Rath said: richardhutnik said: And again, I am reminded of this question: Why should I care what Rick Gervais believes or doesn't believe? This would go for most celebrities actually. If you can end up on TMZ, why does what you think matter on areas that are out of your realm of expertise? And if it is said that it is up to the believer to show why they believe, then in keeping with that, I would count arguments by non-believers to be useless, because they don't add anything really. They do nothing to end up showing anything to my satisfaction. It is said you can't really disprove anything absolutely does not exist in this entire universe, so to go hard core that was is absurd. Then ignore that it's Ricky Gervais and just read it as a properly interesting, clever, funny and elequent article on religious belief.

That really doesn't say anything new that I haven't heard before.  I don't care why he is an atheist or why he believes faith exists.  

richardhutnik said: And again, I am reminded of this question: Why should I care what Rick Gervais believes or doesn't believe? This would go for most celebrities actually. If you can end up on TMZ, why does what you think matter on areas that are out of your realm of expertise? And if it is said that it is up to the believer to show why they believe, then in keeping with that, I would count arguments by non-believers to be useless, because they don't add anything really. They do nothing to end up showing anything to my satisfaction. It is said you can't really disprove anything absolutely does not exist in this entire universe, so to go hard core that was is absurd.

You could just say that to anyone who's expressing their opinions. You don't have to care, but not doing so makes you seem quite ignorant, don't you think? Democracy is based on caring about everyone's opinions.

TheProphet said: bluesinG said: TheProphet said:  As to creation, the Bible does not give a date. Some people have tried to use the Bible to make that calculation many years ago. However, nowhere does the Bible say just how long ago. The Bible does say emphatically that God created the universe. NASA has discovered the age of the universe. It has a beginning, therefore it was created. If you believe that the universe created itself out of nothing then you are taking an enormous leap of faith. Something does not come from nothing. Where did all the matter come from?" An where did intelligence come from? There is no law of physics that says that life, and especial intelligence, will come into being. That's like saying that there is a law of nature that turns rocks into brains. It is false. There is no such law. Who created god? Did god create themself out of nothing? I don't see how saying "god has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before god" makes any more sense than saying "the universe has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before the universe." fyi, time was created with the universe. This was discovered by our smartest scientists. God did not exist from the beginning of time. God existed BEFORE time. The universe is about 14 billion years old according to NASA. Time was created with the matter of the universe. Since God can create time and matter God must be able to control time. The only way to control time is to be immune to it. i.e. (that is) God is timeless, immortal, always was. Therefore God was not created, but is immortal. This Biblical description of God is in perfect harmony with our most advanced science. For people who believe in God, which is over ninety percent of the world, we have no conflict between science and our believe in God.

I hope you realize the flawed logic of that statement. In any case, you're avoiding the question: Where did god come from? Who or what created god?

Logically, saying "god has always existed; nothing created him or caused him to exist" is no more satisfying than saying "the big bang was the beginning of time; we don't know what caused it".

bluesinG said: TheProphet said: bluesinG said: TheProphet said:  As to creation, the Bible does not give a date. Some people have tried to use the Bible to make that calculation many years ago. However, nowhere does the Bible say just how long ago. The Bible does say emphatically that God created the universe. NASA has discovered the age of the universe. It has a beginning, therefore it was created. If you believe that the universe created itself out of nothing then you are taking an enormous leap of faith. Something does not come from nothing. Where did all the matter come from?" An where did intelligence come from? There is no law of physics that says that life, and especial intelligence, will come into being. That's like saying that there is a law of nature that turns rocks into brains. It is false. There is no such law. Who created god? Did god create themself out of nothing? I don't see how saying "god has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before god" makes any more sense than saying "the universe has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before the universe." fyi, time was created with the universe. This was discovered by our smartest scientists. God did not exist from the beginning of time. God existed BEFORE time. The universe is about 14 billion years old according to NASA. Time was created with the matter of the universe. Since God can create time and matter God must be able to control time. The only way to control time is to be immune to it. i.e. (that is) God is timeless, immortal, always was. Therefore God was not created, but is immortal. This Biblical description of God is in perfect harmony with our most advanced science. For people who believe in God, which is over ninety percent of the world, we have no conflict between science and our believe in God.  I hope you realize the flawed logic of that statement. In any case, you're avoiding the question: Where did god come from? Who or what created god? Logically, saying "god has always existed; nothing created him or caused him to exist" is no more satisfying than saying "the big bang was the beginning of time; we don't know what caused it".

Just because we don't know how and from what the universe appeared, does NOT mean that it began out of nothing, nor that the explanation is god. How many of these things were examples of why god(s) exists presented as evidence since times immemorial? Why was the Earth the center of the universe? Must be god. Turns out it wasn't. Why were mosquetos spontaneously created in menuer? it must be god. Turns out it wasn't. Why is the rainbow in the sky and how come you can never reach it? It must be god. Turns out it's not.

It's very important to remain open minded on these matters imo.

Personally I don't think the answer remains in either religious fanatacism or scientific materialist fanatacism. A fanatic is a man who overcompensates a secret doubt.

Interesting books which I would recommend to those on both sides of the debate; The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot and The Science Delusion by Rupert Sheldrake because they open up the debate slightly and take it beyond the usual divisions.

Runa216 said: Seriously? I've been saying EVERYTHING in this for years, and whenever I bring it up (whether I'm being blunt or sensitive about it), I'm met with inconsolable ire. Every single point he brings up is one I use regularly to explain why faith is irrational, and since HE'S famous, he's the credible one and I'm just some mindless, inflammatory hater. I don't get this world.

I'd imagine he expressed his ideas a lot more.... peaceful than you.

