Does God exist?

[Rockchalk2010]

Side note- scientists have been able to reproduce experiments where they have carbon, oxygen , nitrogen then add a spark of electricity, (similar to what we beleive Earth was like trillions of years ago) and form that simple amino acids formed on their own. They were able to make more complex protiens by adding in things like potassium and phosphorous. If one was to believe that evolution is possible, then theoretically those scientists reproduced what the origin of life was like on this planet.

[Rockchalk2010]

5. There are billions and billions of people living and past with differing opinions than yours of religion. Many religions of the past have come and gone and we only laugh at how silly their beliefs seem. Like Mayans, Native American, Ancient Egyptians, Pagans, or Greek, Roman or Norse Gods. The things that they believe couldn’t be more silly, right? Still I would say that the vast majority of the people in all of those ancient religions believed more in theirs than you do in yours. I’m not an expert on ancient cultures, but I think many would be willing to die for their religions if called on. I’ve read the thread, and there is a lot of the ‘meh’ written between the lines of ‘I do believe this, but I’m flexible on the rest of this’ religious sentiment out there. Still I think every person on this board would say that their religion is more ‘correct’ than any of the ones I’ve named above, or Hinduism, or Islam or most of the others.

Here’s a fun experiment: Objectively look at the hard-to-believe parts of the bible, and tell me if you think they are good, real, valid and possible. And based on what you know of the real secular world, does it make any sense? Like if you heard a story of Zeus reaching down from the heavens and impregnating a virgin woman and making a half man/half god, would you say to yourself, well yeah, that could, and really did really happen. Or if you heard about Buddah and the burning bush, but the bush wasn’t consumed, you’d probably say, well it was probably a little burnt, and that fat man probably just didn’t really notice. Or it was just a little on fire on the bush.
The Judeo-Christian origin story is just as crazy as the others. Maybe in some ways more crazy than most, but if you hadn’t heard it before, and someone told you it was the Mayan, or the Pagan origin story about a garden and a serpent, and all the people of the earth came from that, you’d think it was just as crazy, and unbelievable. And that would mean that you don’t objectively believe it, but subjectively believe it. I think that means that you might believe any implausible thing that your parents or your preacher may tell you, and you can hide behind that big phony word of faith, saying I know it doesn’t make any sense, but I get a free pass to believe something completely illogical and I don’t have to explain or justify my silly beliefs in any way.

Well this took longer than I thought it was going to. I’m getting off work now. I have a lot more to share, but I think I’ll sit on it for a while, and see if I get any responses. I’m sorry if there were some points in my writing that were less than fully respectful to the other members in this community. None of this was directed at anyone in particular. I was just feeling a little hoppy today, and saw this and jumped in. And thanks for forgiving the terrible grammar and spelling.

[PhoggyDog]

Your avatar is proof enough that God exists.

[Rockchalk2010]

I made this thread my B*tch. I thought I'd get some ignorant comment from Esquire, but I haven't heard a peep. Someone has to have some opinion on this, right? Anyone?

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk2010

I made this thread my B*tch. I thought I'd get some ignorant comment from Esquire, but I haven't heard a peep. Someone has to have some opinion on this, right? Anyone?

I felt like I deserved the 3 minutes of my life it took read your posts refunded to me in the form of some monetary gift, or at least an apology.

Don't go away mad, you wanted an opinion.

[Rockchalk2010]

Really- that's the best you have? Can you answer any of the legetimate questions I posted? Bring one or two of those to your church and ask the pastor/priest/etc. Then come back here and let me know how they respond. Print off a few of my posts on this thread. It's easy to do. I'm laying down the challange. Someone take me up on it. Please. And men of God love talking about this, and helping a lost sheep. Trust me. If you don't take the challange, maybe ask yourself why aren't you attempting to explore your knowledge of your religion or personal beliefs? Not jsut RockChalk- Anyone. Please?

