now listen, I never said Love is a belief�, I said you must believe in Love! Likewise God is not a belief, you must believe in God…”
if you believe in love, then you have a belief in love…and if you believe in “god”, then you believe in “god”….which makes your statement 100% contradictory….just sayin “god is not a belief, you must believe in god…” is the same thing as ‘you must believe in god, but god is not a belief’?? …just sayin…. i would have followed your argument with more interest as i love to analyze things, but you not only seem to contradict yourself, you also seem to be trying to press your religion on others….i am all for stating your opinion, and i will listen and respect it, but to force something or try to….no cool….in my opinion…
PhairW – You’re attempting to make the point that you must “believe in love”. As I have said, there is no reason to believe in love when one can merely experience it first-hand. Also, unless one has experienced love first-hand, “belief in love” is impossible. Without a frame of reference from personal experience or one that can be deduced from personal experience, you can’t possibly understand what the concept of “love” is to believe in it. Of course, if you’ve had personal experience with feelings of love, what would be the utility of belief in it? Why insist on the necessity of believing in love when you’ve genuinely felt the emotion for yourself? One can understand why one can only generally “believe” what one is told about other planets in the solar system or perhaps what one is told about animal species in the Antarctic. Without personal experience regarding these things, belief is all one has … unless, of course, one eventually acquires direct experience with those things. It is then that belief is no longer necessary. One can now speak of them from personal experience. Belief no longer has any utility with regard to those things you’ve directly experienced.
I understand you reject my “proof” of my love for cheesecake. As I stated, direct observation of my behavioral responses to the eating of cheesecake as well as the physiological reactions for what would qualify as scientific evidence of such is impossible over the internet. Nevertheless, I view your rejection of my reasonable attempt as rather arbitrary and mostly predictable. I’m confident I stated a good argument of proof that I indeed “love” cheesecake and feel no need to give you more of an effort.
You state that you don’t like cheesecake but yet you’ve never tasted it, i.e., never had direct physical experience with the eating of cheesecake. I would submit you DON’T actually hate cheesecake but rather you hate the IDEA of cheesecake which is a very different matter. Your idea is quite likely related to actual physical experience with other things, perhaps with cheeses and cakes and the idea of combining the two together seems repulsive to you in spite of the fact you have no direct experience with cheesecake itself. This is something we humans do all the time, however, understand your alleged dislike of cheesecake has nothing to do with cheesecake itself. It can’t because you’ve not directly experienced it. As for attempting to convince you that you’d like cheesecake, the only argument I could make to do that without your actual sampling of cheesecake is to point out that I love it, I love it for very concrete reasons which have been repeated numerous times and I would perhaps supplement that argument with the fact that millions around the world also love cheesecake. The belief that might arise in your mind will be belief in my honesty as regards my own experiences and my honesty as regards to what I know about the experiences of others relating to cheesecake. You will believe or you won’t based on your own experiences and your own reasoning abilities. All of this belief, however, becomes moot the moment you actually try cheesecake directly. From that point on, assuming you don’t leave your liking or disliking to just one sample, your like or dislike of cheesecake will derive from actual experience, not belief. In any event, before you try it, you do not have to believe you’ll like it, you simply have to believe what I’m telling you enough that you are convinced to try it. No argument of mine will be sufficient until you physically sample it and make up your own damned mind.
As for “god”, unless you have directly experienced a “god”, all you have is belief, not experience. That belief might have some arguable support … then again, it quite likely will not. In any case, as to any claims to direct experience with a “god”, to convince others of the truth of that experience, you must provide the means for others to directly experience the same and/or provide sufficient deductive support for your belief without direct experience, otherwise your attempt to prove your claims is likely to fail. In my “proof” of my love of cheesecake, I admitted up front you could not directly experience the physical evidence of my “love of cheesecake”, however, as I stated, I believe I provided a argument from general facts to allay most reasonable doubts to my claim which you arbitrarily dismiss. Any “proof” one can give over the internet is bound to be incomplete, however, I never originally stated a conclusive proof could be given over the internet. I merely said I could prove it beyond reasonable doubt without committing to where and when, how or to whom. It would have been irrational to do so because, again, such conclusive proof is impossible in a mere text posting.
Naumadd – You don’t like to answer my questions!!! Your like a man in politics…, Listen, I know what I’m attempting to do, you don’t have to tell me. Only let me know if you don’t understand me Okay! And I will do a better job of getting my point across.
Now, I was so glad to read your response this time because you said some things I totally agree with…, I know I said this earlier but I’ll said it again: I have experienced, felt, and encountered PURE LOVE!!! And I can testify it was GOD!!! I know for myself God is Real!!! And that their only One true and Living, Almighty God. Whose unforgetable Love can conquer death. I have come to know God’s love by the presents of the Holy Ghost in me. I can feel it when I pray, mediate, and many times I feel the presents of God when reading the Bible. This wonderful feeling of Love is greater than the love & joy a personal feels if he wins the lottery or comes into a lot of money somehow. This wonderful feeling is comforting to know and helps me face life. For I believe it give me power to overcome all pain and sorrow the world could offer….,
Now is this proof, God is Real??? I said, I can feel his love!!! Many other christians may tell you the same.
Going by what you say, I don’t believe, I know God is Real. And your Right!!! But, I still have to believe in Love because Love is how we build and live our lives!!!
For example: You got married because the love you and your wife feel for each other, made you BELIEVE it would last until death and ya’ll built a life together, Right??? (if not please explain why you got married)
Also keep in mind marriage has nothing to do with science and has everything to do with faith, after all it’s orgin is from the BIBLE!!!
Phairw asked: “Now don’t you think I have to be convinced it’s good and I would like it.”
No I don’t. Personally I like cheesecake covered with strawberries or raspberries and you are free to evaluate that information on your own. I will not insult your intelligence by presuming you are so incompetent and stupid that you can’t think for yourself. I respect your right to not try cheesecake for your own reasons.
Psy – I’m not sure you understand! I know I could evaluate that info on my own, but I choose not too… for reasons you may not understand or agree with but I choose not to eat cheesecake. Now, I thank you for not insulting my intelligence because I can think for myself and I know full well all I have to do is taste it and see if I like. But I don’t want too… Now this convo is not about cheesecake. It’s about proving you love something or someone without faith involved. Okay!!! Now I won’t eat cheesecake simple because I don’t believe I’ll like it and so I don’t want to try it.
Now you may say, I don’t know what I’m missing and you might be Right because if I taste it, I might find out I do like cheesecake. But I don’t care, I’m fine without cheesecake in my life.
On the other hand, concerning God, I’m here to help the Atheist community and try to convince you guys that God is real. Don’t treat God like I treat cheesecake because you will be the big loser at the end of time. And God isn’t someone you can live without…, Forever!!!
Phairw said “On the other hand, concerning God, I’m here to help the Atheist community and try to convince you guys that God is real. Don’t treat God like I treat cheesecake because you will be the big loser at the end of time. And God isn’t someone you can live without…, Forever!!!”
Another variation on the eternal damnation sales pitch and claims that its better than cheesecake. Either you are a con-man or you’ve been conned into doing the dirty work. I have read the Bible from cover to cover along with other religious books back in the mid 90’s and concluded that I have no use for religion. Yet you think its alright to treat me like some simpleton. Why do you think think its alright to insult my intelligence?
If you do some research you will find in general that atheist are analytical thinkers and not emotional thinkers. As for myself I can’t relate to your emotional sales pitch however if you can find something along the lines of the endorphin rush caused by over thinking instead of the illusion of security brought about by your love concept I’d be interested in hearing about it.
Do you have anything that appeals adrenaline? I occasionally enjoy skydiving, rock climbing, high diving and flying airplanes.
Basically what I see you selling here is no different than drug addiction to your love, fear concept.
Psy – I’m sorry if you feel I have insulted you. That was/is not my intentions. Forgive me! But, I will not apoligze for our disagreement about the existence of God.
Now you said you read the Bible from Beginning to End. And You have no use for religion. GOOD! me too…, Religion is worthless without purpose. I don’t read the Bible for religion, I read the Bible for salvation. I don’t believe in God for religion, I believe in God because of his Love. Religion is just a way of life i.e I live religiously as a believer in God and you live religiously as a non-believer. Now I’m not here to talk about religion. I here to talk about God!
God is Love!!! That’s what I believe. Love is the creator of the World!!! That’s what I believe. Without Love/God there is no life. So according to me, it is not wise to have no belief in Love/God because without it theirs no life. The world in which we live is dying!!! We are dying!!! This should seriously concern everyone. Death is the #1 problem in the world, Yet we seem to just live life without trying to overcome this problem. But, we are looking for cures for AIDS, and many other sickness; we eat food to live and some of us tries to prolong death by eating healthy; basically our every effort is to live and not die. But it’s all in vain because death will find us. Why!!! Because the LOVE that lives in this world is fading away; imperfect; failing us; and is becoming non-existent. The Love in the heart of mankind will die. And when it does, life will be no more. All because we don’t believe in Love/God. Love which Atheists simplify as only an emotion is capable of bringing a man & women together and create a family. And that family can become tribes and those tribes can become a nation(s). Creating a world built by L-O-V-E. But, we don’t believe!!! So we die. Mankind’s knowledge of love today almost can’t build a home for our children any more. With all the abortions, and foster homes, baby mommas & fathers, children not knowing the parents, and etc. It’s no wonder to me why we’re dying. The Bible is Right!!! We are lost and we can’t see. We live like animals, without knowledge of pure LOVE!!! And it’s sad because we were made in the image of God.
I cannot speak for my wives, but I got married because I personally felt love for each of them and personally desired to live with them within the commitment of a marriage. If there was or is belief in anything regarding my marriages, in the case of the first two, I had what was at the time a reasonable belief in the authenticity of each of those persons with regard to commitment and their claims of love for me. Some of their actions reinforced my belief, others did not. In the end, their behaviors falsified my belief. Neither were authentic in the claims of commitment or love. I divorced them. As for my current wife, based on what I’ve been able to observe in our interactions both before and since the wedding, I again have a reasonable belief she is authentic in her claims of commitment and love. Again, some of her behavior affirms my belief, some it does not. None of this was a “belief in love”, it was belief in the authenticity of each of their claims of commitment and love for me. Had I not had that supportable belief based on my real experiences with them before the actual weddings, no weddings would have taken place and I would have moved on. I did not “believe in love” for each of these persons – I felt it. The marriages were not based on a belief in love, but rather a reasonable belief in the authenticity of each person’s claims. A marriage isn’t about how I feel, it is about how my potential mate feels as well. I can know without any doubt what MY feelings are, however, I have to take as only belief what their feelings are. I can believe their feelings are genuine either for rational reasons or irrational ones. I’m convinced my belief regarding how each felt was rational for the duration of each relationship in that their claims to commitment and love seemed genuine in the beginning and, over time, changed to inauthentic which prompted me each time to end the relationship. I do not believe I made an error at any time but rather their commitment and love changed over time from authentic to inauthentic. I acted according to what information I had all along the way and continue to do so in my current marriage.
I do not belief in MY love – I feel it. Belief is not required. I continue, however, to believe my current wife loves me and with demonstrable reason. When I’m no longer convinced there is reason to believe she loves me, I will end the relationship regardless of my personal feelings for her. My belief in the authenticity of her claims of commitment and love are dependent on her behavior. It is not an empty belief, it is a supportable belief. That belief will change when her behavior changes.
“Also keep in mind marriage has nothing
to do with science and has everything
to do with faith, after all it’s orgin
is from the BIBLE!!!”
Though I agree there can be belief or “faith” involved in an individual’s thinking and behavior with regard to “marriage”, I do not agree “faith” is necessarily part of it. I disagree that “marriage” between two or more human beings has “nothing to do with science”. It is absolutely a matter for science with regard to human behavior as much as are questions such as why we create and need music or why some people have blue eyes and others have brown. Science is merely the tool we use to understand the nature of everything we can observe – and most certainly including ourselves – and how to manipulate it to our advantage (technology). There is nothing beyond the study of science. I say this because science is merely the practice of accurate observation then filtered through logically-consistent reason – our senses and our minds. Because we necessarily use our senses and reason, albeit mostly inefficiently, to come to “know” or believe anything at all, we are doing precisely what science does but more accurately and more logically. “Marriage” as a human behavior is most certainly a topic of study in psychology, sociology, anthropology, politics, economics, and on and on. There is no aspect of the human experience beyond the scope of science to study and to attempt to explain.
I also disagree that the origins of ALL marriage are in the Judeo-Christian and Muslim religious documents. The origin of the human behavior called “marriage” predates those religions. Granted the Jewish, Christian, or Muslim BRANDS of marriage may or may not originate with those religions, however, the broader concept of “marriage” does not. In fact, I’d venture to say the concept of “marriage” – an intensely mutually-held commitment of one individual with one or more others likely predates our species. The Jewish, Christian and Muslim notions of “marriage” are certainly very narrow ones. My notion of marriage is much broader than any of those. To me a “marriage” is merely a deep commitment to voluntarily merge one’s own life with that of one or more others with the intent of maintaining that merging indefinitely. My notion of marriage does not callously exclude any individual from the possibility of marriage with one or more others. It most certainly doesn’t require unsupportable belief in an alleged “supernatural” and all others claim that includes. “Marriage” is a human behavior. Human beings exist, and human beings marry or they do not just as they eat cheesecake or they do not. There is no belief in a “god” necessary for any of that to occur or to be true.
Phairw, no need to apologize, I understand religion is a form of collectivism and how collectivist need to keep each other in check and reaffirm their beliefs. However I am an individualist:
From Wikipedia, Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, or social outlook that stresses independence and self-reliance. Individualists promote the exercise of one’s goals and desires, while opposing most external interference upon one’s choices, whether by society, or any other group or institution. Individualism is opposed to collectivism, which stress that communal, community, group, societal, or national goals should take priority over individual goals. Individualism is also opposed to any tradition or other form of external moral standard being used to limit an individual’s choice of actions.
“Religion is worthless without purpose. I don’t read the Bible for religion, I read the Bible for salvation. I don’t believe in God for religion,”
Personally I see no reason for a God or Gods, but as for purpose in the US religion seems to be for uniting people and communities against threats real or imagined and social interaction. It also makes it easier to put together an army which won’t question those who project the illusion of authority, a god figure or president.
I perceive Far Eastern religion as promoting emotional growth, as an example meditative states supposedly quiet the mind from the constant random thoughts we all have constantly roaming through our minds. They claim this allows quicker emotional growth. The counter argument is that it takes away your ambition. If your goal is selflessness this is a good thing, however if you live in a capitalist society you are considered a lazy bum.
As for the value of life and family I agree with you to a point excluding your mythology of course. As for tribal and nationalism they are forms of divisionism and exclusionism. I see the world without imaginary boarders, sadly most of the world does not.
“we don’t believe!!! So we die.”
Hasn’t anyone told you that its OK to die. Belief in a god or gods won’t change the fact that we are mortal.
Okay first Naumadd – Why are you working so hard to disagree with what I say??? Your last arguement (to me) was very bad!!! I know your trying to logically disprove the Christian God but now it seems you just want to be diffcult.
I agreed with you that Love is something you can feel. But, I still say you must believe in it, in order to make a life. Here’s your argument using marriage for our example: I did not “believe in love†for each of these persons – I felt it. The marriages were not based on a belief in love, but rather a reasonable belief in the authenticity of each person’s claims…., Now maybe I don’t understand what your saying because, your statement seems to me, just another way of saying they believe in your LOVE for them and you believe in their Love for you…. which means you got married because you and they, believe in LOVE!!! Now WHY you think & say you didn’t Believe in Love is beyond me. Either I misunderstood you, or your just going to be diffcult & disagree with me no matter what I say. If I misunderstood you please, I need further explanation of your argument. But, if your just being diffcult at all cost, there’s no need for me to continue chatting with you because this convo will be going nowhere.
Psy – lol….. I’m trying my best to figure you out!!! I don’t know if your serious with some of you comments…,
Your last argument seems to be sincere except your last statement:
You said, “Hasn’t anyone told you that its OK to die. Belief in a god or gods won’t change the fact that we are mortal.”
Are you serious??? Are you telling me it’s ok to die??? Is this how you comfort people who lost a love one at funerals??? Will this be your words of wisdom to family and friends if they find out they have CANCER, AIDS, or any other serious sickness…..???
My friend, your Right!!! believing in God or gods won’t change the fact that we will die. But telling me it’s Okay to die is not comforting to me and many others and shouldn’t be comforting to you. But that’s your business!!! Now, I have found comfort dealing with death by believing in God/Love. I hope to live again after death by the power of Love/God…, this is my comfort dealing with death. Facing death is the hardest thing in life, if you ask me. And we all need comfort!!! Please, I beg you, don’t tell a mother whose son got shot, it Okay if he dies and doesn’t come back; or a child whose parents died in a car accident, it’s okay that your parents are dead.
I’m not able to understand your logic and/or rational answer for death. So if your serious please explain.
I have lost many friends and family in my lifetime and have found comfort when I told that its OK to die. As have other, I have heard it told to people on their deathbeds as a nurse told me that some people need permission to die. Fear of death is natural but it is stronger in some more than others sometimes to the point of phobia – Thanatophobia. I am in no hurry to die but I am not scared to death of death.
David Carradine from the old Kung Fu TV series “How do we know that death isn’t the greatest thing?”.
Psy – ok, I see your point. But, I’m in total disagreement.
The words you offer people to deal with death (to me) is false comfort, and ignores the seriousness of death in order to deal with the natural fear of death. I would never tell anyone it’s okay to DIE!!! And nobody will never be able to comfort me with those words…, These words ignores all my efforts to live. These words say what’s the point of hospitals, medicine, cures and looking for cures when it’s okay to die. And if I include your last statement it gets worst: Could David Carradine be saying what’s the point of life when death might be better???
I totally understand everyone must somehow, someway deal with the fear of death because if they don’t, how will they go on with their lives? But, what your offering for comfort is wrong. And how you and anyone else are comfort with these words is beyond me. Ya’ll have overcome the fear of death (falsely to me), but actually dealing with death itself you offer no answers.
=but actually dealing with death itself you offer no answers.
Why would you assume there would be an acceptable answer?
That may be why so many people turn to religion or God, I didn’t find any answers there, just false hope and empty promises in exchange for obedience. I concluded the god concept was the equivalent of selling your soul for a promise.
Psy – Right!!! that is why people believe in God because an answer to solve the problem of death is given!!!
Now you didn’t find an answer because you don’t believe. You say false hope because you don’t understand; and you say empty promises in exchange for obedience because you do not excerise faith in God so you have no desire to follow. You can’t prove nothing you say. You can only say I don’t believe!!! Which is your choice & your right to do!!!
But, I believe and that’s my choice & my right to do!!! I found an answer for death in the Bible and I’m sad you missed it. The hope offered in the Bible isn’t false to me it’s real and comforting. Promises recorded in the Bible are rich & desirable and my obedience is a very small price to pay.
In conclusion, God’s Love is free and offered as a gift to the world but only believers receive. And theirs nothing I can sell God that he needs. He’s only looking for me to love him in return.
PhairW – What I’ve been trying to say about my relationships with each of my wives is their behavior testified to what their feelings for me likely were or are and my behavior testified to what my feelings likely were for them. You want to use the word “believe” as I “believed their love”. What I’m trying to say is I KNOW they loved me and they KNEW I loved them through genuinely real expressions in action and word. When I was no longer convinced by their word and action they did NOT love me, were NOT committed to me, I broke the relationships. I’m merely making the distinction between “believing” and “knowing”. If I merely believed they loved me, it would have far less to do with any evidence of their love and commitment and far more to do with my wanting to cling to an unsubstantiated belief. When I say I KNOW they were committed to me and KNOW they loved me, that knowledge is based on actual behaviors that could not have been interpreted any other way than that they were committed to and loved me. In other words – evidence of love. Without such evidence, it would have been belief without good reason for it.
I approach the notion of a “god” in precisely the same way, if I see concrete and deductive reason to think such a thing exists, I will know it exists. I will not have to BELIEVE it exists. For me, because I have self-respect and respect for good reasoning versus poor reasoning – my values – I do not indulge in belief without cause. You claim that “god is love”. I experience love all of the time regarding many, many things. I have not once seen any evidence in all of that love that it had to do with anything or anyone except my own mind. I see no reasonable evidence for a “god” or that such “god” is “love”. One would think that, if what theists claim is true, we would see concrete evidence everywhere around us and within us. I’m a reasonable human being and incredibly open to experience, possibilities and likelihoods. If anyone was going to stumble on such an alleged “deity”, I would be it. In fact, in spite of attempting to discover and observe such evidence, I have found none and continue to find none. I cannot believe because such believe has no substance. I cannot know for the same reason.
So it is with “love”. I do not BELIEVE my wife loves me – I know it from her actual behavior. She does not need to believe my love for her, she know I love her from my actual behavior. Neither of us needs belief – we know. We know because we each feel it within ourselves and can feel it coming from the other.
If you BELIEVE I’m merely being difficult rather than attempting to engage in rational discourse with you, you can discontinue addressing me at your leisure. What you don’t KNOW is I’m actually taking great care to engage with you and with all authenticity for a rational discussion. That you believe I’m being deliberately difficult is a false belief. All of the evidence is here in this discussion for you to KNOW I’m being genuine and patient. All you have to do is open to it.
=The hope offered in the Bible isn’t false to me it’s real and comforting.
Comforting? I have no understanding of this need for comfort. What is so scary about life? I mean the world is a playground of things to do, places to go and people to see. I don’t get it.
Naumadd – Okay! I fully understand you now, Thank You!!! I thought you were just being diffcult but, if you review your previous argument, I think you would or should agree it’s different from your current argument/explanation (it doesn’t further explain).
Okay, so now that I feel like we are having a reasonable debative convo…, I still disagree, and I think you’re simply in denial respectfully.
Here’s Why: Can you truthfully say, The Love ya’ll felt/feel for one another never turn on the imagination within??? And if it did Why, if ya’ll didn’t BELIEVE in the Love that brought ya’ll together??? hmmm…..
Now, I said it before and I’ll say it again…, I know God is real because I can feel his LOVE!!! In Life we prove what’s REAL by our five senses, RIGHT??? (Sight, Sound, Taste, Feel/Touch, & smell) If you agree, I testify that God is Real because I can feel him within me. By sight I couldn’t prove God but that’s okay, neither can a blind person. By sound I can’t prove God but that’s Okay, neither can a deaf person. By smell or taste I couldn’t accurately prove God but that’s okay, I need sight and/or maybe hearing even to know what I’m smelling and tasting. But, by feeling him I know he’s REAL and everybody (no matter the conditon) can feel LOVE. Now LOVE come from someone or something alive. Therefore I know God is REAL and I believe in God and the power of his LOVE. Now I can tell you about it and help you understand and even guide you in the direction to receiving this Love for yourself. But, You must have faith or else you will never know what I mean and can never know this level of LOVE.
Psy – I don’t know how you got disconnected from our convo but let me put us back on track…, The comfort being talked about is for death. Death is what’s so scary about life. Death stops life, RIGHT??? I want to live, I think you want to live, so logically Death is a problem, RIGHT??? You said, previously you are an analytical thinker…, so show me!!! Does this make sense to you…???
Now although you comment seems to me off track, I’m still glad you made this statement: “I mean the world is a playground of things to do, places to go and people to see.” — This statement confirms my earlier argument that people who don’t believe in God ignores the seriousness of death. You comfort yourself against the fear of it. And live life without an answer to overcome death. Yes, I know life can be enjoyable. But I (and many others) can’t enjoy life with the gloom of death all around me (us)! Atheism offers me no answers. But God has an answer, so now I can live life free of all my worries concerning death. I hope you understand and we’re now back on track with our convo!!!
I (and many others) can’t enjoy life with the gloom of death all around me (us)!
So why do you insist on converting atheist to your placebo cure for doom and gloom when we don’t suffer from your “authoritarian personality” disorders and insecurities?
Psy – Listen, I’m having trouble understanding you. Your replies are opening wide the door of confusion in my mind. I don’t know if you serious or not, if you’re just being diffcult no matter what I say, or maybe you don’t understand me so our convo can’t stay on track. I’m really starting to become un-interested in your comments!!!
It seems you ignoring everything I say, and only attacking selective portions of my statements that you choose. I’m not ignoring you and I’m taking you very serious, allowing you the chance to prove to me, that there is no GOD! I’m putting my faith on the line and allowing you and anyone else to challenge my belief, point out the faults and/or flaws. Likewise, with the Heading of this forum being: Logically disproving the Christian God, I join in this forum to represent my faith in the Christian God and show the flaws and/or faults of Atheism.
Now please, I’m here to debate with individuals making rational, logical, and reasonable comments that show why they are an Atheist and why they think their Right. Individuals who honestly answers my questions and I do the same. You ignore all of my questions. You have put me in your christian or theist category of crazy losers, and do not debate with me according to what I say. And you want me to answer your questions.
Now I’m willing to try again. I’ll start by answering your last question to me. But, if we continue in this confusion I will stop my replies to you. Okay!!!
Now, to answer your question, I want you to know the truth that God is real and he’s our only help to deal with death. I’m trying to persuade and compel you. There’s nothing “authoritarian” about what I’m doing. You not forced to believe me. I’m not insecure, my belief in God makes me secure. I believe you are insecure but your unaware because you ignore death due to you reasoning of not being afraid of death. (which we discuss earlier). Now can you answer my previous question(s)???
Ok, I feel I’m rejoining this a little late in the day, but your discussions are fascinating.
benjeans – Please don’t confuse evolution and natural selection.
