[willed]

Is there anything that would, concievably, shake your faith? Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept which would prove to you that there is no God?

It was my answer to this question that made me realise that what I had was essentially blind faith. I realised that, no matter what the evidence, I would still believe in God, making me no better than idiots who believe they've been abducted by aliens in the face of all the evidence to the contrary. After studying the Bible for a year at Uni now I realise that it is certainly a very interesting historical/sociological document, but is not divine revelation. Christianity dies a death of 1000 justifications. For years I had a good faith. Then I began to learn too much, and was only fooling myself by still believing. Basically, are you being honest with yourself?






[Ducks and waits for flames]

Dunno why I posted this really. I'm obviously not going to change any beliefs, but thought it might be interesting to try.

[Logic]

Originally posted by willed:
Is there anything that would, concievably, shake your faith? Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept which would prove to you that there is no God?

I'll bite even if I'm not a christian. No, very little would shake my faith. But if there would be any evidence that showed that Allah(God if you like) didn't exist then I would have to think again. But I might ask you this question. Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept that there is a god? Since you seem to talk about "scientific evidence" and such I might ask you this. What makes you believe in the Big Bang or evolution and how life was formed? There is no evidence(except for evolution) that proves that the current theories are correct but still most atheists believe in that. How come? Isn't that equally ignorant?

It was my answer to this question that made me realise that what I had was essentially blind faith. I realised that, no matter what the evidence, I would still believe in God, making me no better than idiots who believe they've been abducted by aliens in the face of all the evidence to the contrary. After studying the Bible for a year at Uni now I realise that it is certainly a very interesting historical/sociological document, but is not divine revelation. Christianity dies a death of 1000 justifications. For years I had a good faith. Then I began to learn too much, and was only fooling myself by still believing. Basically, are you being honest with yourself?

Once again you make the assumption that because you have learned so much you cannot believe. That only a fool would believe in god since there are no evidence. Then we come back to the question I asked you above. Also since you seem to be so educated you should no that in science one of the most important things is not to prove, but to disprove(right word?). It is always harder to disprove than to prove and therefore a scientist should rather aim for that instead of proving every single hypothesis(null hypothesis comes to mind).

So since you are so enlightened, can you prove that there is no such thing as a god? Can you prove that the existing theories for the formation of life, evolution and the Big Bang are wrong? No you can't, but still those things are the foundation for todays science. How come people aren't allowed to believe in god when there are just as reasonable arguments for his existance as there are for our fundamental theories about life?

[Adam Betts]

[Logic]

Adam:

LOL

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Logic:
I'll bite even if I'm not a christian. No, very little would shake my faith. But if there would be any evidence that showed that Allah(God if you like) didn't exist then I would have to think again. But I might ask you this question. Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept that there is a god? Since you seem to talk about "scientific evidence" and such I might ask you this. What makes you believe in the Big Bang or evolution and how life was formed? There is no evidence(except for evolution) that proves that the current theories are correct but still most atheists believe in that. How come? Isn't that equally ignorant?

Once again you make the assumption that because you have learned so much you cannot believe. That only a fool would believe in god since there are no evidence. Then we come back to the question I asked you above. Also since you seem to be so educated you should no that in science one of the most important things is not to prove, but to disprove(right word?). It is always harder to disprove than to prove and therefore a scientist should rather aim for that instead of proving every single hypothesis(null hypothesis comes to mind).

So since you are so enlightened, can you prove that there is no such thing as a god? Can you prove that the existing theories for the formation of life, evolution and the Big Bang are wrong? No you can't, but still those things are the foundation for todays science. How come people aren't allowed to believe in god when there are just as reasonable arguments for his existance as there are for our fundamental theories about life?

You probably also agree, then that nothing can ever be proven or disproved. That there is an intrinsic doubt about all things. Am I right? I tend to agree with that, whether you do or not.

Anyway... believing in the Big Bang or something is totally different than believing in "God". What evidence at all is there for the existence of a "God"? None. What evidence is there for a big bang? Well, there is a decent amount; the background radiation, the universal expansion, dark matter, all of that comes to mind to a degree.

Where's your proof of a big man in the sky? Nowhere, evidently. Nobody has claimed to know how the universe originated; nor where it came from; nor when, where or how it will end.

The difference between science and religion, and what makes religious people ignorant and arrogant, is this:

Science is not afraid to say "I don't know".
Religion, on the other hand, simply says "It was God...".

We don't know how the universe started, but two hundred years ago, we didn't know about the mechanisms of evolution either. In another two hundred years, maybe we will know how the universe started. Maybe we will know where, how and when it will end.

Either way... I'll believe in the flying purple space monkeys before I believe in some God, by name, and pretend to know anything about "him".

I could, of course, delve into the whole "if God exists, why is there so much suffering in the world?" line of questioning, but that would be pointless, because Christians would then respond "He has His reasons".

Yeah. Right.

[Ozmodiar]

It is true, there is no way to prove or disprove the existence of God. I was raised Catholic, but have comfortably settled into a belief system that some would call agnosticism. I don't think there is sufficient evidence either way to determine if there is a God, but that doesn't prevent me from living my life within the bounds of normal civil society [i.e, the reason I don't go on a shooting rampage isn't because I'm afraid of God (or Satan, or Hell, or whatever), it's because that's not acceptable human behavior].