Jay520 said: Runa216 said: Seriously? I've been saying EVERYTHING in this for years, and whenever I bring it up (whether I'm being blunt or sensitive about it), I'm met with inconsolable ire. Every single point he brings up is one I use regularly to explain why faith is irrational, and since HE'S famous, he's the credible one and I'm just some mindless, inflammatory hater. I don't get this world. I'd imagine he expressed his ideas a lot more.... peaceful than you.

I spent the better part of a decade expressing my opinions on the matter in a peaceful, rational, logical, kind way, and it got me nowhere.  I get a much stronger reaction (and much more passionate responses) when I'm blunt about it.  this "being an arrogant 'tard" on the topic of religion is a relatively new development for me.  Truth be told, I'm still holding back a bit, beause my opinions on the matter are even more aggressive than I've shown.  

My point is, this thread (and this 'article' as a whole) is an excercise in how sensitive people are, rather than logical.  If the people involved were logical, rational people, they'd realize that what I said was identical, and treat it as such, but instead my words elicit an emotional response, which in a way supports the belief that faith, religion, and god are emotional comforts, not logical conclusions.

bluesinG said: TheProphet said: bluesinG said: TheProphet said:  As to creation, the Bible does not give a date. Some people have tried to use the Bible to make that calculation many years ago. However, nowhere does the Bible say just how long ago. The Bible does say emphatically that God created the universe. NASA has discovered the age of the universe. It has a beginning, therefore it was created. If you believe that the universe created itself out of nothing then you are taking an enormous leap of faith. Something does not come from nothing. Where did all the matter come from?" An where did intelligence come from? There is no law of physics that says that life, and especial intelligence, will come into being. That's like saying that there is a law of nature that turns rocks into brains. It is false. There is no such law. Who created god? Did god create themself out of nothing? I don't see how saying "god has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before god" makes any more sense than saying "the universe has existed since the beginning of time; there was nothing before the universe." fyi, time was created with the universe. This was discovered by our smartest scientists. God did not exist from the beginning of time. God existed BEFORE time. The universe is about 14 billion years old according to NASA. Time was created with the matter of the universe. Since God can create time and matter God must be able to control time. The only way to control time is to be immune to it. i.e. (that is) God is timeless, immortal, always was. Therefore God was not created, but is immortal. This Biblical description of God is in perfect harmony with our most advanced science. For people who believe in God, which is over ninety percent of the world, we have no conflict between science and our believe in God.  I hope you realize the flawed logic of that statement. In any case, you're avoiding the question: Where did god come from? Who or what created god? Logically, saying "god has always existed; nothing created him or caused him to exist" is no more satisfying than saying "the big bang was the beginning of time; we don't know what caused it".

The logic is not flawed. Perhaps my explanation was inadequate. I will try again.

 The universe and time were created. Only a God could create time and a universe.  

 

 Since God created time with the universe there was no time until God created it. (I realize this is a difficult concept, but it is worth trying to understand.) Therefore there could never be anything before God because time did not exist before God created it. 

The reason this explanation is satisfying because it is based on a consistent appreciation of advanced science.  It is not based on a faulty comparison between before and after time was created.

TheProphet said:   The logic is not flawed. Perhaps my explanation was inadequate. I will try again.  The universe and time were created. Only a God could create time and a universe.      Since God created time with the universe there was no time until God created it. (I realize this is a difficult concept, but it is worth trying to understand.) Therefore there could never be anything before God because time did not exist before God created it.    The reason this explanation is satisfying because it is based on a consistent appreciation of advanced science.  It is not based on a faulty comparison between before and after time was created.

And we know the bolded from where?

Also, the fact that the universe needs a god that always was to be created is nauseatingly ilogical to me.

The thing is, I get the feeling that an universe that was not created is ilogical to others. I just for the life of me can't understand, can't feel and most certanly don't believe it.

Runa216 said: Jay520 said: Runa216 said: Seriously? I've been saying EVERYTHING in this for years, and whenever I bring it up (whether I'm being blunt or sensitive about it), I'm met with inconsolable ire. Every single point he brings up is one I use regularly to explain why faith is irrational, and since HE'S famous, he's the credible one and I'm just some mindless, inflammatory hater. I don't get this world. I'd imagine he expressed his ideas a lot more.... peaceful than you. I spent the better part of a decade expressing my opinions on the matter in a peaceful, rational, logical, kind way, and it got me nowhere.  I get a much stronger reaction (and much more passionate responses) when I'm blunt about it.  this "being an arrogant 'tard" on the topic of religion is a relatively new development for me.  Truth be told, I'm still holding back a bit, beause my opinions on the matter are even more aggressive than I've shown.   My point is, this thread (and this 'article' as a whole) is an excercise in how sensitive people are, rather than logical.  If the people involved were logical, rational people, they'd realize that what I said was identical, and treat it as such, but instead my words elicit an emotional response, which in a way supports the belief that faith, religion, and god are emotional comforts, not logical conclusions.

Don't you think it would be better to give everyone the oppurtunity to prove that they can respond to peaceful words? Rather than being blunt or aggressive to them just because your past debaters were shitheads?

I find it very interesting that you say when you were sensitive & peaceful, that it got you no where. However, in this very thread, you've witnessed and acknowledged that sensitivity & peacefulness trumps bluntness & aggressiveness even when the message is the same. If people respond logically to Ricky's words and not yours, doesn't that prove that you're WORSE off by being blunt? Doesn't peaceful words seem to elicit more logical response then aggressive? (based off this thread)

Makes me wonder A.) Where you ever as peaceful as you say you were? B.) Do you prefer to elicit a strong, passionate response (like the one's you say you've recently been getting), or an actual logical response (like the responses to Ricky), and C.) Who were these people that you communicated with for the "better part of a decade", who has determined your pre-impressions of people today?