Phairw – I think one of the patterns in your comments is that you are very fearful. You mention using your belief to comfort people who are grieving, or dying, and that comfort that does not take this approach is “false comfort”. Would your approach be of comfort to a family who had just lost a treasured child who was an atheist, or one who was too young to believe or be Christened? Would they not go to purgatory? How would this be of any comfort to a grieving family?
As for love, there has been a great debate here as to whether love is observable or whether love is God. As Psy and I have pointed out, love is an observable reaction in the brain. The feeling we experience is the result of the presence of this chemical reaction. I do not have to believe my partner loves me, she tells me she does and her actions support her statements to the affirmative. I can’t “feel” her love, I can only witness her actions. I’m intrigued as to how you can feel the emotions of another entity, especially since that entity is invisible, imperceptible and completely, absolutely, fundamentally unproven. To take another example, when my partner is happy, a reaction takes place in her amygdala which ultimately leads to a physical change, most notably her smiling. I don’t “feel” her happiness, it’s there for me to see and to perceive. I don’t “believe” her happiness, because there’s no need, I can see it. Even where someone attempts to hide their emotions, the perceptive amongst us can still pick up on micro-emotions and subtle changes in their body. Again, no need to “believe”.
Whilst it certainly seems less romantic to dissect emotions, it’s still a valid exercise and allows us to more effectively treat psychological disorders.
The point of this article was to prove, logically, that the Christian God does no exist. If God is love to you, then that is your view which you’re entitled to. You’ve artfully avoided the crux of the original article though, the suggestion that the God as defined by the Christian Bible cannot exist because it is inherently a contradiction. Whoever wrote the Bible was not infallible, because we know the Bible is inaccurate, describes events that did not take place and continually contradicts itself.
The Atheist – Please understand me! I’m not fearful or living fearfully. My belief in God comforts my fears and believe me, I’m Fine!!! I don’t fear death or anything else for that matter due to my belief in God. Does that mean I can’t be startled, shocked, or even afraid of something or someone like a snake or murder, NO!!! The comfort I found in God, helps me to be able to face the worst of the world’s pain and sorrow it can offer. And I can live free, without fear, knowing and/or believing no matter what, everything will be alright in the end. Now before I believed in God, I lived my life willfully ignoring the reality of death until one day, I thought I was dead. That experience caused me to sober up to the fact that death is real, shouldn’t be ignored, and I needed to find an answer creditable to deal with it.
Now I would try to comfort all people and say, there is a Love that exist, stronger than death, able to bring you back alive again if you would only believe in it. I would tell a greiving family (believers or non-believers), that person (dead one, now gone) is now in the hands of God, God is Love, and their no better place to be. And etc (I hope you get the idea), this would be my words of comfort.
I wouldn’t tell nobody about purgatory because I don’t believe in purgatory, I never read anything about purgatory in the Bible. That’s what Cathloic’s teaches shamefully in the christian faith. I apoligze to you and the Atheist’s community for that (I’m deeply sorrow, I wish I could stop the lies but sorrowfully, lies are everywhere).
Now you’re Right, I never disagreed with PSY and I’m not disagreeing with You, Love is observable!!! Whether it be in the brain, or in couples, or in families, marriages, and etc. YES it’s true, Love can be observed. But Love must be felt and how can someone feel love unless they believe in that love??? You guys give examples trying to disprove what I say. Ya’ll are in denial!!! For example, again: We (mankind) identify what’s real with our five senses including Love. Now Love is invisble to the eyes, it’s an emotion RIGHT??? Love can’t be heard, an emotion can’t make a sound RIGHT??? Is Love something you can taste or smell? (I hope we can agree the answer is NO) But, you can feel it that’s how we now it’s REAL!!! Now in order to observe Love with our other senses and call it REAL, we must believe in it. I don’t know how a man can see a woman and call her the love of his life unless faith is involved in what he see. A woman crying for her dead child, is that not the sound of her Love grieving? would you believe she love her child according to the sound of her cries. (remember some people can fake) Taste of Love, check out our cheesecake convo. Smell of Love, basiclly on the same level of taste. Depends on the person and what they believe smell or taste good (after all, everybody will not agree). I hope you can understand my point and argument.
Now you’re Right again!!! about the article heading. So unless someone still wants to talk about the previous argument about God is Love, I’m ready to get back on track. Now there’s no contradictions from a christian’s point of veiw of the Bible. But, to a non-believer the Bible is full of contraditions. Now, who’s view of the Bible is right??? (that would be the question). HMMM…..
Now I’m a christian and I pray to God!!! To you this may seem retarded and stupid, Why, you don’t believe! (maybe I’m talking to the air or to myself with my eyes closed as far as you can tell but I’m certainly not talking to nobody, because your not blind and you don’t see anyone).
Likewise the Bible will offend all non-believers in like fashion. Without faith and/or a believing heart, you all are RIGHT to say the Bible contradicts itself. I would totally agree with you if I didn’t have faith. And I would totally agree with you if you can prove my faith in God is misplace. Faith, Love, and Hope are the three most important things needed to understanding the Life of a Christian. Love is #1 on the list because faith and hope is void & worthless without Love. But Love won’t survive without Faith and hope. You must Believe in Love and hope in it’s abilities.
I hope I may myself clear and to the point
Sorry Phairw, I still don’t get it.
But its not your fault, I think its a lack of a common point of reference. You say ‘I feel, I believe’ while I say ‘I see, I think’. Obliviously I’m not on the same channel. Its late but I will see what I can find on the internet to help me understand or relate to what you are saying.
“I am inclined to say that possibilities do exist. Even if no actual universe existed, its possibility would exist, together with the possibilities of every other possible universe, all comprising an infinite set of possibilities. . . But how can mere possibilities exist? One must be logically ruthless, and say that either there are really no possibilities or that they exist in something actual. In that case, since possibilities will always, eternally, exist, there never is absolutely nothing. There is always something, and something that can contain in itself every possibility. A definition of a ‘necessarily existing being’ is that it is a being which exists in every possible logical world (where ‘a world’ is taken to cover absolutely everything that actually exists). If, wherever anything is possible, there exists an actual being which contains that possibility, and if that actual being is the same in all possible worlds, then by definition that actual being is a necessarily existing being.
“Now all possibilities, as possibilities, are necessarily existent. That is, every possible world exists in every other possible world, precisely as a possible, but usually non-actual, world. Therefore the actual being that contains each possible world is one and the same being that contains all possible worlds. So there is one and only one actual and necessarily existing being. It will itself exist of necessity, and it will necessarily contain all possibilities in itself.”
– Keith Ward
This is a pointless exercise. Every scientific attempt to prove there is no god can just be countered by “He’s God. He made science that way. Every result we find through science was by his design”.
Science can NOT be used to disprove the existence of divine beings.
The christian bible, on the other hand, is clearly a piece of crap fiction, and all efforts should be made to enlighten people of that.
justsomedude – I’m sorry you feel that way!!! — As a christian, I joined the chat because of the title heading. And I’m allowing my faith in God to be challenged by anyone who think they can logically disproved the Christian God. No one has done so, YET !!!!! 🙂 ……all they have done is shown & explained there doubt in the Christian God.
Now I would love to hear you reasoning for saying, “The christian bible, on the other hand, is clearly a piece of crap fiction” You sound like your able to “CLEARLY” show and/or explain. So here’s your chance please enlighten me, so I can stop foolishly living as a christian.
The Atheist – I like the new look of your blog site!!!! VERY NICE!!! But the pic of a Christmas Tree by my name, I don’t like. Can I send you a pic or something???? I know the christmas tree idea came from the church (Catholic church to be exact). But, I don’t support Christmas, A christmas tree, Santa Claus, and many other lies not found in the BIBLE!!! Thank You in advance.
Hi Phairw. Glad you like the new look. The picture next to your name, called an avatar, is actually randomly generated. It does look like a Christmas tree, but I think it’s supposed to be some sort of germ or something.
If you want to change the picture, you can do so at gravatar.com. It’s a completely free service that links your email address to a picture. Then, when you leave a comment on any site that supports it, the image will show up next to your name. It lets you show a consistent image across all the sites that you comment on.
Thank You very much!!!
I thought that image was a christmas tree and I don’t want you or anyone else to think of me a the common christian who supports everything taught in christian history and in our present day. I follow the Holy Bible (a library of 66 books). That’s IT!!!! If the Bible doesn’t support it, I don’t either.
Thanks again, for that website info.
haha i changed mine to Zooey Deschanel. because she’s a BABE-A-SAURUS
YOU PPL ARE GOING TO BURN IN THE LAKE OF FIRE BECAUSE GOD IS GOING TO BE SO MAD THAT YOU TRIED (BUT FAILED) TO DISPROVE THE BIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GODISSOREAL – Now why would you say that??? What do you hope to accomplish with this statement??? Are you trying to scare ppl into the church??? Don’t you know the Atheist community understand already that the Bible talks about Heaven & Hell???
I’m a believer in Christ as you are. And I’m disappointed in you with this comment. You will win nobody this way!!! All this does is make the Atheist community continue to frown on the Church and Christians. PPL who consider themselves an Atheist lack understanding of REAL & TRUE LOVE!!! We will do better to help them by explaining the reality of God, instead of chasing them away from the church with statement such as your. I hope you will reconsider your comment because now is not the time or place for this statement. Okay!!!
Glad you are a believer in Christ, and I pray God give you understanding and wisdom to win other for God.
Hmmmm….. God DOES exist. He is not the “God” we know of but a person. I have a theory that proves existence of a “God” but, This is not the “christian God” but another power. Let’s start from the moment the world began. After that, our universe goes through 4 billion years. Then, suddenly, Christianity appeared! Why does it just pop up? The “BIBLE” said that the inspiration comes from John the baptist. Does it sound weird? 1 person influenced another which in the long run influenced more than 1 billion people. One person with some helpers? No. It is larger than that. This is because Jesus is a TIME TRAVELER. God is THE FIRST TIME TRAVELER IN HISTORY. I will explain this more if I had the time but I don’t have. But I will Explain more.
The Atheist – I’m glad you seem to have finally accepted the existence of a “Almighty God”. GOOD!!! Now you just need a better understand about GOD.
So now, If you truly believe in the existence of God, ARE YOU STILL An ATHEIST???? because if so, WHY & HOW when, Atheism whole existence is based on, NON belief in the existence of GOD?
Phairw – I’m afraid that wasn’t me, but rather someone pretending to be me. Unfortunately, theists have to resort to dishonesty, lies and deception to try and get their points across. It’s a real shame.
god otherwise known as Lysergic acid diethylamide
this conversation will never end, so i say to each their own
PhairW
Science knows much about why and how we love. It typically asks questions religions rarely if ever do, which is why science knows and will always know far more about every human emotion – love included – than religion will ever be able to explain or fully appreciate beyond a childlike understanding. Lucky for religion, you can always learn from science. Sadly, science can learn nothing from the irrationality of religion save information regarding its dysfunctions.
Just for some interesting reading, here’s an article at New Scientist magazine online. I’m certain a search on “scientific explanation for love” will get you much more.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9981-instant-expert-love.html?full=true
I disagree with your premise, sir! Smart Christians don’t believe that the Bible that we have is infallible.
I don’t believe in God but this argument is weak and stupid and makes illogical assumptions and jumps, not unlike arguments proving the existence of God. Firstly one of the main premises of your argument is a complete falsehood. The Bible is not ‘the true word of God’ and I would say that only the most ignorant of Christians would claim that it was. The Bible is an account written by others and even that has been subject to thousands of years worth of change and alteration. This argument may apply to religious texts like the Qu’ran which claim to have been directly written by God, but not the Bible. Secondly, because the Bible is incorrect does not prove the non-existence of God. As I mentioned the message may have been changed and perverted over time but thats not to say that God isn’t still around, sitting on a cloud shaking his head. Just because there is a typo on the box, doesn’t mean that its empty. Also, if you are admitting that there are inaccuracies in the Bible, why does it necessarily have to be true that God is infallible? Could this not be the one inaccuracy that presupposes all the other inaccuracies?
In conclusion, I don’t think it is particularly helpful to sit around picking holes in the Bible because at the end of the day a monkey could do that. I also don’t think it is particularly helpful to devote yourself to an ancient scripture which history proves has been continually and strategically edited and censured of thousands of years for hundreds of strange and sinister reasons but at the end of the day you can’t prove the existence if God right or wrong (although the Bible is dead wrong)and to claim you have is both arrogant and stupid.
Hughbert – I don’t know who you are directing your comment to….? But, I’ll answer anyhow.
I understand the Bible was written by men and also translated by men. And I understand this leave plenty of room for errors over the many years. I agree 100%!!! But yet and still I believe the Bible is the written Word of God How we got the Bible is important but what is written is more important.
Now it is written God is Love!!! So I ask you, true or false??? If false, explain Okay!!! Then I would be able to see the errors better. If God doesn’t exists, then tell me how LOVE isn’t real??? This is what Christians believe or should believe.
Now, I’m sorry you have a problem with individuals such as I, that believe that the Bible is God’s infallible Word. But, that’s your problem. The reasons you stated in your comment is not why I say the Bible is infallible. I believe the Bible is infallible because of the meaning of the words written therein. So I’ll say it again, it is written in the Bible that God is Love!!! Here’s your chance to prove the Bible fallible. Just prove this Bible written statement wrong.
“Chris Sanford – I hope you realize the absurdity of your argument. Do you believe Harry Potter is real because it gives an accurate representation of an English housing estate? There are, of course, historically accurate parts of the Bible, but they aren’t the contentious parts. There’s absolutely no proof for any of the so-called miracles, any proof of Jesus as a person ever existing (the first record comes a few hundred years after his supposed death, which leaves plenty of time for the fable to spread into common culture. If he was a real person, you’d expect some record of his existence at the time he was alive, there is none) nor any proof of any Gods. Ever. Anywhere. As for the references to Jesus being made before he was supposedly alive, perhaps they came from the numerous other prophets and deities in the region that shared the same basic story as the Christian Jesus (born of a virgin, resurrected, performed miracles etc.). The stories had been circulated for centuries before the period in which Jesus was supposedly born, except they were used by different religions. The Christian story is far from original.”
Then what are you suggesting that someone actually took their sweet time fabricated all the prophecies from the Old Testement regarding Jesus, waited a couple hundred years and I dunno maybe he left a post it note for some other guy to fabricate the story of Jesus and make every prophecy mentioned about Jesus in the old testement to coincide with the actual account of Jesus in the New testement? I dunno you seem like a “BRIGHT” individual so how about you give us a couple more intelligent comebacks than perhaps it was a fable passed around the region. So you’re expecting Christians to believe that someone took EVERY prophecy in the Bible regarding Jesus and fabricated EVERY prophecy into the account of Jesus ministry, which you think was a was merely a story passed down from other PAGAN religions?
Or are you attempting to say that the account of Jesus life in the New testement from 4 different authors were actually fables from the distant past passed down from pagan religions and magically showed up in what we call the Bible today, yah ok.
Yes, clearly it’s absurd to suggest that someone wrote a story, about the past. That’s never happened.
There are problems with the Bible. We know that there are numerous religions that pre-date Christianity and the Bible that essentially contain many of the same elements. Jesus’s story, in particular, seems heavily borrowed from pre-existing stories (for example Horus, even though parts of the similarity are debated. There are so many others that the debate seems almost pointless).
So given that, what’s more likely. The fables that had already been passed down through multiple generations (after all, the religions that contain the same aspects are fairly spread out, in a historical context), simply being updated to the current environment. – OR – Your wonderful creator God deciding that he liked these stories so much that he decided to “do a remake” of his own, and send his only son to earth to walk in the shadow of many religious icons that had gone before him?
Either your God is very unimaginative, or he doesn’t exist.
The bible contains self contradictory passages and very silly things (four legged insects, cud chewing rabbits, etc.). However, this attack upon the self contradictory bible only dismantles biblical literalists. However, there are some bigger and nicely simple logical contradictions as well, first, the problem of evil. ‘If god has the power to stop evil and does not want to, he is not omnibenevolent. If god wants to stop evil but does not have the power, he is not omnipotent.’ There is also the stone paradox which takes down most definitions of omnipotence. ‘Can god create a stone so big he can not lift it?’ If he can, then there is something he cannot do (lift the stone). If he can’t, there is something he cannot do (create said stone).
You obviously have no knowledge of the bible whatsoever, you simply not knowing what God’s plan for us is a testement for that.
What did you think Revelation was all about? Seriously where did you get that “fact” that God couldn’t Destroy Evil and that he didn’t want to, you have some kind of damage to read the Bible which I’m pretty sure you didn’t and come to that Conclusion when it’s Clearly stated in the Bible that Sinners will be destroyed along with Sin itself as stated in Revelation Chapter 20.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rev&c=20&v=1&t=NKJV
and oh damn you really got God with that paradox there, it’s funny how humans try to limit God with their own standards, their own limitations, amusing really.
It’s not humans trying to limit God, much like this article it’s just humans trying to understand what other humans believe a God is. It’s a valid pursuit, and even theists should try and understand their view of their God (after all, religion is a very personal thing, with many subscribers to the same religion having slightly different views of the same deity).
I’ve heard a similar theoretical arguments that discuss whether God is capable of killing himself, or whether God is capable of creating another being of equal power and prominence. I won’t go into detail here, because cathy has inspired me to write a post about it.
To everyone who has left comments since my last comment — I don’t know why you guys are trying so hard to downplay the Bible. You simply can’t!!! Your negative comments about Bible is only creditable to people who are Atheist as you are. Now I can say things postive about the Bible but that’s only creditable to people who believe as I do. Okay! So let stop the back and forth comments which only displays our opinions and belief, which is already known.
Now, this is not Bible study!!! And I refuse to explain the Bible to non-believers because you don’t believe. The Bible is for believers not non-believers. But what I can talk to non-believers about (whether he or she is a theist or atheist)is who/what is God. And as I have said time and time again, GOD is LOVE!!! God is the Almighty Creator and God is Love. If you don’t understand I will gladly explain. If you do understand then logically disprove this statement. I’m all ears!!!
Most of you already have your own understanding of the Bible as I do. But the question is who is right??? So let start with the basic princples of God (according to scripture). God is: Almighty; The creator of life; a spirit called the Holy Ghost; A Father in heaven; A born Son of heaven; One God Almighty; man was made in the image and likeness of God; and last but not least God is LOVE.
Now before you guys reply with your common comments of disbelief against religion(s), consider this: The first religion (or way of life) in the world is F.A.M.I.L.Y….., And for every family to be real it must have a Father, a child, and love. This is the first religion and will be the last. This religion is the true religion and shall live forever by the power of GOD.
Those not with us are against us. – Luke 11:23 NIV
The Big Lie of the Big-3 Monster-theisms:
Skeptics cannot undermine beliefs which require spiritual insight to believe!
Xianity cannot be refuted; it can only be dismantled.
The Big Lie exemplifies a classic logical failure called an “immunizing strategy.” Only a believer can understand another believer’s beliefs. It is a form of begging the question — presupposing without proof the very point at issue.
An immunizing strategy amounts to deflecting away every request for reasoning outside the charmed circle of language which only a believer could use.
But, one pays dearly when immunizing a belief from criticism. It cuts off rational communication. The immunizer gives up the right to be classed as a “reasonable person†by any logical or semantic criterion.
You cannot respond rationally to critics by saying that only those who are with me can understand what I have to say. There must be some starting point in a discourse common to believer and to critic. Otherwise, there’s nothing that can be talked about.
Now you know why the xian “conversion†sales job has always begun with purportedly “absurd†or “paradoxical” claims to induce belief. And to a rational ancient Greek nothing was more conceptually contradictory than a “god on a cross.”
The de-deification of culture (including the sciences) must be our task for the next 100 years.
the anti-supernaturalist
Hello anti_supernaturalist
Your comment was a clever one, I must say!
The Big Lie, lol… how is it a lie??? prove it!!! Your previous comment doesn’t prove it, it just states your having a problem believing it. And gives a clever theory called the “immunizing strategy†as to part of your problem with the Big Lie.
Also, “god on a cross”. I would have used a capital “G” for god but anyhow, that’s right, I do believe that. See, me and you understand one of the main points of the Bible. But, our belief system puts us on different sides. Now I see no point in explaining “God on the cross”, when you don’t even believe their is a GOD!!! Why should I go deep into explaining the cross when first you must believe their is a God??? A baby has to crawl before it can walk, right???
Check out some of my previous comments… I said to the Atheist community time and time again GOD is LOVE and gave (I believe) good understand or explanation to my statement. If you believe LOVE is real, then you should believe God is real. If you don’t believe in God than you don’t believe in Love (What a shame, too bad and so sad). It was LOVE/GOD that created all of life. It’s no wonder (to me) why all of life is dying, We don’t know nor do we believe in Love/God as we should. And the real sad part for mankind is, we were made in the image of LOVE/GOD. So we are suppose to know, understand, and believe in Love while reaping all the benefits of doing so.
So first, let talk about God/Love. Is God real or not??? Prove God isn’t real. If you have this proof (of no God) please share. My proof of God is pure love. Someone who loves us made the sun and knew we would need it before we realized we did ourselves. Someone made trees and caused fruits to grow for us to eat. Someone knew we needed air to breath and so many other things I can say. We all were born due to the process of LOVE. All the credit and glory belongs to Love, and the credit and glory belongs to God.
I am no atheist(being that I do believe in some form of an omniprescent being or “God”), but I also do not worship any for of mainstream religion. The religious beliefs that I have are ones I alone have developed in my own mind and are the only ones that make any sense to me. I also believe there is no such thing as the word of God existing anywhere beyond within one’s self. The only pure message of God would be concience, fear, guilt, etc; everything else is just the folklore of man. Religion was originally used as simply a way for the priests to gain power, in my opinion. I also firmly believe that religion has existed for as long as it has with little to no justification.
I agree that Christianity (and in my opinion every single mainstream religion that tries to define god) is incorrect. However, I also believe that you have arrived at less than logical conclusions over this whole situtation. Perhaps it may even be my own misunderstanding of your words. For example,“The Bible is inaccurate – therefore God is fallible – therefore the definition of God is incorrect – therefore God does not exist.†The inaccuracies of a religious text does not prove that some form of God does not exist. It does, however, lessen the credibility of that specific religious text. Just because one religion got it wrong does not mean there is no God to believe in. If you were trying to imply that the Christian definition of God does not exist because of The Bible’s inaccuracies, then I would have to agree with this.
Hi Dennis,
That is exactly what they (Atheists) are trying to do… [say that, Christians and their definition of God due to our understanding of the Bible is wrong]. And you seem to agree.
Now you being someone who believes in God, you are a step closer to the truth than those in the Atheist’s community.
Okay, so you believe in God but, you gave no reasoning as to why you believe. And you say Christianity is wrong without proof. Making statements of opinions without reasoning or better yet proof, serves no purpose to me. You think (as well as many others), the Bible is inaccurate. I will even help you out! One of the many problems with the Bible, I had (before I believed) was, in one place it reads love you enemies then in another place it reads hate you father and mother. This easily seems to make no sense. And many like writing are in the Bible.
But now it does make sense to me WHY? I believe the Bible is the word of God and I understand the conditioning/reasoning by which each word is written. And I stop making my own assumptions which easily makes the Bible seem inaccurate.
Now you say you believe in God, I believe in God also. And God should be the same to us both otherwise, one of us is wrong or both of us is wrong. Now their a law to govern all of life. Everything has a law. And where there’s a law there a lawgiver. I beleive God is Love. And the only way to know God/Love is to know his law, rules, Word. There will only be one law Why? Because there’s only One Almighty God. So either the Bible is the Word of God and your wrong. Or, the Bible isn’t the Word and your law about God is right. Or we both are wrong and someone else has the truth because there’s only one truth. But I’m staying with the Bible as the written Word / Law / Commandments of God. I believe the Bible explains God’s love to the world. And without it we wouldn’t know God unless he reveal himself to us.
You my friend have alot to learn about the Christian God.
I’m simply going to comment on the first paragraph written about the creation of the world. Christians do not believe the world was created in six days. In the orginal language of Genesis the word days simply means a period of time. So six periods of time could mean anything from six seconds to six decades to.. well you get the point.
When will the world realize that Religion and Science/Evolution must stop battling eachother to be the truth, when they both must go hand in hand. Religon cannot exist without science and vice versa.
We cannot prove there is no God, and we cannot prove the world was created my a giant bang. There are too many things that need to have been perfect in order to do so.
One day science will prove there is a God.
Hi CHristian. I’m actually well versed in the Christian God, all of them.
I respect your interpretation of “days”, of course, in the grand scheme of things this does little to add credibility to the Bible as a source of fact given that there are so many more contradictions and inaccuracies within its pages.
I also think you need to do a little bit of research before making claims like:
There are plenty of Christians who do believe that the earth was created in six days.
I also suspect it’s wishful thinking when you suggest that science will one day prove a God’s existence, it’s far more likely to be the opposite. In recent times the gaps for which a God to live are shrinking. We used to think that God created the universe, now we have an alternative testable theory. We used to think God created life, now we know that’s not true. We used to think that God created us, people, now we know that was the process of evolution. If science continues at this pace, those who choose to still believe in a God will have no choice but to admit that it was lame, and didn’t actually do anything.
Religion is based on faith and believing that an ancient, static book can explain everything. Science is based on exploration, experimentation and the scientific method with tested theories. The two are no compatible philosophies and science certainly does not require religion. One could argue that society, in order to be well balanced and healthy needs both, but as we can see in primarily atheistic countries, that typically have far higher living standards than non-atheist countries, this isn’t necessary true.
I find it ironic how so many atheists are always moaning how christians or those that follow religion try relentlessly to convert those who do not believe. However, it seems to me that atheists, too, just cannot enough of trying to disprove the bible or god.
Please do not confuse this; I do not have the answers.