I'm interested in reading the responses to this thread. Indeed, what would it take to shake someone's faith?

[exa]

Logic, gimme a break, you are trying to put religion and science on the same level. Science is a field which admits things are unknown but creates good and sensible arguments that can lead us to believe in something (eg evolution, big bang, etc). These theories are found from empirical data, not some book or scripture we merely have to trust; such data is something religion lacks, as religion is purely faith based (show me I'm wrong).

Let me give you an example. Lets say there is a wall, and there may be a flower behind it, but you do not know. Then, I say, there is a flower behind the wall. You can choose to believe that there is a flower behind the wall, so you are putting faith into my words, or you can choose to believe that there is no flower behind the wall (a la atheism). Or you can simply admit that you have no idea, which I believe is the most rational approach (note: I am agnostic).

Now, lets say we can see some sort of bulge in the wall's shadow on the edge; we can theorize that this is a shadow of the flower and it exists, due to this iota of empirical data. This is what science is essentially, we look for data to give evidence for a hypothesis (certainly the big bang and the formation of life have significant evidence for us to believe in them).

Now, lets go around the wall to look for the flower with our own eyes. Lets say we find that flower, can we be absolutely sure that it exists? Not at all, because our eyes do not dictate absolute truth. For all we know, that flower can be plastic, or an illusion, or we can be in a situation like The Matrix where nothing really exists. All are perfectly reasonable hypotheses, however the most provable scenario at this point is that the object in question really is a flower. This is our scientifically reasoned theory, and unfortunately for a 'supreme creator', we cannot look around the proverbial 'wall'.

Do not mix religion and science, they simply are not the same.

[Logic]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
You probably also agree, then that nothing can ever be proven or disproved. That there is an intrinsic doubt about all things. Am I right? I tend to agree with that, whether you do or not.

Anyway... believing in the Big Bang or something is totally different than believing in "God". What evidence at all is there for the existence of a "God"? None. What evidence is there for a big bang? Well, there is a decent amount; the background radiation, the universal expansion, dark matter, all of that comes to mind to a degree.

Where's your proof of a big man in the sky? Nowhere, evidently. Nobody has claimed to know how the universe originated; nor where it came from; nor when, where or how it will end.

The difference between science and religion, and what makes religious people ignorant and arrogant, is this:

Science is not afraid to say "I don't know".
Religion, on the other hand, simply says "It was God...".

We don't know how the universe started, but two hundred years ago, we didn't know about the mechanisms of evolution either. In another two hundred years, maybe we will know how the universe started. Maybe we will know where, how and when it will end.

Either way... I'll believe in the flying purple space monkeys before I believe in some God, by name, and pretend to know anything about "him".

I could, of course, delve into the whole "if God exists, why is there so much suffering in the world?" line of questioning, but that would be pointless, because Christians would then respond "He has His reasons".

Yeah. Right.

I mostly agree with you Cipher. I do though believe that things can be proven and disproved. But unfortunatly our proofs are often a result of our preconceived opinions. But I do disagree with you that it is completly different to believe in the Big Bang than in God. Yes, we do have some evidence that point to the big bang theory, but the question remains, What was before the big bang? Matter cannot become out of nothing. Until you(you as in scientists) can prove what was before, this theory is just as believable as God. And maybe I should add that I also believe in the Big Bang, formation of life and evolution so that you all don't think that I'm some sort of a fundamentalist in faith.

I also find it interesting that we are supposed to believe that life, universe and matter came from something we can in no way prove. Especially at the same time it has become taboo to believe in the big man in the sky. Yes, I have absolutly no prove that God exists. But that will not hinder me from believing in Him. Neither will it stop me from seeking knowledge of how the world works, evolved and functions.

And calling religious people ignorant is, ...... well, ignorant. I do say that "I don't know". Most religious people do. Being religious does in no way hinder me in my job at the lab. In no way.

I do though agree with you that many Christians will say He has his reasons when talking about the suffering in the world. This is something I strongly disagree with. I have always thought that the suffering in the world is our own fault and we have only our own ignorance to blame.

So Cipher, why is it that you must call religious people ignorant and call them names? What is it that makes you better in any way than religious people? You claim to know that God does not exist, but at the same time you cannot in any way disprove Him. Have I called you ignorant for not believing in God? Have I called you names for not believing in God? Tell me, in what way has me being religious made me a worse person than you?

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Logic:
I mostly agree with you Cipher. I do though believe that things can be proven and disproved. But unfortunatly our proofs are often a result of our preconceived opinions. But I do disagree with you that it is completly different to believe in the Big Bang than in God. Yes, we do have some evidence that point to the big bang theory, but the question remains, What was before the big bang? Matter cannot become out of nothing. Until you(you as in scientists) can prove what was before, this theory is just as believable as God. And maybe I should add that I also believe in the Big Bang, formation of life and evolution so that you all don't think that I'm some sort of a fundamentalist in faith.

I also find it interesting that we are supposed to believe that life, universe and matter came from something we can in no way prove. Especially at the same time it has become taboo to believe in the big man in the sky. Yes, I have absolutly no prove that God exists. But that will not hinder me from believing in Him. Neither will it stop me from seeking knowledge of how the world works, evolved and functions.

