By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mummelmann on 01 September 2011

This will certainly not end well...



Around the Network
MARCUSDJACKSON on 01 September 2011
The Fury said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:

existstance is nothing more then pure thought. in a space of nothing how can something just be created? how was god here before man? wht brouht him here? he couldn't have just existed! thats not logical by anymeans.

there had to be something before God and something here before that ect, or theres no way he could exists. nothing just exists there has to be some logic or rational reasoning behind it.

You are thinking based on knowledge we humans possess, which is limited at best. Your thoughts are created from nothing every moment of every day, you should have no more belief in your own thoughts then you do of God. Why did there have to be something before God? if God is the 'begining and end of all' then God is the thing that existed before God. Logical thinking is not be used when those who believe in God show you their proof. Their faith is, and faith is something that comes from nothing.

something that comes from nothing is nothing.



 Zarx's unofficial The Witcher 3    

Official Playstation Vita Thread!

write reveiws, articles, share thoughts, and expand on discussion like never before on gamewise.co/brainwaves

MARCUSDJACKSON on 01 September 2011
buIlza90 said:
Its impossoble to prove god exists since he actually doesnt in the first place. Its like proving Santas real.

this



 Zarx's unofficial The Witcher 3    

Official Playstation Vita Thread!

write reveiws, articles, share thoughts, and expand on discussion like never before on gamewise.co/brainwaves

Porcupine_I on 01 September 2011
nightsurge said:
Porcupine_I said:
nightsurge said:
Porcupine_I said:
nightsurge said:

I will ignore the slightly insulting OP's usage of "archaic" and other words that imply belief in a religion to be silly, old fashioned, or otherwise odd.

I just have two things to say:

 

  1. Science never PROVES anything. This is a common misusage/misconception.
  1. If you wish to believe in the Big Bang Theory or other creation theories that don't rely on a devine being, explain to me where the very first object in the universe came from. They say the Big Bang started from a very small amount of elements that began moving extremely rapidly in a dense state. Well, what about where those elements came from? They had to come from somewhere, correct? Just a little philosophical conundrum.

 

Enjoy :)

the simple fact that we even discuss the big bang theory is due to that science has proven a lot of things to that point. Things that could not be accepted in other times, but they turned out to be true. and some were only proven because people stood up to their believes. and these things gradually became accepted as truth and fact and it was the religions who had to give way to knowledge.

it was never the other way around, and i doubt it ever will be.

otherwise the sun would still revolve around earth in the center of the universe and we would still be scared to sail over the edge.

or do you beleive these are theories too?

 

What I said was a fact.

Science does not PROVE anything. Yet you just used the words "proof, proven, prove" a lot in that response. Science can NEVER ever prove anything to 100% certainty and all educated scientists themselves know and accept this as fact.

It was never religion that claimed we were the center of the universe or that the earth was flat, it was the people's intelligence and Science at those points in time. So yes, those are/were theories and they have since evolved into what we understand today. Theories gain evidence to either support or refute their claims, but they never ever irrefutably prove anything. I was merely trying to emphasize that fact.

Also, I have avoided making my personal beliefs known up to this point, but I will divulge now. What I believe is a combination of both Scientific theories and God for the explanation of creation. There is no reason a god could not have used events such as the big bang or evolution to create the universe as it is today. The Bible intentionally leaves things up for interpretation, I feel. Such as when it says that God created the heavens and the earth, and created the earth in 6 days. But what is a "day" to an all powerful being that exists beyond time itself and has no essence of "time"? Millions of years forming the earth could be a blink of an eye to this being. He/She could very well have used volcanic eruptions, slow erosion, and evolution of species over millions of years to form what we have now. Time is merely a concept that we humans created. There is no reason one cannot believe in both Scientific theories such as the Big Bang/Evolution and in a higher power. But that's just my own personal beliefs from not accepting everything that was thrown at me at face value and making my own informed decisions on the topics.

Now, that is interesting, because if nobody can ever prove anything, why even use a universal creator to justify what is written in the bible?

by your definition the bible cannot be used as a source of anything at all, and every  educated person should be aware of that fact or does that not go both ways?