What if the religious books in society are books left open to interpretation? What if -gasp- they are merely for teaching basic moral principles based on what the specific religion dictates are “correct?”
Any moron can copy and paste some real hard-lining, soul-searching facts onto a blog and say, “oh yeah, i got all the facts, so dont even try to fuck with me.”
How about we stop trying to disprove everyone else when we know in our own souls that we are all lost. Somehow I have a sneaky feeling that even the pope does not know what comes next, for certainty.
Hopefully this does not make you cry, but no one will ever know thanks to the virtual mask of the internet. good day.
I have a problem I have seen evil hand Jesus and the problem is I have witnesis.My wife divorced me in twelve weeks because things were moving around are house she was terrified a angel name Mary came and gave me warning and a lot more besides the evil is known as master? he is also a witches familiar we are at war you people are lucky you have a choice in your beliefs me and my family have no choice .
I have been reading this discussion and I honestly didn’t believe that people as ignorant as “Phairw, Disciple of Christ†would try and argue the existence of God to a collection of, from what I’ve been reading, a collection of intelligent humans.
There have been so many absurd comments made but unfortunately I only have time to question one or two…
Phairw – Earlier in this discussion you claimed that “Love is the creator of the Worldâ€, that is a fairly bold statement considering Oxytocin’s other roles in behaviour include orgasms and stress. In effect you argued that Orgasm’s created the world.
I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that “Love†is a word humans have given to an emotion caused by a chemical reaction, an emotion that is no more “creative†than stress, anger or lust. None of these are capable of creating a physical universe.
Please do not confuse this post; I am not condemning the existence of a higher power but your argument that: because “God†cannot be conclusively disproved yet, he exists, is extraordinary! You do realise that is the same argument as: because the existence of a race of leprechaun’s hasn’t been conclusively disproved yet, they exist!
David – “What if the religious books in society are books left open to interpretation? What if -gasp- they are merely for teaching basic moral principles based on what the specific religion dictates are “correct?â€â€
A point that has been made countless times in the past when trying to defend Christianity. Unfortunately there is always one fail safe counter to that suggestion; If you just wanted to write down some moral principles you would only write that. The bible is full of verses such as the creation of the world that have no moral meaning and, if we’re being honest, leaves the reader to about as much interpretive freedom as a eulogy.
There is substantial benefit in us discussing these issues as educating people like Phairw is very important to preventing the existence of the largest cause of war and manmade cause of death: Religion.
A Physicist – LOL…., You said, “In effect you argued that Orgasm’s created the world.” Please, don’t put words in my mouth. Your so WRONG!!!
I said LOVE/GOD created the world. Not Orgasms!!! Now it’s clear you either didn’t understand my argument or, your argument is based on what you understand about LOVE. Which (to me) is sad. I hope and pray you can one day go beyond thinking of Love as just an Orgasm. Love has a much deeper meaning, which is far beyond the dictionary, science, and any other sources that make you find words for me to look-up such as “Oxytocin”. And even though Love can go deep, it is yet simple to understand (if you really want too).
Now I have a question for you! All the (good)charitable organizations in the world, how were they created??? (By Love, or Orgasm) Think about it and choose one, let me know asap…..
I’m not going to linger on trying to explain this to you in detail but “charity” or helping someone less fortunate than yourself is a Darwinian survival skill that dates back to when people that you met once, you were likely to know for the rest of your life as humans didn’t travel far from where they grew up. This lack of travel meant that if you helped someone survive (ie. Charity) you could expect them to return the favour in later life, helping you to survive. Charity is caused by evolution, and whether or not you agree with me Evolution is fact.
You also seem confused by my comment about orgasms, you see the emotion “love” and orgasms are both caused by a chemical called Oxytocin. I am merely taking that radical example to explain how ridiculous it is that you think “love” created the world.
I actually can agree with you that the emotion “love” is a wonderful thing as it does bring people together. The fact that I understand how it works doesn’t stop me from feeling it! The one thing that I can absolutely promise you is that “love” is not god, it is an emotion, that’s it.
If you are still feeling unclear please, don’t hesitate to respond.
My friend, you have not expose my statement to be ridiculous!!! You’re trying to…, lol
Now, That’s not fair! I responded to your question or statement. Why won’t you answer my question??? I’m sure I have not misunderstood you. My question should have prove that. You said, “In effect you argued that Orgasm’s created the world.” This was said because I said Love created the world Right? Now (according to you) Love & Orgasms is cause by a chemical in our bodies called Oxytocin, I understand that. I’m saying Love has a much deeper meaning than limiting Love to just an emotion caused by this chemical (maybe true for Orgasms but not Love).
Now, I never said Evolution wasn’t a fact!!! I believe evolution played a part in creation. But please, one debate at a time. Let’s finish what has been started before we tackle a new topic.
Charity – LOL…, did you know charity could also mean LOVE…..??? I don’t know what was the point of your explanation surrounding charity but I didn’t get it. Are you saying if someone give charity to a homeless man (maybe food, money or etc), their doing so because of your Darwinian explanation and I’m wrong to say this charity was an expression of Love??? I totally disagree. I’m SORRY
You don’t seem to understand that i’m not asking you, i’m telling you! What i’m saying is not questionable, it is fact. I will explain on monday when i’m less tired.
Listen, no need to response Monday! I don’t need the scientific break-down of Love. If you read all the previous challenges to my statement, You’ll see uncounted others have said already Love is an emotion, blah-blah-blah, blah-blah-blah. Your argument is no different from what I’ve already heard and responsed too. Now you feel, what you have said is unquestionable, FINE! We can end this convo now. Because I see we’ll only be going in circle with the convo (saying the same thing over and over).
Okay!!! Thank You, I wish you input would have advance this blog discussion forward but it hasn’t… We’re still at the same spot before you joined in the convo.
Phairw, the Darwinian explanation for our moral groundings is fairly solid. Essentially, and reduced to it’s simplest explanation, it posits that animals, especially those who live in social groups, stand a better chance of surviving to the point at which they can breed if they are seen as beneficial to the rest of their social group.
In modern times this may have manifested itself as charitable acts, but pre-modern society, it was far more likely to have manifested itself as what we might describe as pack behaviour. Protecting the vulnerable in the pack, hunting together and sharing the spoils etc.
I know it sounds somewhat unromantic to call love oxytocin, and to point out that all charitable acts are essentially selfish, but to suggest anything else would be ignoring the evidence and the facts.
If the bear falls in the woods,does the Pope shit on it?
I cant prove for certain otherwise, so yes the pope enjoys tracking down bears and doing his dirty work. Through this logic im nearly convinced that god really does exist.
But he has some really screwed up popes working for him.
“I can’t prove for certain otherwise …”
Ah, but you can prove for certain. You can, in fact, ask the Pope directly if he shits on fallen bears. Assuming the Pope does not wish to answer the question, you could hypothetically follow the Pope around for a chosen period of time to see if he, in fact, ever takes the opportunity to shit on a fallen bear. You can observe the Pope’s behavior to determine if there is any substantial reason to believe he shits on fallen bears. You needn’t take anyone else’s word for it one way or the other. You can find out for yourself. No special “insight” required. Look, watch, learn. Easy.
In contrast, try asking “god” if he shits on fallen bears OR following him/her/it around to see if he/she/it shits on fallen bears. You can make no direct observations of your own. All can do is take the word of others one way or the other. Look, listen, kneel, pray, obey.
The difference is, empirical evidence can be obtained about the Pope question, none can be obtained regarding the “god” question. So, one wonders why one even entertains the “god” question at all. If one cannot obtain empirical evidence of a “god”, how does one come to “knowledge” of a “god” when one’s senses and one’s ability to reason are the only confirmed method of obtaining knowledge? Of course, the so-called believer will simply say “faith”.
“Faith” or “trust” or “confidence” in a thing are emotions, NOT tools for the acquisition of knowledge. They are consequences to knowledge, not sources of it. “Faith” without empirical evidence is mere imagination or delusion.
You cannot prove for certain that the Pope has not shat on a bear during his life, I argee that it is very statistically unlikely. But, if he did the pope most probably accept that it is a bit of a faux pas, and try and cover his tracks. Looking back to try and for certain prove that the Pope has never done this would be impossible.
Taking your point into account, if you could hypothetically try and follow the pope round, he would undoubtly have people on the payroll to ensure that doesnt happen. Also he would probably bribe others to ensure word doesnt get round. Imagine what the tabloids would make of it.
I argree that in theory it is possible to prove it, but it would not work as there are too many varibles, alike predicting the lottery, by looking at the individual momentums/moments of inertia of each ball as they are let off. Impossible to do for absolute certain.
‘All (one) can do is take the word of others one way or the other’
Im assuming ‘(one)’ is what you meant if not apologies. One cannot just take the word of others because as I discussed in thelast paragraph, humans are capable of a remarkable feat entitled lying. I think the people who wrote the bible were talking bollocks alike the ancient greeks talking bollocks about zeus.
When I said I thought god existed, quite simply I was taking the piss, maybe its my english humor, but I thought that talk of popes shitting may lead people onto that.
‘Faith†or “trust†or “confidence†in a thing are emotions, NOT tools for the acquisition of knowledge. They are consequences to knowledge, not sources of it. “Faith†without empirical evidence is mere imagination or delusion’
I agree 100% I cannot have trust faith or confidence that the pope does not shit on bears, as I do not want to be deluded, nor do I want to be deluded in believing in god via faith et cetera.
Do you believe in god? if so you are digging your own grave with that paragraph.
A Better Physicist –
No, I do not believe in an alleged “supernatural” or a “god”, gods, goddesses, fairies, spooks, goblins, Thor, or little green men, etc. I guess some would call me an “atheist” but I believe that’s only a word needed by others. It’s not my own adopted label. Perhaps my being an atheist wasn’t clear from what I wrote. Sorry.
What I was attempting to point out is there are many questions for which one can know the answer with reasonable certainty and others you cannot. There are also some questions for which there is no reasonable explanation for why they are even asked. The entire “god” question is an unwarranted leap in logic. Though it seems plausible but unlikely the pope might at some point shit on a fallen bear, there is no argument to suggest even seeking evidence for a “supernatural” or “god”, let alone actually finding any.
I look at nature and see a great many wonderful things but to see “god” is an unwarranted stretch of even the flimsiest of imaginations. In my opinion, believers of such are intellectually dysfunctional or suffer from some mental pathology.
I was guided to church a medium I met also attended the church but i made comments about me being attack by evil she would not except any of it.I was to be confirmed she was there it was a normal Sunday worship I was confirmed we go in the crypt for a cuppa after sermon normally she would avoid me but she was very excited choking to say something to me.I new already when i walked up to the bishop she saw a Bright light coming down to my left shoulder .It was the hand of god guiding me she will never doubt my word again I acted normal but inside me I was floating the only thing was none of my family attended but Anita will remember what she saw for the rest of her life.
Phairw – Your right this is becoming a circular conversation, however, this not because what i have said or what others have said has been in any way responded to with a rational argument.
You say that i don’t answer any of your questions, i apologise. If you could just make a list of any questions you have in a reply i will be more than willing to answer any queries you have.
In the mean time i was wondering if you could respond to a statement i made in an earlier post: “your argument that: because “God†cannot be conclusively disproved yet, he exists, is extraordinary! You do realise that is the same argument as: because the existence of a race of leprechaun’s hasn’t been conclusively disproved yet, they exist!”
Do you understand what i’m saying here and if so do you have a response?
A Better Physicist – Simon, it’s a pleasure. I could not agree with your argument more! It was a delight to read, a logical concise argument for once! I have to say that although it is statistically unlikely that the pope would defecate on a bear, i would like to think that given the opportunity he would do the right thing.
Yours
A very good Physicist but not quite as good as a better physicist.
The Atheist – You just don’t get it!!! The first place I understood what charity is, was at home. My Parents was the Charitable organization and I and my brothers and sisters were the ones in need of their charity. Now to describe the charity given to me by them as not Love, I’m not able to understand nor agree with whatever your trying to say. Especially, since I have been told by them (My Parents), all they have done for us came from their hearts full of Love for us…. Are you tell me, they are lying or didn’t know the Darwinian explanation, so they said it was done out of love…???
I have children now (4) and a wife and all the charity I give in my home comes from a place in my heart call “Love”. Impossible for it to be the Darwinian explanation first because I didn’t know about yet. Second, you’re not able to explanation better than me, what I feel for my family. At best you can match what I say by describing what you feel for people you love. So in conclustion, The Darwinian explanation may have some facts about life but it doesn’t cover everything about Charity. And that’s a Fact.
Also The Atheist – Love being described as an emotion caused by a Chemical called Oxytocin. Is very unromantic. Exactly my point and problem with this meaning for Love. This meaning doesn’t not capture the true value, essensce, full nature, and explanation of Love.
Now A Physicist – God is a spirit called the Holy Spirit or the Holy Ghost. Spirits or Ghosts are invisble. Leprechauns (according to those people who believe they exist) are creaters we should be able to see and witness for ourselves RIGHT? So unless I didn’t know what I was looking at or until someone show me a Leprechaun I don’t believe they exist. God on the other hand, you must believe in and you must be able to feel. God/Love is invisible but it can be felt. Hope this answers your question.
While I might not technically classify this as charity, but your parents caring for your in your early years is again, down to Darwinian evolution. Strength of family, of pack, is beneficial in an evolutionary sense.
I’m sorry you can’t see past your romantic notion of love. We’ve discussed this at length in the past, so I won’t stretch the point again here. Just because you don’t see the scientific explanation as romantic, it isn’t any less valid or true. This brings to mind a favourite quote of mine by novelist Douglas Adams:
Some of us see the scientific explanation of the world beautiful. I don’t need to believe in some odd belief that love is inspired by a deity to enjoy the benefits of oxytocin. Have a look at the affects of oxytocin on the brain, and you’ll see where the physicists and I are coming from. It specifically affects, trust, generosity, maternal behaviour and bonding/empathy. I think that fairly concisely covers most of your points off.
A fact is a pragmatic truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and confirmed.
An opinion is a belief that may or may not be backed up with evidence, but which cannot be proved with that evidence.
Phair – No trust me on this one, YOU don’t get it. Your pathetically illogical arguments and your weak grasp of the English language are giving me a headache!
It is not a matter of whether you agree or not with charity being a selfish act, IT IS. That is a fact much the same as the earth is round and that evolution causes a new strain of Flu to become prevalent each year! You can’t argue with a fact so don’t bother!
“Impossible for it to be the Darwinian explanation first because I didn’t know about yet” (you need English lessons)
You’re so ignorant i’m not sure if it’s worth explaining this to you but here goes… You would not need to know about it, it is part of our evolution! Do you need to know to retract your hand from a hot object as a child? NO! Evolution (in basic) has caused us to have certain behavioural actions programmed in our brains, we don’t need to be told about Darwin to be charitable! By the way will you please take a 13 year’s old biology class, it will teach you alot!
Love has no deeper meaning, no true value, no other truth. Love is an emotion caused by chemical reactions, that is it. STOP questioning it!
You also didn’t seem to understand my point about the leprechaun’s either! You see the only proof for god is a book assembled over 1000 years ago. The only proof for leprechauns are books written in the modern age. THERE IS NO OTHER PROOF FOR EITHER, god can’t be felt*. FACT. Accepting this (which you must because it’s true) you must also accept that having faith in god is as logical as having faith in leprechauns. Do you understand or do i need to go slower??
Please go back to school and elevate you level of education to that of a 13 year old.
Yours a Physicist
*the proof for god not being able to be felt is that if he was able to be felt by any human sense, then he would also be able to be detected by scientific equipment.
Just a small point: “charity” is never a selfless act. It is, in fact, the self that desires to be charitable. It is the self that plans the charitable act. It is the self that performs the charitable act. It is the self that sees the result of such an act.
It is the self who wills, wants, needs or wishes to be charitable. Being charitable to others is what YOU want and through the charitable act YOU get what YOU want – emotional satisfaction from being charitable. Without the will of the self, the act would not have taken place. It was a personal value, a personal goal and through your act it is fulfilled. The self attains virtue as a result. Quite often, people benefit materially from charitable acts too, i.e. awards of recognition, tax breaks, etc.
Nothing one chooses to do is selfless. Genuine “selflessness” is one does NOT personally choose, when one is physically forced to do a thing or coerced against one’s will. Of course, that’s not called “charity” – it’s called a savage crime.
“Compulsory charity” is a contradiction in terms, “voluntary charity” is redundant and it is always full of the self.
A Physicist – LOL, LOL…, please excuse me for my bad English. I’ll try to do better.
Now, why are you bother by what I say??? If you don’t agree FINE. (I’ll be over here with my thoughts, you stay where you are with yours).
I answered your question, Right? Why did you just dismiss what I said? I told you what God is, and I told you what Leprechauns are. Now if you don’t agree with this, then said that. But understand, you asked a question and I answered it according to my knowledge of God and Leprechauns. Okay!!!
So, Thank You for you input. And I’ll past on the biology classes. It might lead me to become as smart as you (without knowledge of God), and I need my understanding of God because it helps me understand eternity.
That’s fine if you want to live in ignorance then feel free to waste some of your valuable life worshiping a unfounded notion that the Christian god is real.
I dismissed what you said because it made no sense and did not answer my question as obviously your did not understand it! I’m not going to write it out again but try reading it really closely, even write it out to try and see if you can comprehend what i’m stating.
About my input, not a problem I am always happy to pass on my knowledge to others.
Just to finish, “a knowledge of god” is not knowledge it is the ramblings of a fool. Knowledge implies you know something!
When god Jesus and my angel enter my life it Was fantastic it was great when my close friends were witness and the people I met were really kind my angel comes regularly 4am
some times we talk about paranormal love moses
dark matter I go out side and have been looking at it at night.Subliminal hypnosis list goes on but I dont want to bore any body.
A nurse saw a man sat in the back of her car so she pulled over to investigate nobody there a man jumped in front of her car she stepped got out nobody there both her and her sister were sensing something watching them.I met them they were being followed give him his marching orders Never got thanks.I it might have been GOD.
The Phsicist – I don’t know what you problem is but, there’s nothing hard about what you said. Believing in God is as logical as believing in Leprechauns, fairies, and etc; I disagree, Why Because of the reason I statement previous and because I believe God is REAL. As real as LOVE. Now you and I believe love is real Right? Our problem is agreeing on the truth and meaning of LOVE.
Now I said this before and I’ll say it again because your new to this blog convo, and no one gave a good answer…, If I wanted to tell and express to my wife, children, mother, father, and good friends, that I love them. Should I say, I love you because the chemical oxytocin is producing the “Love” emotion in my head. And they will be able to prove it because all they need is the resources to prove this chemical is producing the love emotion….??? And how will they know it’s Love??? Sense we know this chemical is responsible for other emotions including stress…??? (Please answer this question)
How do you tell and express to people you Love that you love them?
Other than the scientific tests or observations looking for known signs of pleasurable emotions which, by the way only prove you are experiencing a certain kind of feeling, not for who or for what you have that feeling, there are numerous ways one can physically demonstrate the love you feel for another. Kissing, hugging, gifts, the look in your eyes, written words, spoken words, just your presence when and where they most need it, etc. These are real, concrete demonstrations of how you feel about them that a reasonable person could interpret as proof of your love for them. Mind you, there are many different types of loving behavior, loving emotions, and they come in many varying degrees. Let’s not forget that “love” is just one of many words to label a set of physical feelings most of us experience. The experience is different for each of us but we seem to agree when it is a feeling of love and when it is not. No, one cannot know with absolute certainty that what one is feeling is “love” nor can others know with absolute certainty you “love” them, however, all can know with REASONABLE certainty both through commonly accepted behavioral demonstrations and through scientific observations of physical signs of pleasurable emotions. Through a diverse collection of evidences, the reasonable person seems to know when what they feel is “love” and when it is not, and the reasonable person seems to know when they are “loved” by another and when they are not.
By looking for the signs of “love”, are you not reasonably certain that this person or that person does NOT love you? The signs can be incredibly obvious and quite subtle, but you see them, you experience them, you feel them, you know them, don’t you? What’s important is the fact that other persons can also observe these obvious and subtle demonstrations or lack of demonstrations of how you feel or how others feel toward you with or without your assistance and come to the same or similar conclusions.
You CAN reasonably prove your feelings of love. What you cannot do with anything approaching equal measure is reasonably demonstrate the existence of this alleged “god”.
I used love once to send evil back to the witch that put evil eye on me her familiar entered to me from her vie her eye to my eyes.I used my granddaughter’s foto to generate love and direct it at the master familiar he had gone for the moment.
The Atheist – Okay! Here’s a question for you and A Physicist…,
Has science observe the Brain only or the Whole body? And if the whole body, what is the scientific answer for love according to it observation of the Heart?
This question I believe will prove to be very important. Because everyone in the whole knows love is felt in our hearts, RIGHT?
(If you agree) Then tell me what science has witness in the heart and not the brain, what does science say about that, since The Physicist has already said, if our human senses can identify then it can be detected by scientific equipment.
And please don’t give me the definition of the heart. I know it already as told to me already previously.
It’s accurate to say the emotion “love” is primarily a phenomenon of the mind which is itself, in total, a phenomenon of the brain as an integral component of the entire physical human body. By learning the function and integration of the heart with the rest of the body one could say we learn a little something of the emotion of love but only in the heart’s contribution to our ability to think and feel emotions. The heart is not the “seat” of emotion nor of “love” specifically.
As for what “love” is, there really is no mystery to it. That which is alive has need of values to make choices in favor OR opposition of continued happy and healthy living. A great deal of conscious or subconscious information goes into the formation of our personal values. It is our adopted values, whether we are consciously aware of them or not, that lead to very complex, very intense emotions, one of which we humans have labeled “love” and the many other words used worldwide.
That there is a relatively easy scientific or rational answer to what is “love” or any other emotion we humans experience doesn’t reduce their importance in human life. That science can explain relatively reasonably what is “love” and its source doesn’t make it any less real, necessary or cherished. One has no authentic need of a mystical explanation for it and, in fact, unsubstantiated mystical explanations reduce one’s ability to appreciate “love” rather than enhance it. Rationally understood, the emotion of “love” can and will still inspire many wonderful human creations and many horrible human tragedies.
“I believe God is REAL” your still not getting it are you! You have no more reason or fact to believe in god than Leprechauns… Do you understand now!
“Our problem is agreeing on the truth and meaning of LOVE.” It is not a matter of agreement, i will explain once more.
Oxytocin causes emotions, these emotions are what you feel for your children. I agree that it is not nice to think about love in this way, but there are certain facts that we just have to accept because they are fact. The biochemistry of how Oxytocin causes different emotions and feelings is extreemly complicated so i’m not going to explain that. A good example that might help you to understand is that, theoretically, if i designed an experiment to controll the amount of oxytocin released in your brain, i could put you in a room with a chair and make you feel the same way about that chair as you do your children. I am not trying to make love sound unimportant but i want you to realise that love is nothing more than a series of biochemical reactions.
“Because everyone in the whole (world?) knows love is felt in our hearts, RIGHT?” – WRONG!!!
Anyone who believes that love is felt in the heart technically has an IQ of a three year old. That is one of the stupidist things i have ever read! The only possible explination for what i just read is that (i’m hoping!) you were talking about the effects of emotions on our heart rate?!
If so different chemicals have effects on our heart rate. When you see someone you love, often adrenalin is released which makes your heart beat faster.
Please, Please go back to school! It is so nesessary if you want to be taken seriously in life.
Love hate jealousy start a chemical reaction in the brain it can strengthen you or weaken you but it is a reaction of chemistry which alters the brain we no very little of what are brains are capable of but god does that is were are spirit lives.
Very Good explanations Namuadd & Physicist, I understand.
Now I need to know, how do I explain to my wife that I will love her until I die? Will she be able to see enough oxytocin produced in me to make the emotion “love”? And what will stop my love from evolving from her to someone-else or thing?
The love that my wife has from me, I tell her to believe and have faith it will last. But, according to Ya’ll this is non-sense.
Next question – In light of the theoretical example of The Physicist, what causes oxytocin? Since oxytocin is the reason for many of our emotion, what’s the cause of oxytocin? and/or what controls the flow or release of this chemical since there are many different phrases or types of love (i.e love for animals, people, cars, and etc. Plus it can be futher breaking-down
You might demonstrate to your wife that you will “love her until the day you die” by taking out a life insurance policy to ensure she is well cared for when that day arrives. Perhaps there are other things you can do that demonstrate a very long-term commitment to your relationship with her. Some would say the wedding day is one such demonstration. Others might mention the creation of children is another sign of a very long-term commitment. Proving you love a person in the here and now is generally easy and straightforward. You are right to point out that demonstrating you love them “until the day you die” is a difficult task depending not only on how you demonstrate it but on their ability and willingness to believe your sincerity and the “proof” you provide of such a claim. Still, though it may be difficult to prove you will love your wife until the day you die, it isn’t impossible. There are likely many things you can do to demonstrate a lifelong and loving commitment. Some demonstrations are culturally common, like life insurance. Some might say you prove such a claim through consistently showing your feelings of love for her moment after moment, day after day, year after year. Surely, you and she can think of others. If not, ask someone for advice.
The answer to how you prove you will “love her until the day you die” is more or less the same as how you prove you love her here and now – demonstrate those feelings in ways a reasonable person can and will accept. If you must, you could always get tested for chemical signs or have the electrical activity of your brain monitored for known physical signs of pleasurable emotional reactions to her presence AND of painful physical and emotional reactions when she comes to harm or is absent.
As science will tell you, “proof” isn’t generally any one thing but rather a collection of things all pointing to one reasonable conclusion which is testable and repeatable. If you wish to “prove” to your wife you will love her until the day you die, you will need a collection of demonstrations consistent over time that provide what she needs for a reasonable conclusion you are correct in what you claim.