And calling religious people ignorant is, ...... well, ignorant. I do say that "I don't know". Most religious people do. Being religious does in no way hinder me in my job at the lab. In no way.

I do though agree with you that many Christians will say He has his reasons when talking about the suffering in the world. This is something I strongly disagree with. I have always thought that the suffering in the world is our own fault and we have only our own ignorance to blame.

So Cipher, why is it that you must call religious people ignorant and call them names? What is it that makes you better in any way than religious people? You claim to know that God does not exist, but at the same time you cannot in any way disprove Him. Have I called you ignorant for not believing in God? Have I called you names for not believing in God? Tell me, in what way has me being religious made me a worse person than you?

We've never tried answering the question of "what came before the big bang?", because at this stage, we have no idea, and have no way of knowing. That may change in the future. At least I can say "I don't know", and it seems you can too - ask a Christian, and generally, they will respond with "God created it". So I respond, "What created God?". They now respond "He just was". Great argument there.

We have decent proof of the Big Bang; that's what makes believing in it different to believing in God. There is zero proof of his existence. None. At all.

The fact is, "life" and "matter" are here, as much as we are; where's God? I can't see him. Life and matter are here, so we can work with them. As opposed to the blind belief of a "divine creator".

Religious people are ignorant, I'm sorry. Some of them are very intelligent, and very open minded, but in the end, ignorant at least to a small degree. I never said that God did not exist. Not once. I said there is no evidence for it.

What it comes down to is this: I'm not arrogant, nor ignorant enough in this respect to claim to know ANYTHING about a supposed "creator". I don't deny the existence of a creator; infact, I think it's very plausible. A multi-dimensional (existing in more than our four dimensions) being that created "us" and our universe, as we may do ourselves one day and spawn another race. A very advanced being. A part of a very advanced race; not a singularity such as "God".

I'm not arrogant enough to believe I know anything about this creator. I'm not arrogant enough to paint a picture of him, or believe he's good, or evil, or temperamental, or demented; I'm not arrogant enough to believe I know anything at all about this creator, or even whether it exists at all.

Right now, my primary belief is that we are a result of chaos - the formation of amino acids under the right conditions, and it went from there. This "creator" may be dictating things in our universe, and may have caused our "big bang" - or maybe not. It's simply a possibility I do not deny. But I don't call it "God".

As for all the suffering in our world being the result of human nature; if God was so perfect, why did he make us this way? Why didn't he know it would happen? Why doesn't he intervene? Yeah.

[thePurpleGiant]

Originally posted by Logic:
I do though agree with you that many Christians will say He has his reasons when talking about the suffering in the world. This is something I strongly disagree with. I have always thought that the suffering in the world is our own fault and we have only our own ignorance to blame.

Actually, I am Christian and completely agree with you. God doesn't have a reason for war and suffering, it's just a result of our civilisation.

[Logic]

Originally posted by exa:
Logic, gimme a break, you are trying to put religion and science on the same level. Science is a field which admits things are unknown but creates good and sensible arguments that can lead us to believe in something (eg evolution, big bang, etc). These theories are found from empirical data, not some book or scripture we merely have to trust; such data is something religion lacks, as religion is purely faith based (show me I'm wrong).

Let me give you an example. Lets say there is a wall, and there may be a flower behind it, but you do not know. Then, I say, there is a flower behind the wall. You can choose to believe that there is a flower behind the wall, so you are putting faith into my words, or you can choose to believe that there is no flower behind the wall (a la atheism). Or you can simply admit that you have no idea, which I believe is the most rational approach (note: I am agnostic).

Now, lets say we can see some sort of bulge in the wall's shadow on the edge; we can theorize that this is a shadow of the flower and it exists, due to this iota of empirical data. This is what science is essentially, we look for data to give evidence for a hypothesis (certainly the big bang and the formation of life have significant evidence for us to believe in them).

Now, lets go around the wall to look for the flower with our own eyes. Lets say we find that flower, can we be absolutely sure that it exists? Not at all, because our eyes do not dictate absolute truth. For all we know, that flower can be plastic, or an illusion, or we can be in a situation like The Matrix where nothing really exists. All are perfectly reasonable hypotheses, however the most provable scenario at this point is that the object in question really is a flower. This is our scientifically reasoned theory, and unfortunately for a 'supreme creator', we cannot look around the proverbial 'wall'.

Do not mix religion and science, they simply are not the same.

Good post and you also bring up some good points. I'm also not trying to put science on the same level as religion. What I am trying to bring up is why I believe in Allah/God and why I find it peculiar that people dismiss Him as a possibility even if they cannot disprove him. You also bring up the point with empirical data. As I said before, our theories are based on our preconceived opinions. It is not long since empirical data showed that the world was flat. It is we who deside what is empirical evidence. One of the reasons scientists don't always agree but "accept" the best probability until proven otherwise. I have some evidence that God exists but I'm sure many of you would consider those "facts" as untrue rubbish. But I really don't care what others think. I know what has changed in my life since I started to believe. And that is enough for me.

The flower example is good and valid but there is one problem with it. You didn't include the answer that I would give you. Depending on how well I knew you, I would probably say that I have no idea but I will believe you until I can prove you wrong. And since you don't know if there is a flower on the other side you cannot tell me I'm wrong until we are on the other side.