--That is why it is called "Faith" :) I never once said the Bible or a divine creator has been fully proven or any variation thereof.

And what makes you say religion never claimed we were the center of the universe? are you not familiar with the story of Galileo Galilei?

After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. In February 1616, although he had been cleared of any offence, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture", and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

--Ahh, Catholics. They tend to create their own set of rules/guidelines that were not ever mentioned or even supported in the Bible. It happens sometimes with Christian denominations which is why I am non-denominational. The leaders of such denominations are power hungry as any human is and abuse that power just as often as anyone else does in a position of power, but I digress. There is no actual supporting evidence in scripture that claims the Earth is the center of the universe, the sun revolves around the earth, it is flat, etc. There is only flawed interpretations made by people of early time periods that lacked the Scientific knowledge that we have today.

so you claim there is no definitive proof that the earth is revolving about the sun?

--No, I claim that Science does not "PROVE" anything, merely, "Everything observed thus far is consistent with". But you are reading way too far into my comment about Science not proving anything. For more information, though, you can look here:

http://blog.drwile.com/?p=5725
Or google it yourself. There is plenty of information out there and sound reasoning for it.

if you do not want people to read into your comments, then maybe you should explain your reasoning properly in the first place.

And yet you still did not dismiss the fact (yes, i am using the word fact, as it seems to be legitimate enough for you) that it was science that brought us to the point where we are even able to discuss the big bang theory.

that's what i call beating around the bush.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Dr.Grass on 01 September 2011
Joelcool7 said:
Dr.Grass said:
Joelcool7 said:
Runa216 said:
alrighty, let's see if I can get this train back on track here.

Original post was saying (in a nicer way) that if Religion wants to continue to have an influence on the world of politics, science, and society, it should be expected to withstand the same criticism and scrutiny that all other aspects of our world has.

Instead of offering proper, intelligent insight to the issue, the thread has essentially turned into the precise thing I was hoping it wouldn't: Proving my point. Instead of offering philisophical insight to the origin of the universe or whatever, we have a lot of christians claiming that this criticism is somehow offensive and are trying to get the thread locked, and the rest are just trying to divert attention to disproving different scientific theories.

In an odd way, this thread has further proven my point: Religion collapses under pressure and is incapable of standing up to rationality without reverting to "let's see who can scream the loudest" to determine what people believe.

Also, for all the people arguing evolution, I have to facepalm. I may not know all the intricate details of evolution offhand, but even the slightest bit of research and proper scientific inquiry will prove to you that evolution is real. Anyone denying this fact is...well, they're not only ignorant but aggressively so.

"Don't bother me with the facts, I've already made up my mind."


Well this is a start, alittle better wording. Maybe you should edit your initial post to make it more welcoming and less flame bait. Also to my knowledge I'm the only one who reported this thread. Many users who agreed with me aren't Christian's either.

But on topic. Religion is already held to the same standards as everything else on earth.

As Kantor said science doesn't disprove religion or prove it. Many of the scientists who created the basic knowledge we follow today were Christian. (1)As I said the majority of scientists around the globe believe in a God, saying that religion isn't held to the same standard as science is a fallacy. Science and religion go hand in hand.

Most people who believe in God, aren't complete moron's. Its not like they didn't think about the decision or research it. Its not like each and everyone of them is uneducated illiterates.

Their is alot of evidence to support the various faiths.(2) Archeological and historical evidence over flows. Scientific evidence doesn't disprove it so people base their beliefs on what is proven and experiances they have had themselves.

Also again with this whole evolution crap. Evolution is a series of theories which started with Darwin's theory of evolution. Some of these theories hold water others do not. To stereotype and include all the theories as Evolution and say its fact is really niave.

(3)I believe in Micro Evolution and not MacroEvolution. I believe that in some cases convergent evolution also occurs. In biology in University I learned about a (4)dozen different evolution theories. Though I don't remember them all this knowledge really keeps me from saying I believe or don't believe in Evolution.