LOVE is a lovely drug I will take it all my life it gives me power over my enemies.cum join me I will love you all my life and my enemies If you do not know love only lust we christians will help you love with gods help.
Oxytocin is produced in a part of our brains called the Hypothalamus. As i have said it would take me day’s to explain in detail how oxytocin produces emotions, so in short, oxytocin is produced in the hypothalamus in different amounts this basically causes emotions. (this is an extremely basic explanation there are many other steps and chemicals involved.)
I’m sorry i can’t answer your question in more detail but the truth is it would take too long and you wouldn’t understand the large majority of it.
“The love that my wife has from me, I tell her to believe and have faith it will last. But, according to Ya’ll this is non-sense.”
No not at all, I will admit to you that memory is one of the hardest parts of an organism to understand, this said, it is clear that memory holds a key part in the release of chemicals such as oxytocin. One example is how certain people cause us fear every time we see them. It would be stupid for me to suggest that married couples re-fall in love every time they see each other!
I know there has been a lot i could not answer in detail, i apologise. Unfortunately we are reaching the realms of some quite complicated science here, and it would be non-productive for me to attempt to explain it.
You know, you guys are simply in denial…, There is no way I can know my wife love’s me with ya’ll definition in mind.I’m not inside her. I can only go by what she say and do, plus I have to trust her.
Now “Love” is a emotion caused by the chemical oxytocin! Simple just like that, OKAY – How can anybody know how I feel outside of my body? How can someone else feel what I feel inside when there outside of my body?
I only know what I feel for my son and my son only know what he feels for me. But I can’t feel what he feels and vice-versa. So I do I prove he loves me?
Yes, you have to trust her. Studies have shown that the controlled introduction of oxytocin into test subjects increased their empathy, decreased their fear and increased their trust.
As for your earlier question about feelings in the “heart”, might I assume that you were being flippant for the sake of entertainment? Probably not. Although one of the affects of oxytocin the body is the amount of adrenaline produced, which does have a direct impact on the body’s heart rate. Of course, to believe that any feeling is felt anywhere other than the brain is ridiculous. It’s the sort of thing we tell children because they aren’t mature or developed enough to understand what’s actually happening. This becomes even more ridiculous when we consider that hearts can be temporary, and permanently, replaced. Does that mean that the person can’t feel love because their heart is no longer in their body? Of course not, only a fool would suggest such a thing.
You bring up a valid point: how DO you feel precisely what someone else feels? The answer is, you can’t. Perhaps some would say, you can’t yet and that maybe someday science will discover a method by which you can know precisely what another is thinking, precisely what another is feeling. It seems likely that day will come, but it isn’t here as yet.
In the meantime, it’s silly to thoroughly discount behavioral demonstrations of one’s thinking and feeling as diverse “proofs” of what is going on inside of you. This is certainly the major dilemma of the psychological sciences. Observation of behavior is generally the only thing one can study to determine things like specific emotions. That one cannot precisely observe the specific emotion a person is feeling in no way invalidates the significance of their behavior as demonstration of that feeling. Surely, the demonstrations of a feeling are somewhat equal to the actual experience itself as physical evidence for it. After all, the words we use to label our various feelings are attached as much to how the emotion feels within ourselves as they are to the commonly-observed behaviors we associate with the same general feeling. In other words, the word “love” refers not only to what YOU feel, but the behaviors commonly agreed to be demonstrations of such an emotion. For instance, often stage performers will ask the audience to “show some love” and they and those audience members seem to know what that means and what is being asked – cheering and clapping. If you are making “num num” sounds while eating a piece of cake, a reasonable person would assume you “love the cake”. The feeling AND the act are both labeled “love”.
Again, if you are looking for absolute proof of an emotion, you will likely be disappointed for the time being because certain proof is likely unobtainable at present. Nevertheless, reasonable certainty through behavioral demonstration and observation is or ought to be acceptable. Science will tell you, all “proof”, all conclusions are contingent and not absolute certainty. This is what keeps knowledge growing because it keeps searchers searching for the truth or, in the least, what is reasonably true. It acknowledges that, although we can reasonably say we “know” many things, we admit there is much we do not yet know but, certainly, want to know and believe we CAN know if we keep asking the right questions.
In any event, those who want “proof” of a “god” are simply looking for reasonable demonstrations of the existence of such just as you should be satisfied with reasonable proof or behavioral demonstration of your wife’s or son’s love for you. If you feel and insist it is reasonable to believe in an alleged “god”, you must somehow be able to show such reason for others to agree with your belief. If you have no interest in others agreeing with your belief, I can see little point to the entire debate.
But your participation here in this forum is a reasonable suggestion you want others to agree with your belief in the existence of one, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-capable, ever-present “god”. If that is so, you must provide a reasonable collection of consistent, testable, and repeatable demonstrations to support your belief for such agreement to take place.
Simply asking others to take your word for what you claim about a “god”, just as asking others to just believe you love them without demonstration, is unreasonable.
Your quite right! You can’t prove that anyone loves you. The only thing you can do is trust people. But even though you don’t know that anyone loves you would this stop you from loving your son?
I think i’ve answered your question, however, your English is getting worse and i’m not entirely sure what your points are any more!
I can promise you that i am not the one in denial. I have been educated extremely well and unfortunately for you that means that my opinion counts for more than yours as i can back it up with scientific fact. All you can back your opinion up with is faith in dusty book.
YOU are not right I personally do not trust scientific fact because they dont always agree with each other and opinion only counts for you but educated has bankrupted england but i still love you.
Wow, i thought your posts were taking the piss they were so non-coherent! Ok lets start on the educated people (i think that’s what you meant) bankrupting England.
The Educated have not led us in to a financial crisis the uneducated have, you see how it started was people who couldn’t afford to take out large mortgages did because they were selfish and stupid. The banks couldn’t reclaim all the money they were owed because the people who had borrowed the money couldn’t pay it back. At this point there was nothing the educated people could do to salvage the situation.
Please don’t make random claims with no factual evidence it’s not clever.
I don’t care if you trust scientific fact, because that sentence proves how stupid you are. You don’t trust fact! You do realise how stupid that makes you sound. A fact is a something that has been proven (ie. you can’t argue with it, it’s a fact!) Please give me one example of where science contradicts itself?
When you are cold but do not know how to make a fire or where to find shelter or how to dress warmly, only they who are educated in such things can make you warm. You are not born with such knowledge. It must be acquired.
Arguing against the educated is, whether you realize it or not, an argument FOR ignorance and, in any event, against your best interest.
Without an education, all you have is instinct. Compared to all other life on earth, human beings seem to have the weakest collection of pure instincts. In other words, man does not, cannot live by instinct alone. He requires first a curiosity … by which he acquires an education. Of course, the same can be said for some other species. Not all species are born knowing all they need to ever know. Many have to acquire knowledge through experiences – an education – or they will perish.
I fact according to you well I have my facts according to me the readers will decide the facts not you or me.
I’m afraid the world doesn’t work that way, Peter. The facts are the facts, people don’t decide on the facts, they establish theories and then test them. Facts are tested and proven.
I suspect that the “facts” you speak of originate from the Bible, no? A book which has been disproven, discredited and shown to be contradictory. If the Bible contains “facts”, then which particular description of the devil do you subscribe to? Because there are at least two which are different. Which one would you consider to be the factual description? Similarly, how many Gods do you believe in? Because the Bible certainly suggests that there’s more than one.
Or rather, like most theists, do you just pick and choose the parts that suit your lifestyle? The “facts” that you like, or the ones that were instilled in you from an early age?
DONT we all pick and choose some people choose to believe me some people choose to think I talk cow manure but it is a type of free will.Being a christian I turn the other cheek I can sense christmas all around me the birth of mankind.I feel the happiness and joy but I also feel the sad the lowless and the wanting but for us with we must think of those without and send love in its purest form amen.
The Atheist – So when I tell my wife, I love her from the bottom of my heart, this is non-sense??? I’m lost ya’ll seriously.
A Physicist – WOW!!! Thank You! Finally we agree on my two main points about “Loveâ€. Point ONE: LOVE we can feel, (it’s an emotion we agree). Point TWO: You must believe, trust, and have faith in LOVE, (since we can’t prove it outside of our own emotion, yet it exists outside of us as well as in us). RIGHT?
These are FACTS about “LOVEâ€. These facts apply to the Christian God. Christian’s Believe God is Love, that’s a Fact. You must believe in God and you must be able to feel the presence of God in order to know within yourself he’s Real.
So then, how can you or anyone else logically disapprove the Christian God when the fact is you can only know the love you feel within but outside of that you can’t prove it, you can only believe or disbelieve it exists?
No, that’s just an expression. If I said “I’m so hungry I could eat a horse”, I’m not actually contemplating eating a horse, I’m just using an expression to convey my hunger. These things, like the Bible, are not to be taken literally.
Okay, very good! The Atheist.
Now what is the meaning of the expression: I love you from the bottom of my heart…? Does it not explain someone’s love coming from the heart? and if you agree it does, is it still non-sense to believe love is felt in our hearts and/or comes from our hearts.
I’m thinking your reply will most likely be, this statement of expression is ridicious! Since your previous answer says,
“Of course, to believe that any feeling is felt anywhere other than the brain is ridiculous. It’s the sort of thing we tell children because they aren’t mature or developed enough to understand what’s actually happening. This becomes even more ridiculous when we consider that hearts can be temporary, and permanently, replaced. Does that mean that the person can’t feel love because their heart is no longer in their body? Of course not, only a fool would suggest such a thing.”
Ok, Phairw, I’ll respond by asking you a question. If you had a heart transplant, would you still love your wife?
I really need to get it clear in my mind that you actually believe that feelings emanate from your heart. Or whether you’re just being awkward for the sake of debate. I think your response to this question will clear things up. And when you contemplate whether a heart transplant would stop you loving your wife, consider that there are about 3,500 a year, so it’s not uncommon. Also consider that you could receive a heart from another person, a different species (technically a xenoplant) or a fake heart (and it may be part of a heart, or a whole heart). So how far do you go with your bizarre assertion that love comes from the heart?
I eagerly await your response.
HORSE is on the menu and was man also on menu even to day man is sacrifice for some god but i dont no which god .I have been warned of foreign demons.
Ok i’m just going to quickly confirm that love has nothing to do with the heart it is an ancient myth. The only reason that they could even be associated is the fact that occasionally hormones such as adreniline can cause the heart to beat faster when you see someone you love. This hormone release is not actually anything to do with love as it does not happen everytime you see someone you love (don’t tell me it does beacuse that is a lie*), it actually happens when you are excited to see someone or something. Stop claiming that love has any relation to the universe, That is the most obserd belief! Love is at best a series of chemical reactions, if they where floating about the universe then not only could be very easily detect them but we could actually manipulate the levels to stop hatred (ie. war).
Expressions such as “I love you from the bottom of my heart” have no meaning, they originate from century’s ago when science was ruled by the church and therefore progress was limited. Now, science is not limited by a dusty book and we have since discovered that the emotion love has absolutely not link to the “bottom” or “top” of your heart!
*i can prove that if you want.
sorry quite tired when i wrote this… a few typo’s
A Physicist – You still don’t get it! You are dis-crediting what I’m saying using one aspect of Love, which is what you can feel and prove through science. What about explaining love using all aspects? Please include the part about how we must have faith in love. Include the part about love (that your trying to called an ancient myrth), but to me and probably you (if you would admit), is a beautiful way to express love to people. And it’s not non-sense, nor a myrth to say, “I love you from the bottom of my heart” or “I have so much love in my heart” even though the physical body feels love (I believe you said) in our brain.This is the part about Love which is explained FAITHFULLY!!! The part you, me, and science can’t not prove incorrect, only trust and/or believe in it or not.
Hope you understand, What I’m trying to say.
The Atheist – Yes, I believe I will still love my wife. But, YOU STILL DON’T GET IT!!!
And yes I do believe feelings emanate from the heart BUT, NOT PHYSICALLY! You and I both know the heart is an organ that pumps blood through-out the body PHYSICALLY, not love.
But when talking about the Heart FAITHFULLY…! ABSOULTELY…! I do believe love is felt in the Heart.
I know…, ABSOULTELY RIDICIOUS!!!! RIGHT???
YET, you yourself understood a faithful expression of Love remember, “I love my wife from the bottom of my heart”. Which, should have been retarded to hear (according to your understanding of love) yet you understood it. I wonder WHY!!!
In conclusion, You and I agree love is something you must have TRUST/FAITH/BELIEF in. I’m simply explaining LOVE’s faithful aspect in life. The aspect the Atheist community know little about since ya’ll expertise on Love is only on the Physical aspect of “LOVE”. OKAY!!!
im confused…why do people spend so much time attempting to disprove one another when they cant even prove their own belief themselves? Every theory whether religion or “science” goes back to one thing, where did the matter come from. Neither can prove this so one isn’t stupid and one really doesn’t take more faith than another. I am a christian and instead of getting angry at another person i just try to accept the fact that people think one is science and smart when i believe in the all powerful God, and they believe in the all powerful dirt. This argument frustrates me only because people get angry when nobody has circumstantial evidence to prove their own belief before they disprove someone elses
Joe – You are quite right i can’t prove where the universe originated from, there are many theories and hopefully science will find an answer soon. As i stated earlier, i am not condemning the existence of a higher power. I find it extremely unlikely but there are certain questions that otherwise can’t be answered at the moment.
This argument is not about whether or not a higher power exists, it is concerning the Christian god (and all other religions).
Phair – I am bored of explaining the same point to you over and over so i’m going to suggest that we stop discussing love as we’re not getting anywhere.
I still need you to explain this to me:
The christian religion is based on a book that no one can prove – You have faith in the bible.
Harry potter is based on a book no one can prove – I’m guessing you don’t have faith in harry potter!
Why do you have faith in the bible but not harry potter?
A Physicist – I trust in the Bible (you calls a dusty book) because of that which is written inside the book. Whereas, Harry Potter, Books about Lephrechauns, and etc, The things written in those books makes no-sense.
Why do you trust Science books and not the Bible (which is before or older than science books)???
If your reasoning will be because of what is written in those books…, I will be lost as to why my previous answers didn’t suffice.
And by the way…, The only reason why we’re dancing in circle around the topic of “Love” is because your dodging my question or treating it as invalid. Which shows me only what I have been saying all along.
YOU DON’T BELIEVE WHAT I’M SAYING ABOUT LOVE, and you can’t prove it WRONG!
But Love talked about Faithfully and/or better yet Spiritually, that’s where the romantic language of love is found, it’s rules, and that’s where God can only be discover (Faithfully and/or Spiritually).
Science books are written on the whole after years of experimentation. The contents of nearly all scientific books is fact. That is why i trust them.
The bible does not contain many facts, actually i contains a large number of lies such as walking on water, raising people from the dead, creating matter from nothing, creating the physical universe in 7 days, i could go on…
Believing in Harry Potter makes as much sense in believing the bible. Both are works of fiction that contain magic!
“Why do you trust Science books and not the Bible (which is before or older than science books)???”
Surely this is shooting yourself in the foot? To start with age has very little to do with anything, but if you want to bring it up humans knew very little about the world when the bible was written so it’s writers were much less intelligent that the writers of scientific books (or Harry Potter).
I am treating every thing you say about love as invalid because you are refusing to accept that love has no other “aspect”! It is an emotion caused by chemicals that is it! There is no magical love fairy floating around making you love your children, you love them because your brain (which is you by the way!) is telling you to. I most certainly can prove that love is just a chemical reaction as i’ve already told you, change the amounts of oxytocin in your brain etc.
Now can we please stop talking about love as you are refusing to listen to anything i say. Everything you say is opinion, everything i say is one the whole factually correct. That is why i don’t listen to anything you say.
IAN [another verbally violent atheist] – LOL…, why does christianity upset you so much…???
Anyway, Evolvution (to me) is basically “change” that takes place over a period of time. (i.e) mankind started out walking, now we can ride in cars, planes, and etc.
So yes, The Earth has gone through the process of Evolvution since it’s beginning and still is…, ABSOLUTELY!
BUT, I have a question! Can a seed evolve? or Can a seed “change” it’s kind or type of life it produces?
I don’t think an apple seed can evolve into something different, an apple seed will remain and always be an apple seed. RIGHT???
you lack any understanding of what evolution is, this is the kind of ignorance that makes me suggest that you should be learning biology with 10 year olds!
“can you seed evolution” – What does that mean!?
Anyway i think this might answer your question. Evolution does not happen to an organism it happens over generations of organisms.
I can very easily show you a species being forced to evolve.
If i take some bacteria and put them on a growth medium that has been sprayed with a anti-bacterial spray, all the bacteria will die except a few who will have a mutation in their genes that makes them resistant to this spray (mutations happen to every organism in the world – naturally). When these bacteria reproduce (by binary fission) all the new bacteria are resistant to the spray. This is evolution, the community of bacteria have become resistant to the spray.
This process takes approximately 2 days and i have done it hundreds of times.
Does this answer your question?
And will you answer mine?
Ignore the first bit… read your post wrong.
only ignore the line “can you seed evolution”. The rest all applies to you.
So no your answer didn’t suffice, would you care to venture another answer or do you want to just admit that the bible is as believable as Harry Potter?
A Physicist – I can go on and on as to why the Bible contains no lies. And how science makes no-sense Especially, when talking about Love outside of the physical body.
I will never tell and express to anybody I love them using the scientific defintion unless I want to sound CRAZY…!!! “Baby, I love you, can’t you see the oxytocin producing love and not fear inside of me” LOL… LOL… LOL…. my wife would laugh me to shame. OR, Son I love you, my body is telling me oxytocin is producing love for you as my son and not as my wife. LOL… LOL… LOL…
Trust me, I can go on and on clowning science in this fashion, WHY!!! Because I using the scientific meaning of “love” improperly.
And I know your understanding of the Bible is improper. WHY! it’s simple, you do not believe. Your blinded by science, you have no sight in life by faith. Yet, you admitted previously Love must be believed in. What a shame!!!
“There is no magical love fairy floating around making you love your children” [said by the Physicist] please Mr. Physicist, I never said that.
To Everyone – Stop saying things like magical, and love fairies, and other things of this nature. Say, “GOD” that’s what I (christians) believe in, not those other ridicious ideas people thought up! We’re talking about the Christian GOD, Right??? Okay well let stay on that. Thank You!
Also Physicist – If you can prove what I’m saying is wrong by keeping in mind my logic to the argument, then I’m all ears. But if you continue to dismiss what I’m saying holding to your failed argument (as far as I’m concerned). Then Okay! say what you want, I won’t be responding anymore.
I’m slightly confused as to where the logical argument is that you are putting forward?!
I gave about four examples of where the bible is lying and your reply was that of a child! You can’t just say i’m wrong and then not back the statement up with facts or at least an answer to my question.
“So no your answer didn’t suffice, would you care to venture another answer or do you want to just admit that the bible is as believable as Harry Potter?”
Answer the question!
My Friend, everthing can’t be proving (by mankind) in the physical realm of life. [that a fact] That’s why I didn’t respond to what you consider lies in the Bible. Second, I don’t have to prove God is Real to you. Why, God can prove himself Real and will one day.
Now there’s no need to have FAITH/TRUST/BELIEF in life, if everything can be proven. [fact]
So I don’t know what’s your problem being a person who’s faith is very small yet it exist. Why faith in anything?? Prove it all.
“I can very easily show you a species being forced to evolve.” [said by the Physicist]
REALLY, That would be a sight to see.
Question: Monkeys can evolve into a totally different CREATURE and not just a different type or kind or speices of MONKEYS…???
Science teaches and can prove this???
The Earth has evolved but we still called it Earth, Right???
I’m excited to know your answer!!!!
The earth has not evolved, no. That proves your lack of understanding of evolution. Evolution is a process that living organisms undergo over generations to help the species adapt to certain pressures and therefore survive.
A species is defined as a group of organisms that are capable of breeding and producing fertile offspring.
Monkey’s didn’t just evolve into humans, it is a gradual process. Over hundreds of thousands of years different generations of chimpanzees slowly developed traits such as standing that helped them survive to the age where they could reproduce and pass on that trait.
Your question is therefore incorrect as science has never taught that a monkey can evolve in to a whale! If this is not what you mean then please state your question more clearly.
Science has proven evolution, it is now a fact.
I spent a large amount of the last two years forcing bacteria to evolve and it’s not all that interesting to watch i can promise you! Why did you put “really” in capitals? Do you not believe it is possible? I have written a report on the entire experiment if you would like to see it. In fact just type “bacteria resistance experiment” in to google and i’m sure you’ll find something.
Is that the “exciting” answer you were looking for?! I doubt it.
Science has not proven evolution, Please don’t lie.
Evolution is still a theory.
So we are a different type of chimpanzee called humans..??? I’m I understanding you correctly???
If so, what a load of foolishness. This is ridicious. Stay away from this science theories.
My friend, everything in life that starts as a seed can only be what that seed will produced. The monkey’s seed will only produce monkeys. Evolution can not intervene and cause monkeys to change into a different creature. Humans are different creatures from Monkeys [fact]. Just as different as a whale is from a monkey.
“Science has not proven evolution, Please don’t lie.
Evolution is still a theory.”
Please tell me your joking!? The theory of evolution is fact, there is so much evidence in the favour of evolution that to say that it is not fact would be as stupid as saying that your mother did not give birth to you! Even the pope the head of Christianity (originally) has accepted the evolution is fact. So your disagreeing with the head of your religion!
Please don’t accuse me of lying before you do your research!
We are related to chimpanzee’s very closely indeed. If you find that weird you will be interested to know that you share approximately 98% of the same genes as a crab!
“My friend, everything in life that starts as a seed can only be what that seed will produced. The monkey’s seed will only produce monkeys. Evolution can not intervene and cause monkeys to change into a different creature. Humans are different creatures from Monkeys [fact]. Just as different as a whale is from a monkey.”
You must be one of the stupidest people I’ve ever talked with! NO MONKEYS HAVE SEEDS! Where do you think a plant seed comes from?! It comes from it’s parent which was a fully grown plant. When the plant is fertilised it requires a male and a female gamete. When these gamete’s are produced mutations occur. It is due to these mutations that evolution happens.
All life originally evolved from a bacteria like organism. EVERYTHING including you, whales etc.
Do not talk about things you know nothing about!
Your use of the word “theory” doesn’t match the way in which genuine science uses the same word. In science, “theory” is used to designate a body of collected facts and the numerous conclusions derived from them. Because additional work is continually added to that collection of fact, a “theory” is continually growing and improving. “Theory” does not equal “unsubstantiated” or “unproven” or “lacking in proof or fact”. Actually, a “theory” has an abundance of fact to be worthy of the name “theory”.
Chimpanzees are not primitive humans nor are humans advanced chimpanzees. You are naming two modern species and by modern I mean species found today whose genetic identity is more recent than the earlier species from which they derived. Science makes no claim that humans are descended from chimpanzees. What is does say is, because the chimpanzee and human share over 90% similar DNA, they are related through a now-extinct parent species from which each is descended. Chimpanzees are cousins, not the species from which we human beings derive. The shared DNA is indisputable. You do not have to take the fact of that shared DNA on faith, you could, if you so choose, examine the DNA yourself.
As it happens, evolution is continuous even now. Indeed, given the right conditions, some population of chimpanzees in isolation from other chimpanzees in very different environmental conditions than the average chimpanzee, given enough time, would become a distinct species unable to interbreed with the original population of chimpanzee, i.e., attempts at reproduction would fail or, in the least produce sterile offspring unable to produce children themselves. Think of it this way, there is no physical way a St. Bernard and a Chihuahua could breed with one another on their own. The obvious physical barriers would prevent it. Only through artificial means could these two dog breeds reproduce at present. The longer they are genetically isolated from one another, the greater the chances they will no longer be able to produce offspring even through artificial means. For intents and purposes, they are organisms who were once genetically wolves who have become two species. What was once wolf is now something else and all within the span of only a few hundred years or a few thousand at most.
P.S. Chimpanzees aren’t monkeys, they’re apes. They are at least as different from monkeys as we are from them and, if I’m not mistaken, genetically speaking, the chimpanzee is more like a human than it is your typical monkey.
I have been told not to give to much info a
medium friend told me no more info my bedroom door was slammed and a man size static force was uneasy my angel .I am going spiritual church bet i get told of but i can say i never believe in anything with out facts but remember facts hang innocent men.love you all.
Peter gore seer – (this is probably the only time I will response to you but anyway) WHAT…??? I don’t know what your trying to say… and I sure no one else does either.
The Physicist – The Pope is not the head of my religion, I’m not Catholic (Please speak what you know). I’m a christian, better yet call me a disciple of Christ.
Next, your trying to tell me Monkey don’t have seeds or sperm or whatever science says they have to produce more monkeys???
Sir, it been a pleasure for a while but this is where I will exit now…., your too busy calling me stupid instead of trying to understand my point. And in many cases can’t get over my typos (like you don’t make any)….. But it was fun while it last Thank You!!!!
Phairw, I have to again ask whether you’re being serious or not in denying evolution? Or are you again, much like your love argument, just being nonsensical for the sake of argument?
Evolution has been proven over and over again. In fact, we can use the theory of evolution (and by the way, calling it a theory does nothing to negate its validity, even though certain uneducated theists seem to think it does) to actively predict where we’ll find transitional fossils and what they’ll look like. Evolution, as a proven theory, is so complete that to deny it would be akin to denying that the earth is roughly spherical.
Do you realise just how ridiculous your argument is? Experiments in evolution have shown that a species can evolve to the point at which they lose the attributes that define them as a species within 40,000 generations. These aren’t small changes, these are huge changes (i.e. the difference between generation 1 and generation 40,000 is massive, the difference between generations 12,936 and 12,940 are very small), and they can happen VERY quickly in evolutionary terms. If you don’t believe that these small mutations happen, ask yourself why children aren’t exact copies of their parents? Yes, they share some similarities and characteristics, but they aren’t identical because they have mutated.