Yes, the Big Bang theory and the theory about the formation of life have some evidence that supports them. But that is in no way against anything I believe. But at the same time the biggest questions about those theories have no evidence for them. What was before the big bang and how did the bilipidlayer and DNA of cells arise. We have nothing that tells us about those very important steps in evolution. Once again I should say that I find these theories highly likely scenarios and wouldn't dismiss them until I have some evidence that points to the contrary.

I am in no way trying to mix science and religion. I'm trying to explain for the orginal poster(and others) why I will believe in Allah/God and what it will take for me to stop believing. That is, I need evidence that he doesn't exist rather than needing evidence that he does exist. You cannot prove he doesn't exist until you provide the evidence to back up your claim. Until you do we can only argue and discuss if he exists.

I hope you see what I'm getting at(I'm tired and should have gone to sleep a while ago).

[Superchicken]

Is there anything that could shake your belief that apple sold you your Mac? There are certain things in life that you simply become sure of. Did I orignally have douts? Yeah, since then I've gotten to a point where I really have got all my awnsers to my tough questions, and no one has been able to say anything that would make me think otherwise.
Have my veiws of certain things changed? yes. I orignally thought that you needed to constantly ask for forgiveness for every little sin, later I realized this didn't make sense.
does my understanding of God change? Yeah. So essentially is my faith able ot be changed and concepts I have no douted? Yes. Are there certain other things that I have no dout in? Yes I have those to. I have no dout in my mind that I will be in heaven with God when I die, and that I have a promise of knowing Him as well as He knows me now. Can this be disproven? Not really. Can it be proven? Not really. It's an issue of faith.
That said are there things in my life that are personal proof? Yes.
I have seen God's hand at work in my life, I have seen Him always provide what I needed, and I have seen Him do things like heal people, I knew someone who had a colapsed lung, for anyone who knows biology, that's pretty much non fixable, when the plural sac can't keep it working you're just kinda done for as far as that lung goes, but some how God made it so that His lung reexpanded which is kinad unheard of.
In my own personal life I've had God speed up the healing of a broken leg when I was a kid so that it took like half the normal time to heal.

Another proof for me is simply the fact that things in the bible make sense. If you actually get to a point where you understand things it makes perfect sense.
You simply have to leave your preconsived assumptions at the door when dealing with God.

When you learn to live and laugh with the All Mighty as a constant part of your life, it's kinda odd, I seriously don't know how non christians get through life without God.

[Logic]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
We've never tried answering the question of "what came before the big bang?", because at this stage, we have no idea, and have no way of knowing. That may change in the future. At least I can say "I don't know", and it seems you can too - ask a Christian, and generally, they will respond with "God created it". So I respond, "What created God?". They now respond "He just was". Great argument there.

We have decent proof of the Big Bang; that's what makes believing in it different to believing in God. There is zero proof of his existence. None. At all.

The fact is, "life" and "matter" are here, as much as we are; where's God? I can't see him. Life and matter are here, so we can work with them. As opposed to the blind belief of a "divine creator".

Religious people are ignorant, I'm sorry. Some of them are very intelligent, and very open minded, but in the end, ignorant at least to a small degree. I never said that God did not exist. Not once. I said there is no evidence for it.

What it comes down to is this: I'm not arrogant, nor ignorant enough in this respect to claim to know ANYTHING about a supposed "creator". I don't deny the existence of a creator; infact, I think it's very plausible. A multi-dimensional (existing in more than our four dimensions) being that created "us" and our universe, as we may do ourselves one day and spawn another race. A very advanced being. A part of a very advanced race; not a singularity such as "God".

I'm not arrogant enough to believe I know anything about this creator. I'm not arrogant enough to paint a picture of him, or believe he's good, or evil, or temperamental, or demented; I'm not arrogant enough to believe I know anything at all about this creator, or even whether it exists at all.

Right now, my primary belief is that we are a result of chaos - the formation of amino acids under the right conditions, and it went from there. This "creator" may be dictating things in our universe, and may have caused our "big bang" - or maybe not. It's simply a possibility I do not deny. But I don't call it "God".

As for all the suffering in our world being the result of human nature; if God was so perfect, why did he make us this way? Why didn't he know it would happen? Why doesn't he intervene? Yeah.

OK, last post before sleep, I have to work tomorrow.

The problem is that "what came before the big bang?" is probably the answer to how the big bang came to be. Until then we have no proof that it did happen and will not understand how it happened.

And just because you don't see god doesn't mean he doesn't exists. Do you see atoms? Do you see electrons? No, but still you believe they exist(and as do I). We say we have evidence for there existance but we can only get the second hand effect of their being. Who is to say that God isn't in all matter and life? Who is to say that he isn't matter and life? It isn't blind believe for all religious people, some do ask questions and discuss it with others. I wasn't born into the religion I have now, nor is there any huge pressure on me here on Iceland from the culture. I chose my religion because after reading about it, it concurs with how I want to live life and I think that my belief has helped me to be a better person. Is that in some way wrong?

Tell me how is it ignorant being religious? You have chosen to view it in the way that since you have no evidence he believes he doesn't exist, while I have chosen to believe until there are evidence that he doesn't exist. From your post you give many of the reasons for why I believe, at least in some way.