Which theories of evolution do you believe in? Why do you believe in these theories and how do these theories disprove the existance of God? You say Evolution is fact and such so which theories are fact and such?

Religion doesn't collapse under pressure. if it did it wouldn't be around anymore. The users here have responded to your questions fairly well infact (5)even non-Christian users in this thread have provided insight into religious beliefs.

Your final quote about facts I'm not sure exactly who your qouting but I'd be happy to see these facts. I'm sure you know way more then my bio proffesor and all the teachers that have taught me science over the years. You probably also know more then the majority of scientists since they believe in God and you obviously have a better understanding of science then they do.

1. FALSE

2. Non-specific statement with no explanation or proof. What are you possibly saying!?

3. This belief is (imo) quite justified. If one studies breeding then the 'breaking point' is always encountered. Fair statement.

4. Erm, what? They all say the same things, but different formulations are presented due to a lack of data at this point in time. Non-sensicle statement.

5. The superiority attitude of the Western man is pathetic.


1. Alright prove that the majority of scientists around the globe are Athiests? Considering the majority of the worlds population believe in a diety and the fact that their are thousands of middle eastern Muslim scientists, African Christian scientists and scientists from accross Europe. Infact even in North America their are thousands of Christian and other religious scientists.How in the world can you claim that as false? Just because their is a very vocal minority in North America and Western Europe does not mean that those scientists speak for everyone in the scientific community.

Infact I have met several Christian scientists, even more Agnostic scientists but only one Athiest scientist. My prof was an agnostic and every marine biologist and such I talk to and zoologist none of them are athiests. I wanted to become a zoologist at one time, I tried very hard to get to know these scientists.

Of course that means you have to consider biologists scientists, which they are. Fact is that I live in Canada and if their are very few athiest ones in western Canada I highly doubt that they are the majority in the rest of the world. Especially when you include the religious countries.

As many biologists I talked to explained it is stupid to believe in or not believe in a God. Any true scientist knows that you can't prove or disprove the existance and having faith in the existance or lack of existance is pure ignorance. That being said I also met Christian biologists and scientists.is

 


 Larson, Edward J.; Larry Witham (1998). "Leading scientists still reject God". Nature (Macmillan Publishers Ltd.) 394 (6691): 313.

''A study has shown atheism in the West to be particularly prevalent among scientists, a tendency already quite marked at the beginning of the 20th century, developing into a dominant one during the course of the century. In 1914, James H. Leuba found that 58% of 1,000 randomly selected U.S. natural scientistsexpressed "disbelief or doubt in the existence of God" (defined as a personal God which interacts directly with human beings). The same study, repeated in 1996, gave a similar percentage of 60.7%. Expressions of positive disbelief rose from 52% to 72%.[13] (See also relationship between religion and science.)''

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism



Around the Network
arcane_chaos on 01 September 2011
Joelcool7 said:

Alright you say this thread isn't supposed to be insulting and is supposed to be intelligent. Yet you already know that nobody can prove God exists and the premice of your thread is people aren't allowed to give you the most educated response. Anybody with a basic education knows that you can't prove or disprove the existance of God , trying to do so is futile.

So I'm going to call your bluff. This thread's intent is obviously hostile in nature and meant to draw users into a debate they cannot win. You know that these users arguments will be flawed because as I said above their is no way of proving or disproving the existance of God. This is a bait thread and your hoping some users actually come on so you and other users can target them.

This thread should be closed immediatly if you truly back what you said in the OP. Your one of the writers I suggest you contact a Mod and have it closed. I will be reporting it as well as a flame bait thread , because thats exactly what it is.

Don't like my response, I'm sorry but as a writer for VGChartz you have to have some integrity, you can't go out and violate VGChartz policies or make a thread with the soul purpose of insulting users. This is very low and I hope you take what I say seriously and contact a mod immediatly before this thread gets out of hand!


this, but sadly it too late...

seriously, his question/arguement/theory has gone on for hundreds if not thousands of years...what makes you think(at the op)  that it could be answered by a few forum posters. this thread has turned into to nothing but a flamewar(like every religious thread before it....)