I don’t understand that you can deny a mountain of evidence, from a massive range of sources, most of which has been independently verified and tested, yet you still believe a book which claims the earth was created several thousand years after man domesticated the dog! Yes, we somehow had pet dogs before your God created the universe. That is the scale of your ignorance.
Picking up on a question you asked of A Physicist, as to why he believes in science books and not the Bible, I don’t want to put words into his mouth but for me, it’s simple. If I read something in a scientific book or journal, I can go out and test it for myself. I don’t have to take the author’s word for it, I can test it myself. Many people have taken a similar approach with the Bible, and tested some of its claims and found them to be false, lies, misrepresentations. For example, the earth is far older than the Bible claims, there was no great flood, many of the historical events and people did not exist (there’s a conspicuous lack of evidence for the existence of Jesus, for example, and on balance, it seems likely, given the evidence, that he didn’t actually exist at all) and there were species that predated humans that eventually evolved into humans. Humans most certainly were not just “created”. And these are just some examples, there are many more, some of which are even more egregious.
Returning to another point of yours, that I didn’t “get” your definition of love, I can only put that down to your not explaining it sufficiently. First you said love was a feeling, to which we explained it was actually caused by a chemical. Then you tried to claim that love comes from the heart, to which I pointed out that you can still love even if you have your heart replaced, and then you just stopped and claimed that I didn’t get it. Maybe I didn’t “get it” because you keep changing tact every time your argument is shown to be absurd?
Thank you that was beginning to give me a headache!
The Atheist – Listen, Evolution is valid. I stated this already. But to say Evolution is the reason for life and the world and not God and creation. Is silly (in my opinion).
I know Physicist…, I said opinion!
So does science when they say “Theories” Just because there are some truths surrounding Evolution doesn’t mean we should jump off the cliff with Evolution holding it’s Theories as our parachute.
Now I don’t care what you guys say, until you show me the actual evidence of humans evolving from chimps, I simply can not accept this as true. This sounds as bad as saying Lephrechaun, fairies, and etc is reality. And Yes, I understand (according to science) this will take a long time to prove. Well then leave it as a theory or just a possiblity according to science. Don’t say it’s right when it’s not possible to test beyond all reasonable doubt.
Also, I told ya’ll God is Love, ya’ll disagree. God/Love was reduce to simply an emotion (according to science). Ya’ll choose to not understand me because ya’ll ignore my logic to the argument. Or maybe ya’ll still don’t get it. Well too bad, I’m not going into that anymore.
All in All, the blog discission has not logically disproved the Christian God. You showed logical doubt but no proof. You can doubt anything you want even truth logically. There’s someone in jail right now for a crime they didn’t do. Why, because of Facts the jury saw as proof. I don’t know if I should acknowledge Pluto as a planet or not. Because science for years said it was a planet, providing facts to this matter. Now the science world is saying Pluto is not a planet do to new facts. Who’s to say they won’t change again.
I’ve discussed the origin of life previously on this blog. To summarise, a collection of chemicals understood to be present on earth in the days before first life can be combined to form RNA, which is the precursor to DNA, which is the blueprint for life. It’s truly fascinating that we can trace life back to it’s very beginning and I’d encourage you to look into it.
Scientific theory does not mean what you think it means. Hopefully this quote from the Wikipedia article will help:
Any clearer? A scientific theory is not something that is yet to be proven. It does not stop being a theory at the point it is proven. As much as you’d like it to, that’s not the way it works. Gravity is technically a theory, but you don’t tie yourself down at night so you don’t float away, do you?
So what would, in your eyes, constitute proof that we share a common ancestor with chimps? And let’s be clear here, we’re talking about shared ancestors with chimps, not that we directly evolved from chimps. No one is suggesting that. Do the numerous discovered intermediate species not suffice as proof? Finds such as Darwinius? And the fact that if you look where we predicted a species like Darwinius would appear on the Human Evolutionary Tree, the prediction was pretty spot-on. In fact, fossil discoveries have been shown, time and time again, to match up with our expectations based on evolutionary theory. That is why evolution is seen as fact, because it’s been proven to be accurate numerous times.
I do wonder why you put such a burden on proof on science, but do not extend the same burden of proof to your deity. As I pointed out, evolutionary theory has been shown to be very accurate many times. The Bible has been shown to be very inaccurate many times. Yet, for no good reason, you choose to trust one over the other. You choose to demand proof of one but not the other. Why do you intrinsically trust the Bible despite its flaws yet dismiss science despite the supporting facts?
The difference between you and I is that I give everything a fair hearing. I applied the same rules of logic to both science and religion. When you do this, it becomes very obvious, very quickly that there is no debate to be had.
You close by saying:
The point that you’re missing is that there is only once source for your definition of God. The Bible. And taking that once source, I have shown it to be flawed. So why would you believe any other part of it? You yourself admitted that I’d shown logical doubt, so are you now doubting the existence of Yahweh? It would be illogical not to, by your own definition, no?
This part applies to person as well. This article does not attempt to discredit or disprove all Gods (or the concept of a God, however unlikely this may be), just the Christian God. I have shown that that the Christian God as defined in the Bible does not exist. I’ve seen no argument that has countered the original point satisfactorily. The wider point is that we do not have to prove that your God, or any God, does not exist in the same way that if I suggested there was an invisible gremlin sitting on your shoulder, it wouldn’t be your responsibility to prove me wrong. It is the person making the ludicrous claim that has to prove it to be true, not the other way round.
Unfortunately this “debate” is going the way all theist-athest debates eventually go. Myself, and several others, have presented evidence to you. You have dismissed the evidence, or changed tact (God is love, no love is oxytocin, no, wait, love is in your heart, no, wait, God is love again – it’s a cyclical argument that you’ve not added anything to since your initial post) whilst not presenting any counter arguments. And no, ignorance does not count as a counter argument. You’ve certainly not presented any evidence to counter ours, far from it in fact.
And you didn’t answer my question. Why do you believe a book that says the world was created several thousand years after man had domesticated dogs?
To the Atheist, or the Physicist – I live in the NY/NJ area. I would love the chance to debate others like you on the subject.
If you can make it possible and If you want to make it possible I would love the chance to debate this with someone face to face. Maybe I’ll do better explaining myself in person.
Let me know
I would love to, unfortunately i live in London, England
Naumadd – WOW! Thank You, I really enjoyed reading you comments. THANK YOU…. THANK YOU…. THANK YOU….
A Physicist & The Atheist – I agreed almost with everything Naumadd written. (I hope you do also)
Everything he said about “Love” (outside of the scientific explanation) is what I have been trying to say is the FAITHFUL aspect of “Love”.
All the demonstrations, the expressions, even the rules people live by. The scientific explanation could never capture this.
(i.e.) “I will love my wife until the day I die” can’t be proven, only reasonably accepted by actions and words of FAITH.
Naumadd – You are right, I would have never participated in the blog convo if I wasn’t trying to get people to agree or believe in the Christian God.
Now I have been saying God is Love and I have said God/Love is the creator of the world, others have rejected without seeing my logic in the long debate. You seem to be closer to understand me. My reasonable evidence of the Almighty God is Love, that it. And this Love was expressed by Jesus Christ! He demonstrated the greatest Love of all by giving his life to the world that we might receive eternity (because his life is believed to be eternal). Every-day we take life to survive, and we call it food (whether its meats, and/or fruits, vegetables). But, no one is willing to give their life so others can survive unless they love them. This is the Love of God express to the world by Jesus Christ.
The Bible is known (to Christians) has the word of God, or the word of eternal love, words that expresses and tell stories (by former believers) about the love of God towards them & mankind. These words I tested in my own life by seeking an experience of Love according to the words written in the Bible and I really found God. And I can tell you, it’s impossible to know God without expressing and demonstrating complete faith in the words of the Bible. My comfort that this love (eternal love) is real is the feelings of joy, peace, and happiness that I get when going to church or praying, or hearing the preacher. Words I love to hear because it gives me hope, words that comforts me when life gets hard and greets me with pains and sorrows, words that have not failed me, words that revives me and keeps me feel good. The words of the Bible makes me feel like a child loved by his father. I can go on and on…..
Doesn’t this sound like true Love being expressed and verbally illustrated? Or does it sound like non-sense or a fairy tale or something ridiculous and not possible? What can anybody say other than whether or not they believe me…?
This was my point all the time.
PhairW,
You seem to have entirely missed my point on the subject of “love”. I never said that proof of the “love” one feels for another is derived from faith. That is clearly NOT “proof” as I use the term. I said that, given certain behaviors on your part, OTHER persons can make reasonable deductions with regard to the emotions you are experiencing and YOU can make reasonable deductions regarding the emotions experienced by others by observing their behaviors. Your actions and words will reasonably demonstrate what you are feeling at any particular moment. By observing the actions and words of others, you can reasonably conclude what they are feeling at any particular moment.
None of these conclusions are acts of faith as I describe them. They are reasonable deductions by real persons from the real behaviors of real people. Of course, what you believe about the emotions of another is largely dependent on your accurate observation and interpretations of the behaviors they exhibit. As most of us know, reliable observation and interpretation of the actions and words of others is tricky business. We all too often get it wrong.
Unlike the reasonable deductions of which I speak, “faith” conclusions are unreasonable. They discard the primacy of fact and reason and instead rely on unexplained whims that really tell you nothing rational at all. Any actions or words in response to such unreasonable conclusions are likely themselves to be unreasonable and irrational.
Naumadd – I can respect your explanation about science use of the word “theory” and I also appreciate and understand what your saying about Evolution.
But, my problem with science is facts isn’t always proof, just facts. And I gave examples previously, There are or was people who went to jail for a crime they didn’t commit because of facts (a lot of it too) that made them look guilty. Even the science world seems to be confuse about whether or not Pluto is a planet because of old and new facts. Now the Atheist ask earlier why do I required absolute proof from science and not for my believe in God? Science place that burden on themselves by excluding belief. So wherever belief/faith/trust is excluding, then those things must be absoultely proven true, leaving no doubt. Evolution is not absolutely proven. Just surrounded by alot of facts which seems to strongly support what you and other think about Evolution. But not me, I need complete proven truth that the world creation is Evolution. Science doesn’t used belief in there research so their force to prove it.
PhairW,
If a thing is a genuine fact, then it is an absolute truth. It is indisputable regardless of one’s point of view or interpretation. Whether or not it is a “proof” is dependent on the specific question one is asking. Certainly, if one wants to know if there is life on other plants in our solar system, the fact there is life on Earth is a fact but it isn’t proof pertaining to your question. If one wants to know if there is life on Earth, the indisputable fact that there is life on Earth seems to make the answer easy but, most importantly, the fact you are asking the question and that you yourself are alive and on Earth makes the answer rather self-evident. If something is a “fact” it is a truth independent of one’s point of view or interpretation. For that fact to be a “proof”, one has to have some specific question in mind and the proper interpretation of that fact must lead to logically-consistent conclusion. Of course, that question is derived from a human point of view and, the interpretation of the facts will also be from a human point of view. The facts themselves, however, are not.
I take from your second paragraph that you believe there are two kinds of “knowledge”, one derived exclusively from fact and reason and, the second derived exclusively from faith or belief. I disagree with you, of course. If you claim to have “knowledge of a god” exclusively through faith or belief, you are speaking of a “knowledge” that is quite unlike the “knowledge” science works diligently to discover. Because your personal definition of “knowledge” is so unlike the definition used by science, it is impossible for you to make any intelligent statements either comparing or contrasting “faith” and “science”. As your arguments make clear, you believe they are not at all the same and I agree with you. You do not believe what science discovers to be “knowledge” by your definition and, certainly, science does not believe “pure faith” to be any kind of knowledge at all. This is the primary reason why many say that science and faith are forever incompatible UNLESS, both compromise on their definitions of “knowledge”. That, I believe, is a mistake on the part of both and an unwarranted compromise on the part of science that ultimately destroys its purpose. In any search for truth, and in any construction of knowledge and wisdom that holds fact and reason as its primary or even its only sources, pure “faith” or pure “belief” characterized almost entirely by a rejection of fact and reason are considered unreliable. “Pure faith” can only lead to unwarranted conclusions which would not be “knowledge” in the rational sense. As you clearly illustrate, there are some who are living or at least attempting to live with a primary personal trust in non-factual non-reasoned belief and faith. To persons such as myself, such philosophies and practices appear nonsensical and both self and culturally destructive.
And by the way, it’s said that the word of God has to be preached in the four CORNERS of the Earth, how the f**k is that possible being the Earth is round.[said by Taylor]
Taylor – When the Bible speaks of the four corners of the Earth. It’s talking about North, South, East, West, and/or Up, Down, Right, Left. That what the Bible means by four corners of the Earth.
Here’s a Tip for everyone: The Bible represents the language of eternal love. Seek to understand and judge it’s meanings because not everything is literally spoken, especially since alot of things in the Bible are dreams and visions.
Emotions can’t be explained by science, therefor they don’t exist, but how many people can tell me that they don’t feel?
Actually, science has a great deal to say about human emotion – it’s called the “affective neuroscience of emotion” or the “cognitive neuroscience of emotion”. Just search for both terms and you’ll find plenty on the web to perhaps satisfy this question.
I would like to consider myself a critical thinker, and anybody who can categorize themselves under that title understands the need to seek sound evidence to guide decisions that they must make along the course of their lives. We find satisfaction in rational thinking and behavior, but that is not to say that irrational thinking and behavior do not form a part of us, for if it were so, we would never act on any sort of emotion seeing as how they are irrational behaviors to stimulation. Faith is an irrational thing, much like an emotion; in neither case do we contemplate rationally the information before us and the outcome that will occur if we so choose to act. I will never argue that faith is not inherent in all human beings. There are gaps in life that we cannot process rationally, and are therefore obligated to process irrationally, but this is by no means to say that we should live our life based on solely irrational behavior
I wish to make it very clear that I am in no way attempting to offend anyone with the following statement however this is the only conclusion that reason and logic have led me to believe. There is no proof of a supernatural God who concerns itself enough to interfere or intervene with life on this planet.
I do not believe God (portrayed as a man or creator; like the Bible portrays) exists. I cannot accept that there is an entity that has created a universe governed by probability (research quantum mechanics; when we get down to the smallest elements of the universe, quantum mechanics so eloquently predicts a jittery-chaotic universe based upon probability. You could even research string theory and M-theory). Not only this, but he creates a universe where his product of life can only arise by chance (an unfathomably miniscule chance, try doing research on the anthropic principle). Only then to pass judgment on his creations that are evolved products of countless chance occurrences (which by the way takes billions of years, and human existence has been an insignificant fraction of that time span). Not only that, out of all of the millions of planets that could harbour life, that he has created, somehow we are exceptional? Sorry, don’t buy it.
The God of the Bible provides structure and sanctuary in which a person can relinquish their hold on the concept of self-fulfillment that they so fervently cling to, and begin living in a new light.
Upon consideration, the idea of God, especially in Christianity, is the most intelligent and purposeful scam of all time. How better then to raise the awareness of countless individuals who are so indulged with satisfying their own desires? The central idea of God provides support. It provides a basis upon which we can rally humanity under a single banner, a single purpose. Underlying it all is the idea that it is more important for humanity to live harmoniously in utopical perfection as a whole, then to live as egocentrically, detached individuals. Love and help every human. And after all, it is hard to argue against the possibility that this is the only way that we can find meaning as a whole, as a species.
That is exactly what is wrong with people these days; they only give to others with the intentions of receiving something in return in the future. In one sentence, this proves exactly what is wrong with the idea of religion; eventually, you will be compensated. Why do you need to be compensated in order to do good in the world? Everyone is promised that if they do good in this life, they will be granted an eternity of happiness. But how dismal does that actually sound when you actually think about it? The only reason we ever do good is because we have this prize waiting for us at the finish line of life? That is truly a depressing thought, one that will lead humanity to its demise. If it is one of the goals of religion to liberate mankind as far as possible from the bondage of egocentric cravings and desires, then the idea of a personal God who compensates you in the afterlife is quite honestly the most contradictory and unfathomably selfish concept to have ever been manifested. I’m truly sorry if I have offended anybody’s views or beliefs, but this concept of compensation after death is a reality for a majority (not all), and I feel honestly bad.
My main interest in this entire discussion has been nothing more than to raise awareness. It would be nice for humanity to open its eyes and view the elaborate truth that has been hidden from them. I am not referring to Christianity, but to the preposterous monetary system that governs our planet and limits our species to sub-par slavery; “for even in physical slavery you are provided with food and shelter, however in economic slavery, you must provide food and shelter for yourselfâ€. The monetary system installed worldwide is the most prominent obstacle remaining for humanities global-interdependence. Eliminate money, and you eliminate a substantial amount of evil throughout the world, and you allow the progression of the human race as a whole. This is the first step that must be taken, and I guarantee it will allow every individual to make that first step towards accepting that we are all we have. By doing this you allow humanity to embrace itself, to embrace one another, to embrace our potential as a species. Only once we are united do we stand any chance of deciphering our universe, our meaning, and our purpose.
Once we have wisdom of the beginning, we shall have the beginning of wisdom.
oh and curt, human beings define specific emotions at specific times by interpreting their arousal and associating it with their environment. For example: if I notice I’m aroused by stimulation, and your obnoxious, I must be angry.
Naumadd is right, science has actually produced a fair amount of knowledge on emotions. If u care to debate me on this topic, I would more than gladly do so. I’m and undergrad student in psychology at York university going for a bachelor of science, I’m sure u can keep up.
I would love the chance to debate with you.But face to face. I’ve tried debating on this blog. But due to typos, misunderstood statements occurring often, and etc. I don’t have the fight in me anymore through bloging. I’ve decided I will only post in length one very short paragraph, straight to the point and meaningful when I deem necessary.
Your attending York Uni…, that’s in Queens NY or somewhere in the 5 boroughs. Let me know the time and place where we can debate for at least an hour. And I’ll do my best to schedule time to debate. I’m free (for now) Monday thru Friday from 10am until 1pm and Saturdays basically all day.Sundays of course I’m worshipping God, so nope can’t do Sundays
Let me know
Lol sry Phairw, you will need to let me know if u come to CANADA for that is the only way you shall have the chance to debate face to face with me. York university is in Toronto Ontario, not in NY state.
do u like my argument?
Oh, I’m sorry, there a York College in NY too.
Your argument was interesting at best, but I’m still holding my position of faith in God. Your argumemt didn’t cause me to do any further research or anything, but it’s interesting to hear the minds of unbelieving individuals.
Phairw, Disciple of Christ!!!!
I am for that, im never going to change my beliefs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Phairw, please understand that I do not intend to trash your beliefs, nor do I intend purposefully to in any way be offensive to you. However, I will state what I believe deeply in my heart, for I believe that there should be no reason why religion cannot be talked about, or have views expressed on it. Our culture has this perspective that discussions and opinions about religion are tabooed, but why should they be? I believe that so long as the discussion remains respectful, there should be no reason why this issue cannot be discussed.
For the rest of this post, I shall attempt to view things from the perspective that I truly believe in God, and I am going to attempt to prove that he exists.
Well, first, I know that deep down, as much as I would like to believe the Bible is true (maybe not a direct literal interpretation, but nevertheless somewhat accurate), I cannot use this fact as a foundation upon which I can convince myself that God exists; for the Bible is only true IF God exists, and I cannot accept this type of circular reasoning to base my beliefs on, for it does not hold its ground.
Second, I cannot prove to myself that God exists solely on what other people have told me, or from accounts that I have read/seen/ or heard about. I cannot be fully convinced by the word of mouth of others even if they are more educated then me in certain aspects of knowledge, as much as I would like to. At times, mostly throughout my childhood, passive acceptance of a teacher’s wisdom has been easy; involving almost no effortful independent thought. And for the most part, it would seem rational because the teacher should know more than me, and this teacher should serve as an icon or idol to me. And yet, I have the hindsight of knowing how disastrous this habit of passive acceptance can be to a man more often than not. Passive acceptance often leads to sheepish characteristics being promoted, and more often than not it entails deception. Therefore, if I am attempting to convince myself that God in fact exists, I will not let myself fall victim to the possible deception of others, nor will I follow passively along with the ideas of others if I cannot be fully convinced myself, after a critical analysis of their logic and reasoning.
Third, I have often considered the reasoning that the existence of God must be true because it has not been proven to be false. However, I have witnessed this logical fallacy many times before, and I believe it is known in Law terms as the argument from ignorance. In most modern criminal legal systems there is a presumption of innocence, and it is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove (usually “beyond reasonable doubt”) that a defendant has in fact committed a particular crime. It is a logical fallacy to presume that mere lack of evidence of innocence of a crime is instead evidence of guilt. Similarly, mere lack of evidence of guilt cannot be taken as evidence of innocence. Therefore, I cannot use this reasoning, to prove to myself that God exists.
Fourth, if God exists, than he has created a universe with purpose. However, there is nothing to suggest that His purpose has any relation or not to my purpose. It may, or it may not; for it seems reasonable to suppose that God would have a purpose linked to me, and just as reasonable that His purpose does not concern me. There are many obvious reasons why it seems reasonable to suppose that his purpose somehow involves me, however how can I justify that it is possible that his purpose has no relation to my purpose? Well, when I contemplate God, He is the highest being imaginable; far more knowledgeable, intuitive, and resourceful then I. In relation to Him, I am insignificant and reduced, much like an ant when compared to myself. When contemplating significance and purpose, the ant may find that his life is driven towards an end-goal (helping his colony) and that this end-goal does in fact have purpose. However, when a higher-being such as myself compares my purpose and meaning with that of the ant, I may find that this single ant is in fact insignificant (assuming it’s not the queen), to my purpose or meaning, or my general consideration. So by this logic, who am I to assume that God’s purpose has any relation to my purpose, or mine to his.
Methods attempted by others at trying to prove God’s existence have failed, therefore I shall refrain from considering their implications (not to mention I have already decided to try and find my own answer). So what is left?
Ok, well if I cannot prove that God exists, I am still willing to accept the fact that He exists; I do this on faith and I act without justifying why I do this. Condemn me if you will, but the idea of God existing seems blatantly obvious to me, and this is all that matters. It is even possible that I may never prove God’s existence, for God is infinite (unlimited, lying outside of space and time) while I am merely finite (limited, confined to space and time); it is possible that I may never recognize God or prove for certain that he exists.
But wait, if God is existent outside of the natural world and not confined to the here and now, while we are existent inside of the natural world and are confined to the here and now, does that raise the possibility that God may never be able to interact with the natural world? For God is supernatural, existing beyond the natural realm of the universe; unexplainable, undetectable, immeasurable, and abnormal. And yet, for him to intervene and interact with the natural world would contradict my idea of God, and not only that, his process of interacting should leave some measurable, detectable, or at least distinguishable trace that I can realize, of which I find no evidence.
Ok well I’m only beginning to cause doubt in myself so I will once again just assume that God exists. Ok, so He exists, and He exists in a state where there is no interaction between Him and his product of creation. Well, this in itself seems sort of perplexing, for why wouldn’t He want to be able to interact with his creation? Wait a minute…â€His creation If God created the universe out of nothing, what was there before the universe existed, and how did God become in charge of creating this universe? On top of all of this, if God is as I believe he is, does he know that He is actually God? Does he not contemplate his existence, where He came from, and why? How is he certain of his relation if regards to his position before and after the universe? Who or what was the originator of God? And who or what was the originator of the originator? AHHHH! I can’t handle this infinite regress! Fine, I shall assume once again that God has always been; he has no originator, and He was the only existing thing before the universe.
I find myself moving in a direction that opposes my original purpose; in the beginning, my conscious intentions were trying to prove Gods existence, and now, I find my conscious intentions are trying to rationalize my beliefs. As I dig deeper, I am forced to realise that my belief in the existence of God rests on nothing more than proposing assumptions to assert myself; it is my last-ditch effort in grasping for straws.
Is it possible that all these years I have been mistaken? Is it possible that countless people have be misinformed, myself included? I have fallen back on faith, as my reason and understanding do not distinguish a path of enlightenment. But how is this possible? How am I able to live in utter ignorance of the truth, and yet devote myself to believing a higher-being?
If I am being perfectly honest with myself, I think I already know the answer. For years, I was the victim of passive acceptance. Throughout my childhood, when my general knowledge of the world was at its least, I relied on obtaining information from the environment and mostly from others. Naturally, I assumed that the knowledge they were passing onto me was the truth, as most of the time it was and this helped me survive and develop. I have always looked up to someone, whether it is a parent, or an icon, or a role-model, and I have always trusted their word and desired their approval. I have developed a tendency to accept things as fact or truth if I believe that it can somehow help me develop my understanding, especially if these ‘facts’ or ‘truths’ are being told by someone remotely older with more experience of the world.
Passive acceptance can at times be quite beneficial, but it has developed a convincing “by-productâ€; the idea of God in religion. God is my big brother for whom I would do anything for acceptance, God is my father who I know will love me always, and God is the net that captures me when I fall. As children, we become conditioned for passive acceptance. As adults, we fail to realize that it is true that many aspects of religion are drawn-out ideas of childhood such as the idea of an ever-present all-loving parent, the feeling of guilt when no-one is looking, the lack of death, etc. We find faith for these reasons; it is a “by-product†of passive-acceptance. The idea of faith brings with it acceptance, belief, dependence, and loyalty.
Can I just inteject here just a little bit
to pose a Question. What in practical terms
are the primary purpose for the three major
schools of thoughts.