The thing is that I don't claim to believe anything about him, at least nothing else than that he exists. Notice I said believe and not know.

Even if you claim you aren't arrogant and ignorant enough to say you know anything about him, you are arrogant enough to say that those who believe in him are both arrogant and ignorant.

For why did he make us this way? Perhaps because he gave us free will to choose between right and wrong, to choose how we live our lives. He is not the one who suffers from our faults, it is only life on earth that suffers. Perhaps he knew this would happen and desided to let us handle this challenge to see if we would choose right. To see if our free will and the "good" in us would prevail over our desires and animal instincts. Maybe he has humour for all this and just wanted us to be a huge reality show for him to watch. I. Don't. Know. And neither do you. For me(as a muslim) I believe that all humans are born "good". Then after we are born it is up to ourselves to deside what we will do with our lifes.

Since you don't believe in God since you don't see him, I have to ask you this. Do you believe that we have a "soul" or are we just a machine that programmed to act in a certain way? Do you believe in love or is that just something that is preprogrammed into us. That is that we can "love" anyone as long as the person is "up to our standards". If you say that this is all biological, I must also ask you if you have ever truly been in love. That is true love. Where you can't see the sun because of your other half?(Loose translation of an Icelandic proverb)

[Nicko]

Ok here is the easy answer: when you die and nothing happens, you will know god doesn't exist

[nonhuman]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
[B]Is there anything that could shake your belief that apple sold you your Mac? There are certain things in life that you simply become sure of.[b]

There's actually evidence that Apple sold you your Mac, and if you wanted to take the trouble you could trace down the exact path the money took from you to Apple and find the orders that went from Apple to the manufacturers to create and ship it, then trace the package all the way to you. Try doing that with God.

I have seen God's hand at work in my life, I have seen Him always provide what I needed, and I have seen Him do things like heal people, I knew someone who had a colapsed lung, for anyone who knows biology, that's pretty much non fixable, when the plural sac can't keep it working you're just kinda done for as far as that lung goes, but some how God made it so that His lung reexpanded which is kinad unheard of.

"Kinda unheard of." That means it does happen it is just rare. Why could your friend have just gotten lucky and had their lung re-expand? I'm not saying that God had no hand in this, I'm just saying that there is no reason to believe that only God could have caused this.

In my own personal life I've had God speed up the healing of a broken leg when I was a kid so that it took like half the normal time to heal.

Maybe you just heal quickly.

Another proof for me is simply the fact that things in the bible make sense. If you actually get to a point where you understand things it makes perfect sense.
You simply have to leave your preconsived assumptions at the door when dealing with God.

In the few instances in the Bible where Satan speaks, the things he says make sense too. Does that mean he's right?

When you learn to live and laugh with the All Mighty as a constant part of your life, it's kinda odd, I seriously don't know how non christians get through life without God.

When you learn to live and laugh with alcohol and/or drugs as a constant part ofyou life you get to that point too.

[Superchicken]

I've never had any of my stoner friends tell me they felt the contentness that I do, and I certainly havn't seen it in their lives. And the point is that lungs DON"T reexpand, it's something that doesn't happen, you'd have to have a clue about how a lung works though.
Like I said there are personal proofs that simply seal the deal, but they are different for each person.

The one point I would make is you can never be certain God doesn't exist.

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by Logic:
OK, last post before sleep, I have to work tomorrow.

The problem is that "what came before the big bang?" is probably the answer to how the big bang came to be. Until then we have no proof that it did happen and will not understand how it happened.

And just because you don't see god doesn't mean he doesn't exists. Do you see atoms? Do you see electrons? No, but still you believe they exist(and as do I). We say we have evidence for there existance but we can only get the second hand effect of their being. Who is to say that God isn't in all matter and life? Who is to say that he isn't matter and life? It isn't blind believe for all religious people, some do ask questions and discuss it with others. I wasn't born into the religion I have now, nor is there any huge pressure on me here on Iceland from the culture. I chose my religion because after reading about it, it concurs with how I want to live life and I think that my belief has helped me to be a better person. Is that in some way wrong?

Tell me how is it ignorant being religious? You have chosen to view it in the way that since you have no evidence he believes he doesn't exist, while I have chosen to believe until there are evidence that he doesn't exist. From your post you give many of the reasons for why I believe, at least in some way.

The thing is that I don't claim to believe anything about him, at least nothing else than that he exists. Notice I said believe and not know.

Even if you claim you aren't arrogant and ignorant enough to say you know anything about him, you are arrogant enough to say that those who believe in him are both arrogant and ignorant.

For why did he make us this way? Perhaps because he gave us free will to choose between right and wrong, to choose how we live our lives. He is not the one who suffers from our faults, it is only life on earth that suffers. Perhaps he knew this would happen and desided to let us handle this challenge to see if we would choose right. To see if our free will and the "good" in us would prevail over our desires and animal instincts. Maybe he has humour for all this and just wanted us to be a huge reality show for him to watch. I. Don't. Know. And neither do you. For me(as a muslim) I believe that all humans are born "good". Then after we are born it is up to ourselves to deside what we will do with our lifes.