Krstorm on 01 September 2011

I love how this thread is considered "a troll thread" or "hostile" but the ones bashing atheism are ok for some reason =)



nightsurge on 01 September 2011
Porcupine_I said:
nightsurge said:
Porcupine_I said:
nightsurge said:
Porcupine_I said:
nightsurge said:

I will ignore the slightly insulting OP's usage of "archaic" and other words that imply belief in a religion to be silly, old fashioned, or otherwise odd.

I just have two things to say:

 

  1. Science never PROVES anything. This is a common misusage/misconception.
  1. If you wish to believe in the Big Bang Theory or other creation theories that don't rely on a devine being, explain to me where the very first object in the universe came from. They say the Big Bang started from a very small amount of elements that began moving extremely rapidly in a dense state. Well, what about where those elements came from? They had to come from somewhere, correct? Just a little philosophical conundrum.

 

Enjoy :)

the simple fact that we even discuss the big bang theory is due to that science has proven a lot of things to that point. Things that could not be accepted in other times, but they turned out to be true. and some were only proven because people stood up to their believes. and these things gradually became accepted as truth and fact and it was the religions who had to give way to knowledge.

it was never the other way around, and i doubt it ever will be.

otherwise the sun would still revolve around earth in the center of the universe and we would still be scared to sail over the edge.

or do you beleive these are theories too?

 

What I said was a fact.

Science does not PROVE anything. Yet you just used the words "proof, proven, prove" a lot in that response. Science can NEVER ever prove anything to 100% certainty and all educated scientists themselves know and accept this as fact.

It was never religion that claimed we were the center of the universe or that the earth was flat, it was the people's intelligence and Science at those points in time. So yes, those are/were theories and they have since evolved into what we understand today. Theories gain evidence to either support or refute their claims, but they never ever irrefutably prove anything. I was merely trying to emphasize that fact.

Also, I have avoided making my personal beliefs known up to this point, but I will divulge now. What I believe is a combination of both Scientific theories and God for the explanation of creation. There is no reason a god could not have used events such as the big bang or evolution to create the universe as it is today. The Bible intentionally leaves things up for interpretation, I feel. Such as when it says that God created the heavens and the earth, and created the earth in 6 days. But what is a "day" to an all powerful being that exists beyond time itself and has no essence of "time"? Millions of years forming the earth could be a blink of an eye to this being. He/She could very well have used volcanic eruptions, slow erosion, and evolution of species over millions of years to form what we have now. Time is merely a concept that we humans created. There is no reason one cannot believe in both Scientific theories such as the Big Bang/Evolution and in a higher power. But that's just my own personal beliefs from not accepting everything that was thrown at me at face value and making my own informed decisions on the topics.

Now, that is interesting, because if nobody can ever prove anything, why even use a universal creator to justify what is written in the bible?

by your definition the bible cannot be used as a source of anything at all, and every  educated person should be aware of that fact or does that not go both ways?

--That is why it is called "Faith" :) I never once said the Bible or a divine creator has been fully proven or any variation thereof.

And what makes you say religion never claimed we were the center of the universe? are you not familiar with the story of Galileo Galilei?

After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. In February 1616, although he had been cleared of any offence, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture", and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

--Ahh, Catholics. They tend to create their own set of rules/guidelines that were not ever mentioned or even supported in the Bible. It happens sometimes with Christian denominations which is why I am non-denominational. The leaders of such denominations are power hungry as any human is and abuse that power just as often as anyone else does in a position of power, but I digress. There is no actual supporting evidence in scripture that claims the Earth is the center of the universe, the sun revolves around the earth, it is flat, etc. There is only flawed interpretations made by people of early time periods that lacked the Scientific knowledge that we have today.

so you claim there is no definitive proof that the earth is revolving about the sun?

--No, I claim that Science does not "PROVE" anything, merely, "Everything observed thus far is consistent with". But you are reading way too far into my comment about Science not proving anything. For more information, though, you can look here:

http://blog.drwile.com/?p=5725
Or google it yourself. There is plenty of information out there and sound reasoning for it.

if you do not want people to read into your comments, then maybe you should explain your reasoning properly in the first place.