1.Religion
2.philosophy
3. science
The development of the mind separate MAN from
the beast of the field. Both are animated entities and are subjected to the universal laws of gravity only one can transend mentally. Which one do you think as the capability to comprehend that which is omipresent?
I would first like to mention that the idea of “religion as a ‘by-product’ theory†is by no means my original idea. The ethnologist Robert Hinde, in Why Gods Persist, and the anthropologists Pascal Boyer, in Religion Explained, and Scott Atran, in In Gods We Trust, have independently promoted the general idea of religion as a by-product of normal psychological dispositions. Other by-product explanations of religion have been proposed by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, Hinde, Shermer, Boyer, Atran, Bloom, Dennett, Keleman and others. I simply believed it was time that this information be brought to light in the discussion, seeing as how not one person has brought it up. There are many variations, but they generally promote the same idea.
I would love to hear your thoughts. Also, I myself find it rather interesting to hear the thoughts of both believers and non-believers; for it is interesting to see who believes because of rational reasoning, and those that believe simply on blind faith…
excuse the schoolboy logic what does evolution
mean. Gradual sucession from a simple form to amore complex form. The word is not suppose to explane the “what” but it go`s as far has to show the mechanical aspects of “how”. From
my learned experience in the art of any form
of investigation one must possess the basic understanding of any given subject to be eligible for comment or opinion. Just for the record from what point of the universal spectrum of reality do you stand Newtonian molecular mechanical or Einsteinian Quantum mechanical Biological being in the middle of these to reference points. END of Argument.
Dear Mr G A Williams…
Indeed I shall excuse your school boy logic, and your unfounded education on the subjects of evolution. Indeed if you truly believe that “Gradual succession from a simple form to a more complex form” is any sort of definition for evolution, then I shall you use own words against you and say that “one must possess the basic understanding of any given subject to be eligible for comment or opinion”.
First off, as anybody who has ANY SORT OF ‘BASIC’ UNDERSTANDING of Evolution would be able to laugh at your comment; for evolution–as a basic definition–is the change in the allele frequencies of a population over time.
Do some research before you claim such extravagant and ignorant statements like that.
Thank you.
I am involved with evil and god I was a none believer till a female using accult attacked me.I have facts proof of paranormal but I do not control it it is in control totally I cannot switch it on or off.I am careful I asked very little because i have got what I asked and it frightens my family and they are very important.My wife divorced me paranormal got out of control I now have a girlfriend she as seen a little only radio turning on and static energy round me but i keep the serious away from her.
I was possessed for six months on and off it cannot enter for to long the body starts to react against it.It enters thru the eyes but then thru the back of the head then you have limited control.Cuts dont heal for split seconds you smell and see no flesh on arms.It felt fantastic I did not feel threatened it said it was a angel I was over the moon life after death fantastic but I wanted more prove.So i wanted things to move things to rattle telly to change channel radio to come on then it started my wife was on her own.She was well six months later divorced this was the start of hell for me now i am confirmed in god there is a curse on me but that is another tail.
Oh and yep you’re right, everyone that has seen a ghost must have a mental illness.
I dont mind being called if people started believing me it could be very dangerous for me.And the attacks could be more violent the occult is real I am one that got a away I after watch my back.I spit in eye of evil I stand and face all evil.
man the occult is very real. Iv seen things that logic just doesn’t explain. Missions trips to Thailand had some strange experiences, like growly men voices coming out of 3 year old girls. An excorsism in someone’s house that went well, and then we got a call from them the next day that when they woke up, EVERYTHING in the room where the excorsism took place was upside down. tables, chairs, the clock on the wall, even the piano was upside down, yet the family didn’t hear anything all night. strange things, and knowing every fact and theory there is to know about atheism vs theism really does not help you there. you either really start believing or you lose your mind lol.
You are very lucky you were not attacked most possessions is mischief.But some times there is more than one evil entity involved then you may have a problem.
Your view of science is absolutely pathetic; what you fail to realize is that science does not dismiss things they fail to understand, they marvel in them. It is at the core of all scientists to admit ignorance in a particular matter and marvel in it, for it is that which drives them, and furthers their exploration into the unknown. It is EXACTLY that: “the unknown” which elevates science to the pursuit of knowledge. And not just “our own conclusions”. Science leads us to THE CONCLUSIONS.
I am going to upset the apple cart now I believe science does as much BAD as it does good.That it gets as many things WRONG as it gets right.And that it plays with things that should be left alone and there’s overt and covert science which is dangerous.Now you can CALL me ignorant fire it at me.
“Christians believe the Bible because they believe it was written by an infallible deity.”
I wonder how many christians belief this exactly as you’ve said it. The Bible was written by Paul and Luke and Isaiah and the rest. So if it was also written by God, then we have to re-define what “written” means.
I think your argument fell in a hole before it even started, and it never really recovered from that. But as they say in the movies; “Thank you for playing!”
For all you intellectually inept individuals who fail to demonstrate any form of rational
reasoning. Lets study the connondrum called life and all its constituency.
1. you must have life to duplicate life, things don`t just arise out of nothing that has no life (0+0=0) simple maths 0+1=1 (life is a universal constant).
2. The universe is based upon a divised sytems
of Laws and applied principles that operate with precession example this planet that we are living on first has to be built before you can have any life forms upon it. explain these stats it rotate on a axis every 24 hours it travels in a orderly orbit around the sun in 8,760hours in 12 months divide this by 24 give you 365 days this will go on
for ever in a pepertual motion. Until a greater force koncks it of orbit. Without this being set in motion their can be no you or me let alone any dynasaurs. (Q) what was it that set this universe in motion?
3. Humans lack understanding of the data in front of their minds. (Q) have got the power or the ability to cause your self into any existance? how did you get here and from where did you come.
4. When you no longer able to exist on this planet where do you go? as a matter of fact
your carcuss stays in the ground where does
the real you go (self or the ego).
5. The point of MAN existing on this planet
is to teach him somthing. What do you think that could be?
6. And lastly what did you bring when you came to this planet equally what will you take when you leave?
YOU ALL SPEND TO MUCH TIME DEBATING SUBJECT
THAT YOU HAVEN`T GRASP THE BASIC PRINCIPLES
OF?
EDUCATION BEFORE OPINIONS.
Why do atheist not believe proof of paranormal are police have used psychics for years in the second war some psychics were lock up for months so as not to give information about D day landings.If you look you may find more but they might be suffering delusions.Or could it be they are afraid they have been wrong or like me fools.
In 1943 a woman went to a psychic she was told her sons ship had blown up he was alive.She went to the admiralty his ship was HMS hood the BISMARC was responsible.Three survivors her son was one the psychic lady was arrested as a spy interrogated with no trial held for nine months in prison never tried.The ship sank three days before the seance.Because of D DAY thay imprisoned her it was on british TV.
the christian god resembles sages dressed in
white robes,in the sky.(it could be hinduism or some sage order.)
I noticed you mentioned that the Bible has many contradictions. Well, I’ve never seen a contradiction in the Bible. I’d love to see one. Can you show me a contradiction? I also noticed that you said that “science” has proved man to be millions of years old. But did you know that Radiometric Dating isn’t perfect? Just like everything else in the world, it can make mistakes. If you’re saying it’s never wrong, then you’re talking about it being god-like. Because nothing but God is perfect. In which case YOU would be the one contradicting yourself. You also mentioned that the oldest living fossle is over a million years old. Well, how did they find that out? By looking at the dirt? By analizing the fossle? Didn’t you read that they concluded it to be that old? They never said it was a fact. Plus, what about the fact that all they found was a jawbone? You are just believing what man says to be true instead of what God says to be true. Which is greater? The one who made us? Or us? The one who made us of course. When you said that the Bible was written by man, you forgot to mention that they wrote what God told them to. You also said that there’s no way that you could fit so many animals on a boat. Well, that was a biiig boat. Do you know how many humans you could fit into your bedroom? Without furniture, around 60+. Now remember, most of the creatures were bugs, so they were flying or climbing the ceiling. Plus, it never said every breed of every animal. He brought, for example, two dachsunds, two abbymisal cats, two parrots, and two geckos. Not a lab and a terrior etc. So he had plenty of room. You also say that the Bible says the world is flat, when Isaiah 40:22 clearly states: “God is enthroned above the circle of the earth”. When God said to stretch his word across the four corners of the world, he didn’t mean it like that. It was just another way of saying: Tell everyone the word of God around the far reaches of the earth. I don’t remember reading about pi being unknown at the time, if you could provide the Bible verse, that would be much appreciated. However, if I were to guess why he didn’t tell them. I would think it in the same way as asking your parents to do your homework; it’s your responsibility to do it, they’re not going to tell you the answers, they will just help you through it. By the way, the Bible is not one book by one author written in the time period of a month. The Bible is 66 books put together, written by 40 different authors, over a time period of 1,500 years. And they harmonize with each other. And that has not been repeated.
I can’t tell whether you’re joking or not with such ludicrous statements. On the off chance you’re not, here’s ~500 bible contradictions to get you started. But anyone who’s bothered to read the Bible will know that it’s so far from “perfect” an “inerrant” it’s not even funny.
You’re also a way off the mark with radiometric dating. No one claims it to be perfect, in fact it’s known to work within ranges. And you’re right, it can be inaccurate, but luckily there are numerous different ways to date materials, so we use the one that’s most applicable. Use the right tool for the job. The same way that most sane people apply their brain to the flood story in order to deduce that it’s completely and utterly ridiculous.
Ofcourse the bible has never been disproved.
It’s just like Nostradamus, everything is so cryptic that it could never be disproved.
You can pretty much make it fit with any story.
The bible was intentionally written that way.
Nevermind the whole 6500 years when we KNOW the earth is atleast 4.5 billion years old.
Seriously … is it that complicated?
The human race’s population double every 163 years. If the human race was 2,000,000 years old or even 100,000 years old do you know the ammount of people that would be alive on the planet right now?
All right let me touch briefly on the topics at hand. The creation of the earth, atom and eve, Noah’s ark, conclusion of the “disproved bible”.
you are correct to say that the earth is much older than humans, and the bible as well. however the word of the bible is written by man, though it is the word of the Lord. God created the earth in six days then rested on the seventh correct? In whose eyes? the idea of this place being created in a mer seven days is absurd. through our eyes seven days is impossible,but how long is one day to God? one day to God could be millions of years? the existence of time has been long disproved by Einstein. Time was created by man. so you trying to disprove god with the time frame of man is void.
next atom and eve, they were the first humans on earth created by God in God’s image. No doubt there had to have been many homo-erectus nut non that where created in God’s own image that was reserved for atom and eve. God is infallible but he must have experimented before he created Atom and eve.
Noah’s ark, true it would be nearly impossible to fit 20 million spices on a boat. however you are leaving out the combination of Geology and Biology. The study of the earth and its inhabitants have shown that life uses Natural selection to adapt to its environment.(just so i don’t contradict myself I am not speaking of evolution, but just adaptation.) where as we have 20 million spices today, back then Noah may have saved but 100,000 or maybe even a million. Despite this fact, Noah saved enough animals to procreate the species we know today. Charles Darwin studied the adaptation of animals and it nearly killed him to write his book , “Theory of evolution” because he didn’t want to destroy an entire civilization built upon religious morals. if you successfully disprove a deity then what…? our eyes are open? to what? to nothing? personally I would rather die and be in the presents of the lord and saviors of my faith than to be lost in an eternity of nothingness. you are lost i pray God will find you.
Just to rebuttal your in infallible attempt to disprove God.
” The Bible is inaccurate- therefore the followers of God are Fallible- therefore the definition of God is one’s own opinion- therefore God created us with the ability to free think, so don’t waste it trying to disprove something that is at a higher thinking level of the human race. Join the chess club” If you truly want to understand the word of God become a paster or a priest and follow him. otherwise go back to playing call of duty kid God can not be cheated, disproved, or forgotten. however you will be, this blog will be, and atheists will be. God will remain as long as my eyes stay open to his good grace. in other words GO FUCK YOUR SELF!
hey retard a thought you wee a ignorant christian “atom and eve” i thouht it was adam anyway non of it is true so who cares
I really can’t believe that this is really being argued against. First of all, nobody has the infinite knowledge to know whether or not God exists in the things that we don’t understand. That’s what makes Him God and us not.
Radiometric dating! LOL!!! That is a feeble comeback. All of the dating methods are flawed to some degree. If I give you a corrupt or messed up formula, chances are that you’re going to get a messed up answer.
Six days the world was created. Six of whose days? God does not have days so there is no other alternative than six literal days. The reason that 6 days was used is to provide us with the way in which we are to use our time. Work 6 days and rest for 1. Why are there only 7 days in a week? It has no astronomical value like days, months and years.
God judged the world by the flood of Noah or Evolutionary processes did the same with asteroids which wiped out dinosaurs that are still in tact!
Sorry buddy, I know that I’m about to ruffle a few feathers here, but there are roughly 5800 different KINDS of animals. Now before you give birth to a golden goose egg, I want to shed some light on some things. Canines produce canines. Birds produce birds. If Noah took two different crocodilian on the ark, I’m sure that we would get the different subspecies in about 6-6500 years. At least Noah had two of each KIND where evolution has dirt and molecules that came from nowhere. Now that I made my point, subspecies do not count when it comes to specific kinds. First of all, the word species originated by a Creationist to describe the “special creations” that God made.
You don’t have to be a priest or pastor to understand the bible. You just have to read it with an open mind and pray for knowledge and understanding.
how stupid are you 5800 species there are 100s of millions. Also why did your deity make life on other planets such as Mars and possibly other planets in the universe ? By the way watch the documnetary Nova:buried secrets of the bible, the try to argue for the old testment. It may open your god sealed eyes.
Yeah, in the bible there is no mention of a heaven for animals. Thus, why is this so. Is it because humans are not animals, that they are different? Then if we are different, the bible is suggesting that humans are totally different. How can this be so? We know that humans are differentiated just because they are thinking. The fact that we believe in a god shows our delusion, that we believe in a god to hide our fear of death, our fear of our consciousness not surviving for all eternity, to just dissappear.
That is a amzing statement and i aplaude you as i also as a fellow athiest had that exact same thought
The bible declares that God is infallible. It also states that man is imperfect. Logic by definition is impossible, because logic requires all possible factors, and perfect reasoning (impossible) to come to the most beneficial conclusion. LOL.
You say that because the Bible doesn’t give exact answers, it is fallible, and therefore God’s word is fallible. But the funny thing is, if you understand that man is imperfect,then how could we possibly comprehend a perfect book created by an infallible God?
I’m not trying to turn you into Christians, because I understand what it’s like being an atheist. It won’t take a 15 year old on a random website named “THE-ATHEIST.COM” to convince you that God exists, but how can all that is around us be random chance? You don’t just roll a dice and hope a universe will pop out… God bless – especially those who study the universe all their live just to try and prove it’s pointless. LOL. LMAOnaise!
Isn’t it funny how people spend their entire lives studying the complexities of the universe just to try and prove it’s all pointless?
The FACT is… God exists.
Simple.
Your “Logic” is that because there are inaccuracies in the Bible, that God is fallible, but the Bible wasn’t written by God. The Bible was written by people. People who were inspired by God, but were themselves fallible. Besides, if God is perfect, and we’re not, how could we possibly understand anything he has to say?
Ironically, logic by definition is supposed to give the perfect answer given all variables, however, as we are imperfect, we cannot find all variables, or make the perfect decision, or even comprehend the answer.
God exists.
I don’t care if you disagree, because I know it won’t take a 15 year-old to convince you that its hypocritical to say that you don’t care about the possiblity of God, when you have to make a website to justify yourself. God bless and good luck.
You like many others are basing are whole athiest view on the writing done by this one athiest, who seems quite intellegnt. Like many other christians are brainwashed and will not except thruth and evidence. We are not just disproving the bible but also argueing what really happened such as the bing bang, evolution exc. Slowly religious theories are being disgarded and scientific fact is being accepted. If you live a long enouggh life you may the world tilt to atheism and finally except the true light of the world science.
Here’s an interesting quantum mechanic fact. Time is relative to ones position or location in the 4th dimension (Space and Time) therefore 7 days could be Trillions of years in-fact to our space time.
2nd statement, Once again What I’ve typed up above.
3rd Noah, Your right seems impossible. But once again science will tell you everything is possible with power. Power can shift anything and everything. Even down to the basic building blocks of the universe. Supposing God existed, and is all powerful, It would make it very possible.
and last, you say the bible is written by man and is fail able. This is true, I fail to see your point. I don’t recall it ever saying “THIS BOOK IS WRITTEN BY THE ALMIGHTY GOD!”
In fact it clearly says the “Gospel according to ” Which is from their memory. And the last note It never once said the earth is flat. Never. Read it again. Unless your looking at the catholic Bible which has been warped and changed from the original text. it doesn’t say it.
And as a last note as someone who so strongly agrees with science over religion, let me explain a little bit of what I call “Basics”
You see Even the most common “Laws of physics” can’t Be proven. That’s right, they CANT. You see we have guesses and Ideas of how the world works and how these laws apply But nothing to really say a “Fact”. Therefore technically The laws aren’t laws but best guesses which would fall under the ruling of “Theory”. Now we add out everyday modern science based on the “Theory’s” and what do we have? oh yes, a Philosophy. Hmm.. now lets Put this in an equation shall we? If science = Philosophy, and to believe that Science is Fact. Does that mean you must have Faith in science? Indeed it does. therefore Science = Faith = Religion in the end both require the same amount of faith and trying to disprove one with the other is foolish. If your going to argue again, Learn some more of your “Faith”, Because apparently you are a very stereotypical arguer.
The point of the bible is not to try and prove whether God exists or not. The bible is here to teach us how to love and be righteous through stories and the word of God. I am an atheist who believes that we should love and care for one another. However, I think all the other atheists are going too far to try to prove that the bible is wrong. The point of the bible is not to be literal. It is here to teach selfless love and kindness, not to explain evolution or something like that.
While I was reading this I couldn’t help but chuckle.
The first thing that struck me when I read this is that you sound exactly like anyone else who argues for or against faith. To simplify what I’m about to say in so many words: you are trying to disprove something’s existence which, by scientific definition, is impossible. You can arm-chair philosophize all day about why the bible’s contradictions or inaccuracies indicate the lack of an omnipotent deity, but it won’t get you anywhere other than your own opinion.
Quite frankly the fact that you even feel the need to make this argument indicates either a need for validation of your own opinions, or a disdain for religion, a sign of immaturity. Regardless of religion, tolerance in all things is to be sought after. Wars over religion are fought over intolerance. Hate crimes stem from intolerance. Religious persecution stems from intolerance. I’m sure you see where I’m going with this.
Second, if you’re so confident that the bible is wrong, then what was your point in posting this? You either wanted to convert people to atheism, which I doubt since you’re so obtuse about your evidence and arguments, or you’re trying to pick a fight with religious people. Either way, you’re not changing anything, and you’re not helping anyone.
To close, my personal favorite point to bring up with atheists: Pascal’s wager. Look it up.
Your personal favourite is Pascal’s Wager? Maybe people who lack basic logical reasoning will be taken in by that deeply flawed argument, but the rest of us realize that it only leads people not to worship any God, if they truly buy in to the underlying principal.
And of course, even if it did hold up logically, only those with no principals, those who do not care about the truth, would use it as a basis for their lives.
I understand the feelings of someone trying to prove the existence of GOD logically. BUt have we ever realised how much advanced is our capacity of logic. Can GOD be sought for logically or is it beyond all logic and to that effect can we accept the fact the we are not “intelligent” enough to feel GOD.The human mind could not fly planes some centuries back but now it can. so what is the present stage of evolution of our mind. Is it developped enough to logically approve or disapprove GOD. I would appreciate if someone could clarify me on this
Hi, i just read this and I just wanted to say. Could it be
possible that God created the world a certain age rather than a
completely new one? He did create Adam and Eve as adults, not
adolescents. Also, the Hebrew word for day, “yom” can actually mean
either a 24-hour day or a certain period of time. That could range
from a certain length of time including years.
If you take the bible as literal absolute fact, you’re an idiot. The bible was written by man through the inspiration of god. It’s meant as a guide. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but where science falls short and can’t explain something, there’s god.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
I’ve spoken to a few athiests (some who are my good friends) and I always ask them what stops them from believing in God and the answer is usually that there is a lack of evidence. By assuming that this “lack of evidence” means that God does not exist they try so hard to find their own evidence against it.
Well, as Christians we believe there is so much evidence that God provided to reveal himself and this is in the Bible, and by that means, if you can disprove the Bible, you leave me an Athiest like yourself. The problem is- you cant. While you claim we can’t prove it is true, you can’t prove it is not.
The factor you’re leaving out is faith. We who are saved are saved by faith(as the bible verse says) and this is the element Atheists lack. They claim they will believe in God with evidence and proofs but with faith? believing in something you cant see, taste, smell, touch, hear, “prove”? That’s unacceptable! Like many preceding posts have done, Christians will share the evidence that we see make the God of the bible real but no matter what evidence we can give, an athiest will try to disprove it. Why? Because of this lack of faith in a living God and too much faith within themselves.
What i’m getting at is this: A Christian knows that the God of the bible is real through faith. An athiest wants to know if the God of the bible is real through proof. Epheshians 2:8 does not say we are saved by evidence. its by faith. You could say “how do you know that this verse is real? faith. How do you know the Bible is real? faith. How do you know God is real? faith. Yes, this may not be the “evidence” athiests want, but it is the single factor upon which we believe we are saved. You guys refuse to believe because evidence is essential, and faith is unacceptable. Yet it is by faith alone that we stand here believing so strongly against your claims.
The best picture i can paint is this. If I loved rootbeer or something and said this rootbeer is so good, and i love drinking it because i believe its good and you never tried rootbeer in your life, you could tell me evidence on why its not good, “i heard it tastes bad” “too many calories” “it smells gross”, but you haven’t tried it. In the same sense, you have no faith, just many claims on why Christianity should be false. And as the bible says, this is what separates Christians from non-christians. We have this faith and know that the God of the bible exists through this faith, and you guys can not accept this “faith” and you need tangible and provable evidence to believe in the Christian God. By asking for evidence, or for proof, or for trying to disprove the bible or our beliefs, you are showing exactly what the bible (which we believe is true) defines Christians and non Christians as. Christians are those that have faith, those that don’t have faith are non Christians.
You can not argue “i dont have faith and there is no God by this and that evidence” when the object of your criticisms are those who have faith, because you are lacking what we have. The same way we can not give you faith but can give you evidence on why the Christian God exists, you can not take away our faith but you can try to find as many loopholes (which are not really loopholes since they anything you say is false about the Bible is refutable) that you want.
Is it not better to gaze upon the stars and wonder and try to explain factually and scientifically how it got there then rather to say “oh god did it”. I am a very strong young Athiest and always will be. There is much dissaproving the entire old testament of the bible and most of the new in many books and documntries such as: NOVA the bibles buried secrets and others;also there is evidence to truthfully explain our universe and past. Religion is a firewall in the computer of knowledge constantly interupting are research and understanding. If not for religion there would be less secregation, war, violence and hate. Religion tears apart instead of bringing together people. I dream of a world entirely Athiest and hope my dream will be realised. Why lie to people and give them false hope when we could aspire in the truth and marvel of science and improve this world for the better.
Ok, so to start out, It dose say in the bible that God created the earth in 6 days. However, it dosnt say how long those days were. God is above time, so they say, so one day for him could be 500 years to us. When comes to the whole Adam and Even thing, it says in the bible they began in the garden of eden and some theorys out there belive that Adam and eve were in the garden while the earth was being created and so hence their appeance. Also, With the Noah and the Ark story, In the bible it is said that the animals came to Noah. So they didnt have to come to him. It also states in the bible “With Christ all things are possible” even the things that are considered physically immposible. I would like to finsh off saying that if you look at all religons out there, they all metion there being “a great flood” and there are historical records out there saying that one happened. If a great flood did in fact happen how could species begin to reappear? Some had to survive somehow. TADA: Noah’s arch.
Finally, Athiesim is the BELIVE that there is no God. you still belive something. And by saying your an athiest is saying you BELIVE in no God. There is still BELIFE there.
Hey!
Great post! Love it how controversial this is, and how the religious people think us scientists are “biased” (I think you might want to read some philosophy of science, which any good scientist follows, to see how we really do science…).
Anyway, just wanted to comment and say, whilst that is a great derivation to logically disprove god, I feel as though many religious people will not believe it, as you are using science to disprove many of the facts that the bible claims. This is all good for us scientists, but religious people do not believe in science (I know one who doesnt even believe in GENES! How ridiculous when I, as a neuroscientist, manipulate genes every day!!).
Therefore, I propose you attempt to disprove god through the bible only. This is much easier than you think, and for some good inspiration, check out this website:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Peace and love to you all 😀
You say we “believe in science”. Here is a short list of things people have believed in: god(s), the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Easter bunny, unicorns, fairies, etc. Notice anything interesting about that list? Every one of those things cannot be proven. Only children believe in things until they gain the necessary knowledge to know different. Belief is completely destroyed by knowledge. They cannot co-exist logically with each other. The only one we seem to argue about is the god(s) one. We don’t believe in science. Belief means that when we grow and learn (science), We eventually see that the myths are not facts. I do not want to “Believe” in anything, I want to know. Belief is only used by those people who are too blinded their religion to see the falseness of this ancient writing. Don’t even try to give me belief, give me knowledge.