Since you don't believe in God since you don't see him, I have to ask you this. Do you believe that we have a "soul" or are we just a machine that programmed to act in a certain way? Do you believe in love or is that just something that is preprogrammed into us. That is that we can "love" anyone as long as the person is "up to our standards". If you say that this is all biological, I must also ask you if you have ever truly been in love. That is true love. Where you can't see the sun because of your other half?(Loose translation of an Icelandic proverb)

We have direct evidence of the existance of atoms through some experiments done @ IBM Corp. We have indirect evidence of the existance of electrons through magnetism in materials and ways atoms reacts (mind you, most chemical reactions are direct use of knowledge about atoms and their electrons).

I am atheist agnostic. That means that I know that we don't know. I see the bible as a tool to make you understand how a modern society should work. Most of it is throwned like stories to illustrate points and make people fear.

There is contradictions inside the bible about what god does and what he is told to be. (Forgiving and mercyful, but chases Adam and Eve from Eden, flood the whole earth, destroy Sodome and Gomore.. doesn't stick to me). Of course it's my opinion and my way of seing it, but this is how I started to criticize Christianity, and realize that it was manipulated by clercs to make you hear what you want to hear.

It works.. not for me!

[Superchicken]

Dude you tottaly have 0 understanding of God. God is not by nature blindly forgiving, God is the most inteligent being around, He is not simply a puppy that runs back to you every time you kick him!
It never ceases to amaze me that that people forget God actually does have a personality.

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Dude you tottaly have 0 understanding of God. God is not by nature blindly forgiving, God is the most inteligent being around, He is not simply a puppy that runs back to you every time you kick him!
It never ceases to amaze me that that people forget God actually does have a personality.

Than, why is it that what you are saying is not what is teached in church every sunday? I've been attending regulary for years..

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
It never ceases to amaze me that that people forget God actually does have a personality.

Does he have a set of balls?

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Dude you tottaly have 0 understanding of God. God is not by nature blindly forgiving, God is the most inteligent being around, He is not simply a puppy that runs back to you every time you kick him!
It never ceases to amaze me that that people forget God actually does have a personality.

I was thinking about that.. and god CAN'T have a personnality.

First, one of the things said in the bible, is that God is perfect.

What is being perfect? Being perfect is having all the qualities (good side of a personnality.. don't really know a word for it in english, qualit� in french) possible.

What is having a personnality? Having a personnality is having qualities and bad sides (opposites, d�faut in french). Having a personnality is choosing how you react to certain persons, it's having preferences and being selective. If you have a personnality, you are not perfect.

So, if God has a personnality, he can't be perfect, and thus he does not exist. So either God is perfect.. or doesn't exist!

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Logic:
Since you don't believe in God since you don't see him, I have to ask you this. Do you believe that we have a "soul" or are we just a machine that programmed to act in a certain way? Do you believe in love or is that just something that is preprogrammed into us. That is that we can "love" anyone as long as the person is "up to our standards". If you say that this is all biological, I must also ask you if you have ever truly been in love. That is true love. Where you can't see the sun because of your other half?(Loose translation of an Icelandic proverb)

I'm at uni at the moment and don't have time to reply to your entire post, but I will respond to this bit immediately, and the rest when I get home.

No, I do not believe in a "soul" as anything transcending matter. We are indeed machines, programmed to act in a certain way. Incredible machines. Machines capable of fear, loathing, hate, anger, violence, vengeance, mercy, compassion, love, empathy, sympathy, maybe even altruism, and so forth.

We are the result of 3.5 billion years of evolution. I do believe in love, and I have been in love. I believe we are machines capable of love. Is there anything wrong with that?

Our consciousness... love, hate, all emotion... is entirely the result of neurons firing in our brain... of electrical signals our brain interprets.

We're just really cool machines, in the end.

[Nicko]

With the right combination of chemical interactions we can believe in and feel anything.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
I'm at uni at the moment and don't have time to reply to your entire post, but I will respond to this bit immediately, and the rest when I get home.

No, I do not believe in a "soul" as anything transcending matter. We are indeed machines, programmed to act in a certain way. Incredible machines. Machines capable of fear, loathing, hate, anger, violence, vengeance, mercy, compassion, love, empathy, sympathy, maybe even altruism, and so forth.

We are the result of 3.5 billion years of evolution. I do believe in love, and I have been in love. I believe we are machines capable of love. Is there anything wrong with that?

Our consciousness... love, hate, all emotion... is entirely the result of neurons firing in our brain... of electrical signals our brain interprets.

We're just really cool machines, in the end.

Wow, well-said

[Superchicken]

Completely agree Cipher.

Although not many Christians would agree with me, we are a collection of biological impluses, of course that's not to say that's all we'll ever be.

EDIT: of course that's not to say that I think we don't have souls, it's simply a terribly misunderstood thing.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by Drizzt:
I am atheist agnostic.

Than, why is it that what you are saying is not what is teached in church every sunday? I've been attending regulary for years..

LOL

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
I'm at uni at the moment and don't have time to reply to your entire post, but I will respond to this bit immediately, and the rest when I get home.

I wouldn't bother if I were you.

[exa]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
I'm at uni at the moment and don't have time to reply to your entire post, but I will respond to this bit immediately, and the rest when I get home.