And yet you still did not dismiss the fact (yes, i am using the word fact, as it seems to be legitimate enough for you) that it was science that brought us to the point where we are even able to discuss the big bang theory.

that's what i call beating around the bush.

I have no idea what you are talking about. My comments were quite clear and to the point. This whole time you seem to be thinking I am apposed to Science in some way, shape, or form, which I am not at all. I was merely emphasizing a common truth about Science in that it does not prove anything. Please do yourself and others a favor and read up on that.

I have nothing wrong with the Big Bang theory, evolution, or anything else Science has brought about through observation.



Burning Typhoon on 01 September 2011

I'm writing a novel. The character's IQ is well over 200... And, this is something she's going to randomly bring up in one of her onslaughts. I could answer this question here, and now... but... I don't want to take away from my novel...

The short answer: Yes. The other answer: Not in the way you're thinking, or expecting...

Tell you what I'll do... When I publish the novel (next year, sorry, still writing it) If this thread isn't locked, I'll come back to it, and, answer this question.

I'll leave with this, though... There's nothing wrong with diverse ways of thinking, (atheists, and religion). So, go about life, and try not to let the subject bother you until I release my novel.. Sorry, I really just don't want to take away from it, or have to go into a lot of explaining, only to do it again in my novel.

But, I'm going to click the post button, because it's very tempting to answer this question.

EDIT:  I'll add that if this thread is blocked, I'll make a new thread next year (I'm planning to have it finished by January, but, publishing could take up to 6 months).  And, probably PM some of you people to come in, and read stuff.  I'll do something.



Sevengen on 01 September 2011

@Runa...

so I see your still on this. It's funny how you choose to argue with others but not with me. Would you like me to tell you why in a subsequent post?
You know what, better yet, I'll just tell you why now:

you've chosen to stop responding to my posts because you're intelligent enough to see that it's a no win situation for you. So instead, you've decided to 'discuss' - 'argue' with others.
I'm sure you can spot the irony here. You demand that others prove God exists, for what reasons you have, and I've read as you've noted through several different posts that the structure of God's reality begins to crumble when a person approaches that theory from a scientific, observational manner. They are basically left without an argument.
In the exact same way that I left you without an answer when I asked you to prove you don't believe in God, or prove that you'd wake up this morning. You stumbled with each and then simply chose to ignore me.
Not fair Runa, considering you started this, not fair. Quite hypocritical to be honest.
but here... let me tell you a little about you.
You were raised with Christian influences, maybe you're family didn't go to church every Sunday, but the idea of God, of a Christian God, ran throughout your family. Now you're an early twenty-something looking for answers, for validations, of a God you learned about when you were younger, a God you can't fully let go of because his certainty was instilled in the back of your head when you had no choice but to listen. You watch the world now, maybe you're in college gleaning information day by day from older folks you've been conditioned to accept as being right, experienced and precise in ways a young man can't be. You've learned the personal value of questioning things, which is exactly why you started this thread.
A part of you believes in God and a part of you doubts him, you just need to know which one to trust.
You can of course disagree with me in a reply post, tell me I'm completely wrong, but I know I'm not. This.... what you're doing right here, is what people do when they're unsure, when they themselves can't find the answers needed for a truth that's begun to hollow.
Dude.. you aint gonna find it on VGChartz, arguing with people that, for the most part, have no idea and simply parrot what things they've heard from others. Quoting scriptures or science books, sounding intelligent.
Wrestling with the ideas of others helps us figure out what we're thinking, so I guess I understand the impetus for the OP. But you won't find answers from people asking the same questions, or providing arguments you're familiar with.
In other words, you aint gonna find it here.

one more thing, in the future, if you're going to start an argument.. be willing and capable to answer when the discussion is turned back on you. That not only provides traction for your initial question, but keeps you in the driver's seat sort of speak. You know, walk the walk sorta thing.
peace.