It is very sad to read writings such as these. The true question would be if you would die and burn in hell for let’s say just 30 minutes and then came back to life would you believe? To start off the knowledge that this guy has in the Bible is wrong and I don’t have time to show him for if I did I would be a very long post. The truth is that science as the Bible will always be questioned no matter how far science advances or how great it gets science will always be questionable. Let’s start with the first theory the creation of the world – where did the universe came from? How did it get created (the whole universe)? And so forth. Scientist can only get real facts and answers from what has already been created. Even there theory of how humans came to be which they state we came from monkeys even that is very questionable and will never be a Fact. For why don’t we see anymore mutations from which supposedly human evolve from? They come back and say well throughout the years humans have mutated in time for people in the 1960 have a different mind, point of view, culture or live style then a person that lives in 2010. Times indeed have evolved, but humanity has not we are still the same types of humans that walk, eat, talk, sleep and so on. God’s power is not just visual and the things he does, but we can also take a look at evil, satan, demons witchcraft and so forth. If you get into any of these things you will come to realize that it’s truly real and will have a better view of how God himself is also real. I wish I had more time to explain this but I don’t so for all of you that say God isn’t real you’ll find out the truth after death and by that time it will be too late. I just hope you figure it out before then like that you won’t run into reality. God bless everyone and remember Jesus Loves You.
Dude. Christianity has been around for WAY more than 2000 years. It’s been around for around 8000… Which is how long the earth has been around. Science has also been around that long. Get your facts straight.
such as the value of pi being unknown at the time (surely God would have known it!?!).
Yeah, but if God would’ve mentioned that, two things could’ve happened… A: The Bible would’ve turned into a math lesson; B: Jesus, if he said this, would have been a scientific genius/professor, thus abolishing his claim to being a pretty normal guy. Yes, it does take a Cristian to point out these things most times. Yes I am a Christian. Yes I am Fourteen years of age. No, nothing you say will ever sway my belief.
Radioactive dating is INNACURATE…JUST GOOGLE RADIOACTIVE DATING FAILURES…. Plus, the EARTH is longer than that. Six days, but YAHWEH, when correctly translated, said SIX PERIODS. And you can divide atoms, it becomes protons, neutrons, and electrons, and then quarks.
Next you are going to tell me that santa and the easter bunny aren’t real either… whatever
One tiny thing I’d like to bring up, you said that there is no way Noah could have ever fit all the millions of species of animals into his boat. I agree! From what I understand, Noah didn’t actually take, for example, every breed of dogs. He actually only took 2 but their gene make up included other dogs. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard this, but that is why poodles are known as the dumbest dogs in the world. They have a terrible gene make up. And I think, not quite sure, but I think they actually do not possess the needed genes to ever breed any other type of dog except poodle. Correct me if I’m wrong. Sorry if I didn’t word this well.
ok lets say god exists. then the first being he created is the worst ,lucifer. didn’t god know he’d turn evil ? cant he stop him?
adam and eve had cain and abel. where did the rest of the people come from. god loves incest
freedom of choice ? ok when i go to heaven can i choose to go back to my old life?
is heaven perfect , if not is it heaven. or is it a matrix like unreality, if any afterlife exists at all.in heaven i’d like to be able to look down upon the things i love most, like my children. and what if my daughter wre getting raped. not a good day in heaven for me. and if you knew your best friend watched your child get raped and did nothing would you ever forgive them, yet you worship god who does nothing
Why are we disproving god? I mean it is the christian population’s job to prove god exists. If i were to come up to you and declare that i have superpowers would i be right simply because you couldn’t prove me wrong? No. It is my need to prove that i have superpowers. Just because science is currently unable to completely disprove the existence of god, that does not make you correct. Untill you prove god fully the statement is as much reliable as the theory of evolution. In fact it is less reliable as evolution has possible scenarios and facts which support it’s position. All you have is the blunt claim that the god is real because the bible claims it. And that the bible is true because it was written by or in the inspiration of god. That’s ignorantly stupid circular logic at its most pathetic. Cut that circle at any point and you successfully stop it all in its tracks. Science has proven the bible to be faulty on many points. There’s the cut. And to extend on that, science adjusts and improves its knowledge and views based on observation of what IS the truth (everything you see around you, because you cannot deny it’s thier or its nature). Religion has sat stubbornly on the idea of god for thousands of years now. Here’s a challenge. You want us to disprove god? How about you disprove evolution? You think you can handle the complexity of a theory like that? Or would you preffer something a little dumber to stop that mushroom in your head from throbbing? How about another religion? Prove why another christian, catholic or islamic belief is wrong and i’ll prove your god wrong too. Religion fit perfectly to what we knew about the world in that time. but as usual science kept improving and religion is slowly being destroyed by it. Remember when you thought the world was flat? Or when pi was 3 to you? Or perhaps that based on the math in the king james version of the bible jesus is already 11 years late? think about it
we find out that science is wrong every day…is used to be science that said the world was flat, then something new disproved that… all science is theories. your silly for believing everything science says. good luck with that
Dude, really? you wrote like, 20 paragraphs ( I didn’t count, I was already pissed by the time I got to the second sentence) just to “prove” that my god isn’t real. I find this very disrespectful. My God could do things you couldn’t even imagine. If you dont mess with my religion, I won’t mess with yours. I’m prayin for you bro. I hope you change your mind about what you think about God.
Sorry you think that. I’m praying for you bro. Hope you change your mind
From everything I have read, even if God wasnt real ( which I am not convinced) I am still so pleased to be a Christian. Mainly because the just by 1 the language and 2 the energy the Christian side seems so much happier. My question to all you Athiests is what is it that makes you so angry to see someone simply believing. Don’t say its because “they dont accept you or they judge you or try to convert you” I think it is something more. you obviously have never had or lost the connection more like relationship with God. You can deny that all you want but that can be the only reason for such hatred and resentment. When Christians say they will pray for you it isnt to change your mind, its to change your outcome. We know God is forgiving and we hope that by our prayers for you he will forgive you and reduce his wrath. We do care about you. As painful your words and how I cannot agree with what you are doing to Our Lord I would never wish Gods wrath on you or the clutches of Saten. I am very sorry that you cannot find faith and if you want to look the other way I cant stop you but please stop trying to bring others down with you. Even if you athiests or other non-beleiver don’t agree with us we are happy with our faith
_God bless
I haven’t read all the posts, but the posts I did read were very interesting. I have a question, if God is infallable, and man is fallible…what does that say about all the theories and science that we have that came from MAN? If man is so fickle, fragile, decieved and wrong on more accounts than right, who says that our technological advancements are right and true if man is indeed fallible? How does that make sense..? I’m not trying to be rude..I’m just restating exactly what you said with the evidence and proof you shared.
Dear Mr. Atheist:
The search for proof or disproof of God via empiricism inherent to natural science or positivism inherent to “theoretical” science (a field itself nearly faith-based) is worthwhile only as a mental exercise period, but in the end will produce no definitive result just as it has failed through the millenia. Maybe that means it is foolhardy. And to presume our modern thinking is finer tuned than the best minds in history is sheer pride and utter folly. In fact we have likely blurred the quality of our thinking with technology rather than sharpened it.
As for the mistakes God has made, God admits in the bible. Seek it out with the right heart and you will find that God repents of having made man (humanity), for all the evil humanity perpetrates against God and the suffering man commits upon one another. Clearly, God has enough character to admit this one glaring error and I have experienced it as true.
The Book also states that God is “Spirit”, God is “Life” and God is “Love”. These attributes of God are closer to our organic being and the best minds our race has ever produced still struggle with their meanings, their power and the extent of their operational realms. Show me in science true and discernible evidence of spirit. Phenomena certainly occur that points to something that might be spirit acting through and upon space and time. But I’m certainly not satisfied such “reports” are not tricks of the mind or instrumental distortions. And what truly is the origin of Life? What is love? You see, we will not agree on these things we have evidence of, albeit nebulous evidence at best. So how can we agree that God exists or does not exist? In fact, an atheist can merely prove to him or herself there is no room for a God in his life.
The only way to prove the existence of God is to know God spiritually. The personal experience and witness of God deep in one’s own spirit is presumably the greatest gift in life. But one can never know God directly, and certainly not in the empirical or positivistic sense that can be reduced to simple statements of fact which you seek as proof positive. However, one can certainly believe with all his and her heart (an experience called “I know that I know” that he(she) has experienced God in mystery. I can not provide to your satisfaction statements of fact of the authenticity and reality of my experience which you can truth-test. So then, is it belief only or is it belief that produces a knowledge of God that is forever limited to first-hand knowledge. Like the origin of life, what comes first, the chicken or the egg. In the case of believer’s, whom you chose to call theists, – a wholly inadequate description, the willingness to believe coupled with a hunger for truth beyond one’s own belly and eyeballs comes first, then spiritually the belief becomes manifest inside one’s being, then the abiding with and in God, maybe only once, maybe reoccurring, then the personal knowledge of God finally follows. So, you will continue to think theists who actually believe are fools. The bible says that also.
Let’s use for a moment the analogy of the family down the street. You know a family lives in a particular house down the street. At first that is all you know. You learn that family has moved here from Toledo. And for a while that is all you know. Then you learn that there is a dad, mom, two boys and a girl. Later you learn the ages of the boys and girl and that the younger boy is autistic. The father works as a chemist at the plant and the mother professionally swims the Columbia River between bridge games with her family, to stay in shape. When you walk by their home sometime you hear them argue and you glean more information, more facts. You pile fact upon fact, heresay upon heresay. Over time you have accumulated more and more facts about this group of people one can call a family. And on one particular day you run into the dad and mom, you feel by the weight of cold facts you already know them. You share a brief neighborly chat and exchange names that you have since forgotten. And one day in conversation at the mall someone asks do you know that family. Automatically adding it all up in your head and reply, yes I know them. Which of course is not true. In fact you know all about them, a whole flurry of facts acquired over a period of time. But the overriding fact is that you never took the time or had the opportunity to talk with them, break bread, learn of goals, fears, beliefs, sorrows and the like. You don’t know a single one as the person he and she is much less how they feel and act with one another. It is the same thing with God. Even theists who are theists by thought and philosophy can know all about God, but never broke bread, knew God in the Godhead Person God is; in the miraculous way God can reach into ones heart and abide deep in the human spirit in response to one’s desire to abide with God.
It says that God is Spirit and can only be apprehended by the spirit residing deep in the heart of man. That little bit of spirit exists in the seat of the soul where the conscience and the root of morality also reside. Can I prove this to you. No one can. It to must first be a matter of willingness to believe, then once experienced becomes a personal knowing. To begin to approach God one needs faith, which is “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen”. Yet you seek to know God by the evidence in the world and beyond the globe through science, which again is relegated to observable phenomena in order to prove to yourself that God exists and you are not a fool to believe as such. The bottom line Mr. Atheist is that you flew from the high perch of your own thinking hoping to disprove God and uphold your own unbelief even before you started. While attempting to disprove the existence of God you merely reveal the confusion in your thinking, showing ignorance of spiritual things, things that will never meet the standards of truth required of the sciences. I see this conflation between ontology and empiricism everywhere rampant in our over-materialized consciousness. Start back at origins: facts are facts and not truths.
All you have succeeded in proving is that you do not what to find God and would run away if you even got close. Clearly the earnest deposit that once lay deep in a child’s bosom has been usurped by something else. Maybe it’s too much Darwin and not enough Spinoza. Maybe it’s the pride of knowledge. Maybe it’s the university propaganda. I don’t know and I will not pontificate on your behalf. But as a seeker of the truth, put your own mind aside and look inside and all around you, at every bit of the natural world of which you are a dear part. You have to admit that with so much Organization evident everywhere in all things, phenomena and processes, such organization implies intelligence beyond happenstance that put it and holds it all together. In fact, the only evidence of true mutation comes as a result of man’s hands put upon things.
Finally, logically, if God is spirit and science can deal only with fact and phenomena evidenced by our senses, however amplified, it certainly follows that science-based thinking can not prove or disprove the existence of God.
Like that family down the street that you know all about, you will only truly know that family when you learn who they are as individual persons first and then how they are dynamically and emotionally combined in family after you have spent the time abiding with them. Once you begin to approach the Person of God and begin to abide with God, you will never be able to disprove God or have the heart to.
Respectfully submitted,
cd
CD,
Nice post, but I have a few points I would like to make regarding your arguments.
Firstly, the point of this exercise, as is eluded to in the title of the article, is disproving the Christian God. And, as far as that is concerned, I believe that has been achieved. I don’t think the author in any way believes his mind is finer tuned than any of the great minds through history, but I would suggest that we now have a greater understanding of the universe and life to make more informed opinions on what texts such as the bible tell us.
You quote the bible in your arguments, but how was this text written? By man, through his senses. You also talk about how you personally have experienced God, you know God spiritually. You say that believing in God requires a “willingness to believe”, and that “once experienced becomes a personal knowing.”. How then, have you achieved this “experience” if not through your senses?
My point here is that it is completely justified to use scientific methods, which rely on observation through the senses, to prove, or, as Karl Popper elegantly has shown, disprove the existence of anything people claim to experience.
Just as you have faith that God does indeed exist, people, like me, have faith that the Christian God described in the bible certainly does not exist. In fact, I would say we not only have faith, we have disproven it quite clearly, from the story of creation (for example, we now know the universe is around 14 Billion years old, life has existed for approximately 4 Billion years on earth, and Homo Sapiens evolved approximately 150 Thousand years ago – much different to the creation story given in the bible), the tale of Jesus (which we have clearly shown is based on ancient Egyptian religious beliefs relating to the stars – see Horus and the Temple in Luxor for more info on that), to the very existence of God using His own book (see original article).
I am personally Agnostic, and have my own theories on what a possible God might be, but as far as the bible is concerned, that God cannot exist.
In respectful reply,
SJW.
Here are a few questions for all Atheists who seem to know everything about how Christianity is ‘wrong’:
1. Have you ever experienced the Holy Spirit? (If you have you would not be saying what you are now.)
2.Why is it that Satanists, Muslims, any other religion and ATHIESTS know more about how they think Christianity is ‘wrong’ than their own belief?
3. If there is no God, then where did the universe, the Earth, US and LIFE come from? Did it evolve from some microscopic organism and if so then where did that organism come from and what or who gave it life?
4. God is more real than what we can see, i.e. science. Yes, science is what we understand about what we’ve studied and that is VERY LITTLE. Anyways, my point and question is, how is it that when my brother and a few other Christian friends prayed for a man who was declared dead 10 min before, due to science not being able to revive him, he was brought back to life? Does this not mean that God is alive and He can do anything??
Furthermore, evolution is a lot of rubbish because if we evolved from apes then why are there still apes and what happened to the other ‘links’?
I think by now we have clarified that any form of dating the earth and fossils is inaccurate and can no longer be used for any facts or hunches, for that matter. The only true dating is that in the bible.
Christians, here is 2 Timothy 3:12-17: “Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”
AND REMEMBER CHRISTIANS: 1 Corinthians 13!! and if you are going to fight for God then speak to Him about it and He will give you the scriptures you need, just like I did!! 🙂
God Bless everyone, even those who don’t accept Him! 🙂 Peace out…
I’ll bite…
1. No, but then again I’m not schizophrenic so I don’t hear voices that aren’t there. If you do, get yourself checked by a qualified doctor because there’s something medically wrong with you.
2. I don’t have a belief, I evaluate evidence. And why are you asking why we know more than those with faith, shouldn’t you be asking yourself why those who claim to follow said holy books why they haven’t bothered to actually read and think about them?
3. I’ve covered the beginning of life on this site before, so I’ll refer you there. As for the beginning of the universe, there are multiple conflicting theories at the moment. If your pinning your hopes (your faith) on that, your not going to be happy when science progresses to the point where it can understand this area better. It’s known as the “God of the gaps” argument, and is unsustainable.
4. What about the times you’ve prayed for something that hasn’t come to fruitiion? Or do you have selective memory about those? Or do you just accept that it’s God’s Will? I can go through multiple scientific reasons why a person can appear to be dead only to “come back to life” shortly afterwards, but we both know there are reasons for this, and it’s certainly not a miracle and is certainly not because of any incantations you made.
You clearly don’t understand evolution. We did not evolve from apes, and no one but an idiot would claim that we did. We evolved from a common ancestor that we shared with the great apes of today. Apes took a different evolutionary path to homo sapiens, they stayed in the wooded areas so natural selection meant mutations that favored life in the trees were passed on. The ancestors of homo sapiens moved into more open areas, so mutations that favored life in that area stayed (e.g. standing upright to see further distances, which isn’t an advantage at all for life in the trees).
As for dating, carbon dating is inaccurate, it’s too easily affected by surrounding elements. Radio metric dating, which has been in use for years now, is far more accurate. There are multiple forms of dating in use, and the most appropriate type is used in each situation. If someone tells you that current methods of dating are inaccurate, you can stare them in the eyes and tell them flat out that they’re lying. If the only true form of dating is in the bible, why is it so contradictory and inaccurate?
1. I’m not schizophrenic. I would know if I was. God doesn’t always speak with an audible voice, in fact, I think He prefers for us to read our bibles and through that He speaks to us because in that way we can relate to other people who have gone through similar problems and we can see how God helped them and how they got out of the problems called “the storms of lifeâ€. God also speaks through other people. All prophesies on my life are coming true.
If you look at most schizophrenics you will see that most of them are going crazy from the voices they hear. The voices either come from demons or their own minds. Your understanding of God is appalling because God is LOVE and He would never torture anyone into becoming crazy.
2. What exactly is a belief? A belief is something that you BELIEVE in, no? I’m not asking you why you ‘know’ or ‘think you know’ more than us with faith, I’m merely asking a rhetorical question. But I’ll answer the question for you if I must: Because all these false belief systems such as Islam, atheism, and so on are too scared that they are proven wrong that they all attack the belief that is most threatening to them. Why is Christianity such a threat and such a problem to you if it’s ‘wrong’?
Remember, there are also many false Christians who use Christianity as a label rather as a life style. God will deal with them one day. There are also people who are put into ‘high religious places’ like the Pope when in actual fact they are being hypocritical people who understand nothing about God. I don’t agree with Catholics 100% because they go against so much the Bible teaches. So don’t look at all the false people out there, look at the Christians who represent themselves by their love, by their humility and by their humbling themselves.
3. Are you not putting your FAITH in science and facts? How is science going to disprove God when the foundation of science is matter and God is spirit? Also, God is evident in the smallest particles of matter, which is atoms, just by the way. Here, let me explain the Trinity to you quickly. An atom is made up of 3 parts: Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. Look at the protons as Father God, the Neutrons as Jesus and the Electrons as the Holy Spirit. Electrons are the energy of atoms and they are shared or transferred to other atoms, etc and they, when packed together, become something like water or carbon or whatever you want. Protons, on the other hand are the positive parts of the atom and they are at the centre of the atom. Without protons, the electrons couldn’t be and there would be no use for neutrons. Protons hold the atom together. (This is just touching on it, I’m sure you know all about the atom). This is all SCIENTIFIC proof that God does exist and He abides in everything He has created.
4. Dude, just because God doesn’t give us what we want doesn’t mean He doesn’t exist. We look and focus on His goodness and love and faithfulness. The things I have prayed for have come true in some way or another, the things that didn’t come true, God has explained to me why they didn’t happen (Remember, God knows what’s good for us and His plans for us are far greater than we can ever imagine, Read Psalm 139 for more info). The other day I prayed that God would take the pains of a friend’s uncle away because he was very sick. The next day he died. Did God not listen to my prayer? Did I say something wrong? NO! Words are merely the way we let things out, just like this discussion. It’s my heart that God honoured in the situation and I believed with all my heart that God would take the mans pain away. And my prayer was answered. The uncle will never feel pain ever again. He had God in his life and is now experiencing God in all His majesty!
I’m sorry but I have never heard of any person magically coming to life without the work of God present.
As for evolution, if some of our ‘ancestors’ stayed in the trees and some moved to open pastures, why is it that the tree animals didn’t evolve tools, tree houses, some form of tree transportation, weapons, etc? Why is it that only some of the great apes moved from where they were naturally placed? Why is it that only some of the great apes evolved and none of the other animals ever did, eg: the bears, other monkey species, fish, etc. Evolution is very flawed and you can choose to stay blind to it, but when you do a bit more research instead of just believing what people tell you, you will find out that evolution is very flawed.
Just for the Noah’s ark discussion, I agree with the guy who said that Noah took every SPECIES of animal and not ever subspecies. And out of all those species that lived back then, how many could survive in water? We have this mindset that all the numbers of species are only land animals, whereas some bugs, animals that were on land, and all the fish could survive in water. And we also take animal sized out of proportion.
Radio metric dating is still very flawed and anyone who tells you that it is the correct method of dating the earth then you can stare them in the eyes and tell them flat out that they’re lying. Just like any other formula in its early stages, it is flawed and will be made better and it will evolve. Let’s look at the atom again. Our understanding of the atom 2000 +- years ago is so wrong and so different from what we know today. Who says that our perception of the atom today is completely right? These things will all still evolve and one day we will be closer to understanding all of this, they still need a lot of work and improvement. And if it took us 2000+- years to know what we know today of the atom, then how much longer will it take us to know the age of the earth? Surely not a few years..
Hey man, I don’t know who did what to you but you were obviously hurt or offended by ‘Christians’ or someone and that made you think that there is no God. God loves you whether you acknowledge Him or not. I’m not saying that you are any less than I am because we are all the same in Gods eyes.
Oh! One more question. How can a man speak in a language he has never understood or spoken or even heard before in his life without studying it? I don’t think there is any disease or mental case that can explain that. Must be God who did that.. 🙂
“This is all SCIENTIFIC proof that God does exist and He abides in everything He has created.”
Let me get this straight… You are trying to cite the theory we currently have of the atom as some kind of proof for God existing??? Not just a God, but the specific Christian God who is described in the bible?? You citing some speech you heard at sunday school where the atom has been used as a metaphor for the Trinity does not constitute any kind of proof that God exists. You haven’t even cited any evidence!
You have absolutely no proof to be able to say: “Look at the protons as Father God, the Neutrons as Jesus and the Electrons as the Holy Spirit.”
Or is that just because you have just “believed what people have told you”???
There are so many flaws in everything you have said, its hard to see where to start…
Evolution: All animals have and continue to evolve. Not just the great apes. Why the ancestors of the apes of today did not evolve tools and tree houses (a weird, but none the less valid question), is because with the evolution of homo sapiens came a bigger brain, enhanced socialising, and opposable thumb, etc, which led to us having the intelligence and skills to build everything man made today (and there is a huge body of evidence to support these facts).
It is this intelligence which has allowed us to reason, philosophise and even think about our own existence. And, sadly, it is also this intelligence which has allowed certain groups to firmly believe in a God beyond what we see. There is no reason to believe in any of the mainstream religions. Anyone who does has not actually thought much about their beliefs, or are simply brainwashed (usually due to influence at a young and impressionable ages).
“when you do a bit more research instead of just believing what people tell you, you will find out that evolution is very flawed.”
Probably the most ironic statement I have ever heard. So you’re willing to be critical of evolution, like a scientist, but not willing to turn the same critical eye to your own beliefs??
How exactly have you come to believe in christianity?? It won’t be from birth, otherwise I and everyone else would believe in Jesus, and there would be no other religions. Clearly, you were brought up to believe it, at a time when your belief system is forming, and you are very impressionable. Perhaps if you did a bit more research instead of just believing what people tell you every sunday, or just getting all your ‘facts’ from one very old book, you will find out the flaws that lie at the heart of most religions.
As for putting Faith in science and facts – as you have clearly demonstrated above with your very own critical thinking of evolution, scientists rarely have faith in any theories. They rely on solid evidence, and when a theory is first put forward (in the form of a hypothesis), it will need to accrue a large amount of evidence in favour of it before it is accepted by science to be fact. Unfortunately, the tenets of christianty have not stood up to that critical thinking, and so we reject it.
Finally, as for how can a man speak a language, well the computer sitting in front of you right now uses a language, and it uses electricity and incredibly complicated circuits to do things that 1000 years ago people would have thought were miracles. Does that also mean computers have been made by God?? Or maybe, just maybe, Homo Sapiens are more gifted than you give credit for…
Hey man, you misunderstood me with the whole languages thing. What I meant was this: How can a man (lets say well into his 40s) start speaking Chinese for example if he has never studied, heard or spoken Chinese before? I have seen and heard of many occasions where this has happened. I see it as God intervening. We all have different opinions.
I did not recite any speech I heard at Sunday School, it is how I see God being evident in creation itself. I was just giving an example, I did not mean it literally that God the Father is the Proton, etc.
Evolution: You just answered a question that I never asked by saying, “is because with the evolution of homo sapiens came a bigger brain, enhanced socialising, and opposable thumb, etc, which led to us having the intelligence and skills to build everything man made today”.
I asked out of innocence to not knowing why only half of the apes evolved when they moved to open regions but the other half didnt evolve their own type of techonology.
It seems you have misunderstood what I’ve said.
As for my statement “when you do a bit more research instead of just believing what people tell you, you will find out that evolution is very flawed.†I get how it is ironic, but let me tell you that I have done my research on science and on Christianity. This may be very difficult for you to understand but God as confirmed my faith many times. Normally, non-believers will turn this down and say that I’m crazy. This is natural for someone who has never known God.
I became a Christian a year ago, actually. You know the saying, “seeing is believing.”? The saying that so many non-believers use? Well, that is how I became a Christian. I’ve seen the Holy Spirit move, but I have also seen demons slamming doors, throwing things, etc. This all in a building that had no electricity and was empty (the demon stuff).
“As for putting Faith in science and facts – as you have clearly demonstrated above with your very own critical thinking of evolution, scientists rarely have faith in any theories. They rely on solid evidence, and when a theory is first put forward (in the form of a hypothesis), it will need to accrue a large amount of evidence in favour of it before it is accepted by science to be fact. ”
God actually teaches the same thing. He teaches us to test what we have heard, find out for ourselves. He tells us to test spirits, and not just accept them as they are.