No, I do not believe in a "soul" as anything transcending matter. We are indeed machines, programmed to act in a certain way. Incredible machines. Machines capable of fear, loathing, hate, anger, violence, vengeance, mercy, compassion, love, empathy, sympathy, maybe even altruism, and so forth.

We are the result of 3.5 billion years of evolution. I do believe in love, and I have been in love. I believe we are machines capable of love. Is there anything wrong with that?

Our consciousness... love, hate, all emotion... is entirely the result of neurons firing in our brain... of electrical signals our brain interprets.

We're just really cool machines, in the end.

But is the possibility of a soul not feasible? I do not think such hypotheses should be debunked so easily, considering the amount of evidence we have going either way.

I don't know, I suppose I feel really pathetic if I am just a machine. I suppose this is how the idea of a transcending soul came in to place. I mean, can you concieve the idea of being dead... being completely off? To me, death is the ultimate truth.

[talisker]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
We've never tried answering the question of "what came before the big bang?", because at this stage, we have no idea, and have no way of knowing. That may change in the future.

The question doesnt make sense, as time was created in the big bang, so there was no "before". Interesting, my brain appears to have exploded.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by willed:
Is there anything that would, concievably, shake your faith? Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept which would prove to you that there is no God?

I am a Christian and don't think there is anything that could shake my faith. Last year I had one really bad day. My car broke down on the way to work and I had to walk 5 blocks in the pouring rain. After I FINALLY got to work and sat down at my desk my computer wouldn't boot. My hard drive had crashed. I'm convinced that I did something to make God mad at me. That is proof enough for me. I've tried to be a better boy since then but I still back up my files weekly just incase.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by exa:
I don't know, I suppose I feel really pathetic if I am just a machine. I suppose this is how the idea of a transcending soul came in to place. I mean, can you concieve the idea of being dead... being completely off? To me, death is the ultimate truth.

Yeah, I really don't think I could handle life thinking that when I die thats it. I mean I'd probably never leave my house! I definately wouldn't drive on the interstate anymore.

I do find it interesting that all religions believe in God(s) and souls. All of these different groups of people separated over millions of miles across the globe, yet everyone came to believe in a God and an afterlife.

[deekay1]

Originally posted by Logic:
But I might ask you this question. Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept that there is a god?

define god, and i'll tell you how he doesn't exist.
i think it's bullshit to have to initially defend the view that somehting fictional doesn't exist.
just because HISTORICALLY accepted truths constitute a central paradigm in social behavior, doesn't mean they are necessarily valid (or valid at all for that matter).
sorry, in 2003, the "ball is in the court of the believers". - define god, and prove that he exists.

blind faith may be acceptable on a personal level, but as far as societal interaction goes, it's out of the window, where imho it belongs.

[deekay1]

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
All of these different groups of people separated over millions of miles across the globe, yet everyone came to believe in a God and an afterlife.

that is simply not true.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by deekay1:
that is simply not true.

When I said everyone I meant everyone that was religious came to believe in similar concepts without knowing about the other religions and concepts that existed.

[gerbnl]

Originally posted by deekay1:
that is simply not true.

nor relevant, even if it where true...

[nonhuman]

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
When I said everyone I meant everyone that was religious came to believe in similar concepts without knowing about the other religions and concepts that existed.

That's because they were all trying to answer the same questions: 1) What makes humans different from other animal, what makes us aware, makes us think? What part of us lasts beyond the body's death, because it's inconceivable that we just end? 2) What mechanism causes the things I don't understand (such as the rising and setting of the sun, the funny dots of light in the night sky, the existence of everything) to happen? The easy (both in terms of difficulty, and comfort) way out of 1 is to say we aren't our bodies but rather some 'thing' that inhabits the body during life, but trancends the border between life and death. The easy way out of 2 is to say 'magic' and/or '(G/g)od(s)'.

[deekay1]

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
When I said everyone I meant everyone that was religious came to believe in similar concepts without knowing about the other religions and concepts that existed.

"similar concepts" is a very sketchy expression. plus, many societies stole, barrowed and copied beliefs from other tribes and people they encountered.

the problem is, that to us westerners, for a long time it seemed that all of these people have similar beliefs. imo that is/was largelyy due to the fact that we ourselves when trying to make sense of the things we encountered, used our own (biased) language to explain their "concepts" of religion and spirituality.

the "function" religion plays in most societies (ancient and present) has been known for quite a while now.

[willed]

Originally posted by Logic:
But I might ask you this question. Is there any evidence which you would hypothetically accept that there is a god?

Yes - at the most basic level, I would, I expect, be convinced if I had a religious vision of some sort. Some may claim that even this is a product of the human mind, but I think that it would convince me. Or, I would have been convinced by the Bible if the sources agreed with eachother and didn't show simple human motives behind them.

you should no that in science one of the most important things is not to prove, but to disprove(right word?). It is always harder to disprove than to prove and therefore a scientist should rather aim for that instead of proving every single hypothesis(null hypothesis comes to mind)... Can you prove that there is no such thing as a god?

It is impossible to prove or disprove anything except for mathematical abstracts. I did mention empirical evidence, and we cannot even 'prove' that gravity will always work. I'm thinking about the balance of evidence. I never said that I could prove that God didn't exist - if I could I wouldn't be having this conversation with you

Basically, the burden of proof is on the theist, who believe in something intangible with no testable effects.

Anyway, I'm going to Milan for a couple of days now, so having stirred up this can of worms, I'm leaving! Bye

[- - e r i k - -]

Religion and science are like water and oil. Do not try mixing fantasy with reality.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
The difference between science and religion, and what makes religious people ignorant and arrogant, is this:

Science is not afraid to say "I don't know".
Religion, on the other hand, simply says "It was God...".

Very well put Cipher. Wether you knew it or not you have very aptly described the principle of Occam's Razor which goes:

One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.

When trying to explain something rationally one should not invent a mystical explanation or some unknown and unproven enity, be it God, ghosts, aliens or conspiracy theory.

As you can plainly see, religion is just one of the more accepted fantasies of man - devised to try to make some sense into our futile existence.

[Drizzt]

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
LOL

If you would have read my other posts, you would understand that I believed there's years ago.. and stoped.

But I guess sticking on a point is easier..

[deekay1]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Dude you tottaly have 0 understanding of God...

...you gotta hit the bong first a couple o' times...then you'll see the truth. totally trippin' maaaannnn.....*cough*

[g. olson]

All of you may want to check out the forums on Infidels.org, a gathering place for non-believers (although posts by theists are common.)

Here is my position: beliefs are not really chosen, even though they may be changed over time by experience, reflection, evidence etc. The only intellectually defensible position seems to be agnosticism, since it is really impossible to prove a negative ie. god doesn't exist.

However, although agnosticism is my defense position, my belief is that god(s) do not exist. This is based on the total lack of evidence for any supernatural being and no pesonal experience in my 54 years of anything that could be construed as "supernatural." In other words, if you tied me down and put electrodes on my genitals, I'd probably say what you want me say, but my belief that there is no god would not change.

For anyone to argue that an unexplained event or coincidence is evidence of a "miracle" is the thought error humans have been making for eons. That's why we have so many weird belief systems around the world. By the way, collapsed lungs are reinflated every day; it's not a miracle.

[gadster]

And lo! On the seventh day, man created god in his own image. And man gave god dominion over the world. And man saw that god was good ... or something like that ...

Primitive wishful thinking. What a load of caRp!

[Spliffdaddy]

So many Christians who are angry with God. They pretend as if they don't believe.

I see right through them.

[wdlove]

Originally posted by - - e r i k - -:
Religion and science are like water and oil. Do not try mixing fantasy with reality.

I see religion and science as reality. There isn't really anything contradictory in the Bible when it comes to science. My Senior Pastor was trained in science prior to Seminary. Now he holds a PhD. He always backs of the facts of the Bible with scientific proof!

[mikellanes]

Originally posted by wdlove:
I see religion and science as reality. There isn't really anything contradictory in the Bible when it comes to science. My Senior Pastor was trained in science prior to Seminary. Now he holds a PhD. He always backs of the facts of the Bible with scientific proof!

So you are trying to tell me that he can back up Moses living to 120 years old and Methuselah living to 969 years old? And he can do all this with Facts?

go right ahead...

[adamk]

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
I am a Christian and don't think there is anything that could shake my faith. Last year I had one really bad day. My car broke down on the way to work and I had to walk 5 blocks in the pouring rain. After I FINALLY got to work and sat down at my desk my computer wouldn't boot. My hard drive had crashed. I'm convinced that I did something to make God mad at me. That is proof enough for me. I've tried to be a better boy since then but I still back up my files weekly just incase.

interface guy,

are you convinced that you did something bad because god punished you? and you can't/don't know what it is?

-or-

do you have any idea of what you might have done to deserve that punishment? something you did, said, thought?

the former case requires blind faith. similiar to a child who is beaten because his father had a bad day at work. the child may know nothing about what his dad does, but may feel the beating was due to something he did bad, though he can't know what it is.

this is very different from doing something knowingly and hoping not to get punished but expecting it when it comes.

some thoughts.

adam

[joe_kr]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:

I have seen God's hand at work in my life, I have seen Him always provide what I needed, and I have seen Him do things like heal people, I knew someone who had a colapsed lung, for anyone who knows biology, that's pretty much non fixable, when the plural sac can't keep it working you're just kinda done for as far as that lung goes, but some how God made it so that His lung reexpanded which is kinad unheard of.

looks like you need to learn more biology...

http://www.vh.org/adult/provider/int...Treatment.html

"A spontaneous pneumothorax which is relatively asymptomatic and occupies up to 15 to 25 percent of the hemithorax can be followed clinically and with serial chest xrays. An uncomplicated, untreated pneumothorax will resolve slowly--approximately 1.25 percent per day."

Reminds me a quote

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'

Which basically can be translated into "things YOU don't understand" can be seen as Magic or the act of God.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by adamk:
interface guy,

are you convinced that you did something bad because god punished you? and you can't/don't know what it is?

No, I don't really believe that. I was just trying to be funny. I know, I know... don't quit my day job. When you're forced to use a 4 year old Dell you just have to accecpt the possibility that the hard drive can crash at any moment. And when you buy a 12 year old car with 120k miles on it you never know when it will stop running. Ok, I'll stop talking off topic now.