For example (many Roman Catholics might be offended by me now), but the spirit of Fatima (Mary) appearing to those kids telling them to afflict pain on themselves to take their sins away (which in fact is not true because it is ‘replacing’ what Jesus did on the cross) was a demonic spirit. That was Satan.
But trust me, any religeous, scientific thing i hear or see I test it and find out for myself if it is true (hense me being a Christian today who also accepts science but not evolution or the earth being billions of years old, etc.)
Christianity was called Judaism before Jesus came… Go read your bibles (If you own any) because clearly you need to read a Bible more than trying to disprove something that will never be disproved. Yes, the laws of science existed since creation.. But how was the earth created and who or what placed those laws?? Nothing can come into existance without being created… Just remember… For something to be created it needs to have time… God lives outside of time and inside of time because He created time.. That’s why God wasnt created and why no one can ever explain how He is..
But He does. There is so much proof that is pro God and so far all attempts to disprove God have failed… Sorry but LOVE NEVER FAILS! 😛
I keep being told that science can’t prove everything and much of what we have learned to be true we later learn was not. You are totally right. If science knew everything then we would be much closer to perfection than we are. It would also be out of a job.
You talk of “science†as being a harmful and untrue proposition. I hope you realize that “science†is not a thing. It is only a tool. It does not tell us about concepts that cannot be tested. As a living human you use science hundreds of times every day. A pencil, spoon, chopstick or plow, all are from science. All that science is about is what works and what doesn’t work. It can say nothing about ANY supposed supernatural claim. Anything supernatural cannot be natural for it is outside nature. By saying that something is supernatural you are admitting that we can’t know anything about it. We can’t know anything that is outside natural reality. Everything that we know is science.
People on this forum are all using circular reasoning… You want to believe what you want to believe. Personally i dont have a problem with that, but we need to think out of the box. And that means looking past what we can see and what is physical. Sounds a bit crazy, doesnt it? But its a saying used by everyone, non-believers and believers alike. Think past what is physical and what we can see (the box) and look deeper, not with your eyes, but with your heart. You’ll be amazed at what amazing things you’ll find!
there are a few problems with your article but i’ll just comment on one.
God’s greatest act wasn’t creation. God’s greatest act was redeeming enemies against Him then adopting them into His very household through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Gods greatest act was and still is love! Sending Jesus to take all our sins away so that we might be righteous and we might live in love… That, in my opinion, is God’s greatest act ever! Jesus said it himself, “The greatest thing a man can ever do is lay his life down for his friends.”
Since we’re on the topic of logically disproving God and the Bible.
One word for all believers out there. Dinosaurs. Can someone please tell me where they fit in and/or where they are mentioned in the Bible?
Something not omnipresent on this thread is a basic command of the English language. Peter gore seer, fantastic name, but I urge you seek medical help,
Some people can’t live without guidance, a sense of purpose and the thought of eternal afterlife. This is why religion was created in the first place. I absolutely do not believe in God but I feel as if religion and faith were and are still vital to the human race because so many of us are weak, evil, selfish, and mentally unstable. Religion helps people get through life. But now as humans are becoming increasingly intelligent Religion is proving to be holding us back. Give it a few hundred years and Christianity will be long and gone just like the hundreds of religions that came before it.
I just have one question I want a devout christian to answer for me. If god created everything then he created the idea of emotions…happy, sad, mad, angry, anxious, etc. And therefore he created the entire concept of evil and everything you associate with evil. Knowing that billions of people would be murdered, raped, tortured, etc. Why would he let that happen? If he is all knowing, created everything, and can see the future then essentially he is the cause of all evil because he created the concept, knew what would occur and let it happen. If you give someone a gun knowing they intend to kill your child (since we supposedly are all god’s children) and you stand by, watch it happen and do nothing…well then you just became God. As long as you say it’s all a “test”.
I’ll live my life with strong morals, help others at times, be loyal to those i love, fight for what i believe in. And if your God comes down to earth and judges us all and sends me to hell, then I pity the fool who looks to him for guidance.
“Only sheep need a shepherd”
The only problem I see with your argument of Biblical inerrancy is that it focuses on a Biblical literalist’s point of view. Basically, your argument is against Protestantism. Most Protestants see the Bible as we would see a science textbook.
However, Protestants make up only about 20% of all professing Christians. To make matters worse, most Protestants wouldn’t meet a definition of Christianity in other creed’s circles. To most Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox (who would make up about 79% of total Christianity (with percentages guessed)) in order to be considered Christian you must accept AT LEAST 3 Ecumenical Councils. I would estimate only about 40% of Protestants would accept the councils.
What I am getting at is that you disproved a Protestant’s definition of God. To be accurate, you debunked the common Western Christian belief surrounding God. However, your argument would have to be extensively modified to come close to challenging Eastern conceptions. If you wish to do so, I would recommend a lengthy time spent on researching theology and the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox. Keep in mind that most non-Protestant Christians are considered compatabalists and see no reason to have a completely literal interpretation of the Bible. These are the same people that state that the Genesis account of creation is poetic. They would also be inclined to agree that the Deluge of Noah’s day was a local event. I’ve heard some people say man was congregated around Mesopotamia and the Ararat Mountain Range. So, a devastating flood as indicated by some recent findings in the Black Sea might explain why so many cultures have a worldwide flood myth.
Another thing I saw in your analysis is that you rely on a “God wrote the Bible” point of view. This is taken by many Western Christians as well. However, man wrote the Bible. Lets say the Bible is a collection of works from different genres. That means that poetic sections shouldn’t be interpreted literally. Prophetical ones might best be interpreted allegorically. So forth and so forth.
I also would like to point out that Catholics and the Orthodox say the Bible came out of Tradition. I don’t want to try and explain what they mean because I would fail horribly. However, these Churches would say there are multiple correct Traditions. This would explain why there are some inconsistencies with the Gospel and how some depictions of God change. Most Eastern Christians see words such as “wrath” and “anger” to be polymorphisms. Others would say that as Judaism developed and Christianity developed that the view of God was better refined. This would mean that religion was changing in some ways. Take a look at the evolution debacle. The Vatican recently announced it accepted the theory. So, this would mean that the Catholic confession is slowly changing its perceptions of the Creation account.
In order to build a better ethos, don’t use your experiences with Christians of one confession to disprove another. You should use experiences, and I won’t say its wrong to, but make sure you state which confession they belonged to. It allows people to place it in a frame of mind.
Reading the Bible isn’t a way to build ethos either. The Bible is seen as a great work of literature and interpretations vary. There are many critical reviews of passages and books out there. Read those and cite them. Even then, I wouldn’t say I was an expert. It takes years of review to make a complete statement.
Also, look into theology to bolster your argument. Theology helps to give people a way to interpret the Bible.
It seems as though you are most familiar with Protestantism as I have stated before. Protestnatism is only a small fraction of Christianity. There are the Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrian Church of the East, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Catholic Church. There are also several other smaller sects of believers out there. In order to disprove a Christian concept of God, you need to read up on these other confessions. The West and the East don’t even agree on the attributes of God!
Now, I know this may all seem like gibberish since I probably made errors in wording, arguing, and grammar. I just hope people who read it take it for the essence of what I was trying to say.
I have read through about the first half of this and felt like I need to voice my OPINION.
I think to to actually believe in a “GOD” is ridiculous and just proves that you have no free thought.
First of all religion is just mankinds way of dealing with the fact that they are going to die eventually and there is nothing they can do about it, as stated in multiple comments above.
When people post comment such as “There is no such thing as evolution” it really makes me sad. To see how stupid people are becoming, that they cant actually think for themselves so they believe in something with no facts to support it, and never keep their minds open.
I have had countless religious debates with Christians. The second someone finds out im an atheist, their first question is ALWAYS, “well then how do u think we got here”? I will tell them something along the lines of evolution and the Big Bang theory. I give actual facts about what I believe happened. No christian has ever given me ANY facts at all to their beliefs, but instead say things like, “God created us” or “Read the bible”.
People have asked me to give them proof that there is no god, in retaliation I ask them to prove that there is one, the only so called “proof” that they give me is telling me to read the bible. That is not proof, not even close!
People are “raised” to be religious, they are “raised” to believe in a god that does not exist because their closed minded parents decided what they should believe, and baby fed them lies about life while growing up. This does not apply to all religious people, some people decide to subscribe to a particular faith sometime later in life for reasons that I dont know.
One more thing that has always been the basis of my religious arguments is that, if there are over 21 major religions in the world, how can you be sure that yours is rite and the others are wrong? Typical religious person response is “I have faith”. Pure A grade stupidity.
Religion helps the weak minded people get through life. Hey if it makes them happy then who am I to challenge their beliefs. I know that I am rite about there being no god, any other logically thinking person knows this as well.
you should read Gita the lecture given by lord Krishna to arjuna.then you would be able to understand the true meaning of all religion books.know that the whole universe is a very small part of god.god is not he nither she.god is beyond that.God did not created earth.God him self/herself/what ever became the stars suns all other things even human.the purus and prakriti are same. energy and matter is not different they are the two forms of one thing.matter can be transformed into energy energy can be transformed into matter.you can not know the god with logic you will have to go beyond that where you will have to leave all your impurities.you will have to be only with your pure consciousness.
all of these arguments are absolutly pointless.
there are always going to be people who believe in god, and those who appose it. personally,i dont know what i am, i always went to church as a child, and hated it, i just hate the way people are at church, i dont know why or what it is about it i just do.
i really only have one thing to say though. if a person lives there entire life devoted to a god, they are, as far as im aware going to be living a helpful and “pure” life, they will help those in need and be happy, and at the end of the day, if there is no god, then theyve done just that, lived a good life helping others. when it comes down to it, if an atheist, im not saying atheists are dicks or dont help people, dont get me wrong, but if theyre completely apposed to the belief of a god, and there right, then both are in the same boat when they die. but if there is a god, who are you really hurting by praying every once in a while, and believing that there is hope for you once you die, if there is a god, and youve lived your life in belief, then you live a wonderful eternal life, if you dont believe and there truly is a god, then your fucked. just my opinion, but theres no use in arguing since many of you have your minds made up.
lol the world is gunna end in 5 billion years when the sun burns out and everyone is going to die 😀
What I don’t get about christians is that they believe some things are literal and should be believed and followed (Adam & Eve, Noah’s Ark, Red Sea Parting, Ten Commandments Jesus, etc… but other things (all the horrible atrocities and laws that happened per god’s instructions) are not to be followed. It’s the SAME GOD all the way through the bible old to new. The same evil, hateful, vengeful, sadistic, god who claims to love everyone, but demands they worship him without proof or he will burn them in hell for eternity. It’s all nonsense like every religion. People follow blindly because they want to be told what to think and believe rather than look at the facts and think for themselves.
I don’t believe in the Christian God. Nor do I believe in the devil or hell. I was raised in the Baptist church and fed the dribble most baptized children of my age were. No, I don’t believe in the Christian God for my own reasons. Not because of carbon dating or other scientific nonsense that can be disproven as easily as Christianity. I don’t believe these things because of my own logic. Noah’s Ark, the burning bush, parting of the red sea, the resurrection of Jesus. All of these things and more are completely improbable scenarios. Only seen in fairy tales. The Bible worshipped a mean spirited deity who would kill anyone who defied it and love it the next. This deity was biased and hateful and a little bipolar. The men of these fables were apparently as infallible as God in many stories. And while I believe Jesus was a real man I do not believe he was divine. I am pagan, a traditional witch. We believe that no human can judge another and to truly love all things. Christianity not only practices the exact opposite of it supposedly teaches but it stole almost every piece of its teachings and beliefs from various other pagan and old world religions. Like I tell my friends who question my distaste for the Christian belief. The Christian church was built on the blood of the non believers. The Bible was written by racist Republicans and the devil was invented by cowards who wont idmit their own wrong doings and they only pray so they can feel like they have a free ticket to be jerks. And believe as long as they go to church they can do pretty much whatever they want. I have plenty more to say. But I’m typing on my phone and its tiring, lol. By the way, you don’t half to waste your prayers on me. You need all the prayer you can spare. Besides, I won’t hear them anyway. 😉
I’m curious…
How can a non-beliver state that a Christian is close-minded?
-We beleive in a God that can literally do anything.
-God could’ve used evolution to create the earth, if he had wanted to.
… -And maybe he did, because how do we know that the numbers of 6 days are literal, the psalms after all are not literal.
Now consider this quote:
“The Bible is inaccurate – therefore God is fallible – therefore the definition of God is incorrect – therefore God does not exist.â€
This quote was taken from a atheist.org
This quote is stating that God IS the bible. “The bible is inaccurate therefore God in falliable”. True, the word IS God. But is the Bible the word itself?
No.
The Bible is merly a vessel for the word, not the actual thing. The word is the truth in life, not the words in paper. The Bible is still accurate. However, you can poke holes in it because of many years of translations AND because it is the word of God, tranlsted into the word of humans. If God is more intelligent than humans, how can we fully understand his thoughts without over working our brains and giving up?
Anything in the bible we do not understand is not because it is not true, it is because we are either looking at it the wrong way, are being stubborn to even look at it logically, or are being trumped by the person who created knowledge itself (How hard would it be to get confused when talking to the maker of knowledge itself, when there is so much we don’t know about within our very own lives).
You cannot disprove God.
You can try.
But you can’t.
You CAN however:
-say that anybody can technically be God (the noodle guy, Buddah, etc)
-that you do do not believe in God
I am not telling you you HAVE to believe God is real. I’m saying it is not impossible, lthus making disproving his existance impossible.
To actually accept that he is real takes faith, living a life of questioning, and a long string of mistakes. Facts will more than likely not aid you in your quest for God, so asking for factual proof of God is ilogical, as he does not make himself known to skeptics who would reject him even if they knew he were true.
It’s all faith, and that’s something I will not try to prove to you. It’s something you have to find yourself.
Don’t comment trying to “disprove” God, I will simply tell you the above line.
Thanks for reading, I just felt like venting.
Here is a thought! some people are just to ignorant to everthing. I hate to say this but here is a way for you athiest to know that GOD is real and heaven and hell and the devil and his demons, go out and buy a Ouija board and call out to the dead and this is forbidden by God.Deuteronomy 18:10 read it athiest since you guys are so set to disprove the bible. try the ouija board and it will take over you hands this will first prove that satan is real. this board is the most likley way to open a portal to hell and god will allow you to be tormentet and once tormented call out to Jesus christ and you have my word it will stop then what the bible says about satan and Jesus and satin fears jesus and when his name is spoken the demon and satan have to leave the bible explains both it will be proof that they are both real would that make you a believer then if that doesnt then you screwed for sure. ps i used to be an athiest for a while but in time God opended my eyes to let me know that he is completely in control in the mean time i will prey and one day hopefully your eyes will be opened
ridiculous. That is just you believing in something greater moving your hands. The mind can fool itself. Not disagreeing with religion but…you give religion a bad name
I am an Atheist. I do not believe there is a God. You may be a Christian, you believe there is a God. My belief is my belief, I can’t prove I am right. Your belief is your belief, you can’t prove you are right.
What happens when we die. If I am wrong I am in for a surprise. If I am right then, I expected that anyway.
If you are wrong you completely cease to exist and you will never have forgiveness for the wrong things you did in your life, because God doesn’t exist (if you are wrong).
What does that mean? It means that because I don’t believe in God, I have to be the best that I can be now, through my own actions. No one is going to do it for me. I have to do it all myself, not rely on God to bail me out by praying.
If you have behaved badly and not made the most of the one life you have to live, thinking that it is okay, because God will forgive me, because I have always believed in him/her/it and God doesn’t exist, you are up the creek without a paddle. You won’t get a do over and you will simply cease to exist having wasted your life.
Hello.
I would like to start off by saying that I am marginally a Christian. Born in a Chinese-American family, never attended church service, pagan (lol) parents etc. The only sort of Christian education I have had is reading the Bible and the works of various philosophers, among which are Descartes, Berkeley, Spinoza etc. I was a complete atheist and something of a nature worshipper until middle school, when I began more intelletual pursuits in a gifted program and sort of converted myself.(I am now only a sophomore in high school) People can therefore hardly call me a brainwashed, blind, and moronic redneck.
Every such argument should begin with the essential paradox of creation. Let’s say God is real, and He created the universe. That means:
A) God created something out of nothing.
God came before the universe–before anything
B) God therefore has existed forever, or
C) God created himself.
All three of the bullet points are contradictory to the innate human common sense. How can something be forever or create itself?
(Nothing is nothing. Not space, not time; it’s nonexistence of anything.)
Okay, so let’s take God out of the equation. Let’s say God doesn’t exist and the universe, well:
A) The universe has always existed.
B) The universe burst into existence from nonexistance.
Equally contradictory to the innate human understanding.
However you slice it, there will be the essential perplexity of the impossibilty of something existing forever or coming out of nothing.
Well, nothing appears to make sense. Yet we KNOW something has to be true. Why? Because I am here, because you are here. We are proof that there is something. Even if you decide to delve into the idea that we are some kind of supernatural thought bubble of a grand omnipotent being, you cannot deny that is SOMETHING. The universe, beyond proof, exists. So what does that mean? That means that the argument of existence is by nature illogical by human reasoning, and to a certain extent, beyong human understanding.
If God doesn’t exist, you will lose nothing by believing in Him. If He does exist, you will lose everything in not believing.
Why wouldnt you want to believe in a place where you go after you die where there is no pain or suffering. I’d rather keep believeing I’m going there than to nothingness.
So God exists because you want him too?
@Caleb
God is, was, and will be. (Infinite)
God is all powerful
E=MC^2.
Figure out the equation.
Peace.
The problem is that you can’t use logic to appeal to someone who’s belief is enshrined in the absense of evidence and/or logic. The whole exercise is futile. Just give up and move on like I have…
Ya this is like the Scopes Trial…. any logic is useless because they dont believe on logic.
P.S. read Inherit the Wind great book
I’m sixty three years old. I spent the first fifty years of my life as a Christian. I have four PHDs in theology. After all of that it hit me. There is NO real proof for the Christian idea of God. I believe in a higher spirit but the proof against Christianity is stacked too high. Sorry, but it’s just facts.
It has often been said that it is as impossible to prove the non-existence of god as it is to prove his existence.
I can’t argue with that.
But it is possible to prove that the existence of god was NOT required to create the universe or life on earth.
Please go to the following links for just a mere taste of the ever-growing scientific facts in these matters….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11161493
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/02/stephen-hawking-big-bang-creator
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1308278/Stephen-Hawking-God-did-create-Universe.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704206804575467921609024244.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7976594/Stephen-Hawking-God-was-not-needed-to-create-the-Universe.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090219105324.htm
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=origin-of-life-on-earth
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html#synthesis
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Life/origins.html
I don’t guess you think an ALL-POWERFUL God in his infinite power could have created the world to APPEAR millions of years old, or brought 2 of every animal to Noah and helped them all to survive on th ark. “With God all things are possible.” You seem to be limited God’s power to the laws of the universe rather than looking at him as the one who MAKES the laws of the universe.
OK….. i have read all of these arguments and i have a question, can anyone who is Christian give an real evidence in the support of god that is NOT FROM THE BIBLE. That is all i am asking thank you.
I become a christian after 32 years, why, well i’m not going to go into that. But i can say that i have experienced things that can’t be explained. But what i really want to say is the way you so called christians on this site are arguing, and the language that is being used. This isn’t the christianity i know. if an atheteist wants to be an atheist it’s not our place to aggressively change their mind, they are free to believe or not belive however they choose. Just as a christian should be free to believe in God and not be persucuted or called dumb for it. Everything can be questioned, for the record we know science exists, but theory of evolution also brings up as much questions as answers, there are a lot that doesn’t make sense. there a lot of scientists who don’t believe in the Big bang theory, for as the title suggests, it as a theory. I could go through and give a lot of answers to why God chooses to let bad things happen, or how God brought the animals to Noah, after all he is a God, beyond human understanding. But all i will say to the atheists is, i just hope you’re wrong. otherwise life is pointless, it doesn’t matter weather you’re good or bad, there are no real consequences, because ultimately we are all just worm food. There are things in life that are yet to be explained, but i would rather believe in something than nothing. More to the point all the christians that i know do a lot for the community, a lot of good for the sick and hungry, throughout the world, so it’s not all bad to be a christian.
PROBLEM WITH WHOLE ARTICLE:
THE CHURCH SAYS GOD IS INFALLIBLE ON ARTICLES ONLY RELATING TO SALVATION.
OOPS! 🙂
Also, people argue the Bible is a metaphor, so the dates aren’t literal.
On your overall argument, it is pointless to disprove God’s existence because even if every aspect of religions were disproven, including the Bible, you would be unable to prove that in another dimension (something like that) God does not exist. Finally, since it is impossible to prove (I think) then the whole fanatical atheism versus the theists boils down to an opinion.
I love the internet.
Now as we see in this giant page of mostly comments, religious debate is a heated subject. But, just assume you know nothing about your current religion and think of why you decided to follow it. So, for Christians, the first people choosing to follow it did so because Jesus preached philosophy and good nature and took context from the stories of the Bible. Atheists follow their path because science is all about logic and knowledge, which is more about taking care of curiosities and backing up their opinions with fact. These are both perfectly knowledgeable pathways. Figure out how you started on your path, and consider some other paths before you continue down it.
Look around you and you will see something phenomenal. A creation that is mysterious indeed. Christians need to understand that everything they see is phenomenal regardless if there is a God or not. It is just a matter of connecting a God to it that makes it a miracle. The psychology of the bible allows the brain to be attracted to what it wants. The bible beats around the bush so profusely, the brain allows itself to fill in the blanks. Trust me when I say the debate will go on and on because there is really no proof for both sides. Instead of being biased to one side, I include God to the bigger questions we don’t think of. Such as, “If God exists, then what is the purpose of everything as a whole(including God).” To put in perspective, draw an imaginary circle and put everything in that circle including God and ask yourself, “What is the purpose of that circle?” Another example, “God never asked me to be here, so why should I owe him anything?” These are questions that Christians fail to answer simply because the bible is ignorant when it come to answering the big questions. Even if a person had physical evidence disproving God, that Christian would have some excuse against the evidence. Like I showed my best friend that the bible contradicts, (Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:18-19) but yet he refuses to believe it. However, only a fool would refuse to believe in God if valid evidence was presented. Look at both sides mutually, base your reasoning on logic and rationality, and then decide which direction you want to go. Otherwise you are stuck in a rut. The way I look at it, is I was saved just in case I was wrong. Now I move on. You decide.
Approach it with mutuality. Pray about it and if nothing happens, then there you go.
So Avery B, I agree with you that the blogger may not have been completely factual and his treatment of the issue is certainly not the most erudite, but the main point is that there is no evidence for the existence of God. Now I won’t go so far to say that there is no God, since there is no proof to corroborate that either.
Therein lies the greatness of science in that scientists do not deny that there could be a God, they just try to work with assumptions that can be proven. It is the only pragmatic way. I can explain anything but inventing a reason that cannot be proven or disproven. In a sense string theory is designed around the problem of incompatibility of QM and GR and it will never be possible to observe strings but at least the math logically leads us to certain observations that while will not prove strings conclusively exist but will at least provide some foundation for belief in such a theory.
The belief in God however, has no tangible evidence. The evidence people claim to have cannot conclusively and objectively support the claim that God exists. That’s the difference, science reserves opinion on things it doesn’t understand while religion goes ahead and ascribes fantastical mechanisms to events that transcend man’s comprehension today.
Thou shalt not deny me, for I am undeniable. For whosoever shall deny me is a fool. I say unto thee gtfo here and stop wasting your time people. The universe is infinite, don’t baffle yourselves. Humans did not evolve from a single microscopic organism, to fish, to monkey, etc. I’m sure there is some kind of being out there, who favors our species and may guide us in the right direction occasionally. The simple fact, nobody knows for sure, or maybe the person or people that do, have to keep it a secret as promised to this greater being. These are all wonderful ideas that we humans have come up with. Imagination is wonderful- in every aspect of the word. Go forth and continue to dream children of men, but don’t cut each other down, it’s pointless. And indeed there are ignorant loggers on here, such as myself, we are all ignorant to many things. Likesay, the subject of the discussion. Please do not feel you need to insult your fellow beings, especially on the matter of ignorance, you are No better.
I’m Christian, but very, very embarrassed. It makes me feel bad to be Christian because half the other Christains here can’t spell
So are you saying that you think there is absolutely nothing in this entire world that cannot be scientifically explained? Hmmmm…
Believing in God is an act of faith, which by definition requires no proof. However, I’ll bet if you polled all your Christian acquaintances they would each tell you they have seen ample “proof” evidenced in their lives to substantiate the existence of God. I used to be an agnostic and always had to “see it to believe it.” I was very critical of believers. It wasn’t until I actually started a quest for answers that I arrived at my current belief system. First step? I took inventory of all the people I knew and tried to find a common thread among the ones who seemed most happy, kind, generous, well-adjusted and at peace. Common thread? Faith.
So I actually took a leap and said, “God, if you really exist, please SHOW ME THE TRUTH.” I asked for enlightenment. Seek and ye shall find. He answers all who seek Him. And it was then that I started believing and SEEING the evidence. And there was a lot of it. Delusions? I don’t think so. You will never see the evidence if you do not believe it exists first. And I know that at the end of our human lives, one of us (meaning you or I) will be very wrong… by believing, I have absolutely nothing to lose. But by NOT believing, you have everything to lose — it’s completely your choice though. That’s why I try very hard NOT to push my faith on others or get into arguments about it. It’s pointless to try to change someone’s mind about such matters. Oh, and by the way, the guy who said he’d pray for you? I don’t think he was saying that because he felt it would change your mind – he was saying it because all believers know how much better life is on this side of the fence, and they want that joy for everyone else. I believe he was sincere, not being a jerk.