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk2010

Really- that's the best you have? Can you answer any of the legetimate questions I posted? Bring one or two of those to your church and ask the pastor/priest/etc. Then come back here and let me know how they respond. Print off a few of my posts on this thread. It's easy to do. I'm laying down the challange. Someone take me up on it. Please. And men of God love talking about this, and helping a lost sheep. Trust me. If you don't take the challange, maybe ask yourself why aren't you attempting to explore your knowledge of your religion or personal beliefs? Not jsut RockChalk- Anyone. Please?

Because you are entitled to your beliefs, as am I. I don't feel it is incumbent upon me to try and convince you of anything. It may be old fashioned but I tend to be accepting of people. Unlike you apparently I sleep at night just fine knowing you and I have differing opinions.

[dester30]

God is basically Santa clause for adults. It's a way to make people feel good about life.

[guitarmas5]

God may exist. However, to believe he exists before there is sufficient, repeatable evidence would be illogical. Therefore, I do not believe god exists. This is the most logical position humans can possibly hold.

P.S. For those of you who believe you have evidence of god's existence, please share, as this would be the biggest scientific breakthrough in history and you would certainly gain riches and world fame.

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by guitarmas5

God may exist. However, to believe he exists before there is sufficient, repeatable evidence would be illogical. Therefore, I do not believe god exists. This is the most logical position humans can possibly hold.

P.S. For those of you who believe you have evidence of god's existence, please share, as this would be the biggest scientific breakthrough in history and you would certainly gain riches and world fame.

I think that is a very logical approach so I ask you this, can you provide concrete evidence God does not exist?

[dester30]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

I think that is a very logical approach so I ask you this, can you provide concrete evidence God does not exist?

Noone can prove or disprove gods existance. At the same time nobody can prove or disprove the existance of a giant 10 armed green bean monster living in space. Are you saying you believe there is a giant 10 armed green bean monster living in space? Until proven otherwise the logical assumption is that no there is no such thing. As new information becomes available I will be able and willing to change my mind. Until then i have seen no such evidence pointing to the existance of any god or gods.

[CalHawk]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

I think that is a very logical approach so I ask you this, can you provide concrete evidence God does not exist?

Proving a negative is a logical fallacy.

The mystical/divine nature of reality is not a rational argument. I don't say that to be dismissive. By its very nature, religious/mystical insight is said to be a "trans-rational experience". In other words, it includes yet transcends the rational interpretation of the rational world. If one could explain/prove/disprove something "trans-rational", it ceases to become such.

That's why mystics claim they cannot tell you what it is, you must see it/experience it for yourself. When they attempt to describe it, you get poetic language "sound of one hand clapping".

I believe there is a divine nature to reality, I do not personify it as a "being" with human desires and emotions.

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by dester30

Noone can prove or disprove gods existance. At the same time nobody can prove or disprove the existance of a giant 10 armed green bean monster living in space. Are you saying you believe there is a giant 10 armed green bean monster living in space? Until proven otherwise the logical assumption is that no there is no such thing. As new information becomes available I will be able and willing to change my mind. Until then i have seen no such evidence pointing to the existance of any god or gods.

You and Cal in different ways make very good arguments. They are very easy arguments and nothing profound about anything either of you said but certainly good arguments. I think you both are interpreting my question wrong. All I was saying is that the guy wanted proof of something and I asked for proof of the counter point.

And let's not compare a 10 armed.. whatever to a belief that has been shared by billions of humans over countless years. At this point I think if we are truly debating God's existence or lack thereof requesting proof either way is valid.

[guitarmas5]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

You and Cal in different ways make very good arguments. They are very easy arguments and nothing profound about anything either of you said but certainly good arguments. I think you both are interpreting my question wrong. All I was saying is that the guy wanted proof of something and I asked for proof of the counter point.

And let's not compare a 10 armed.. whatever to a belief that has been shared by billions of humans over countless years. At this point I think if we are truly debating God's existence or lack thereof requesting proof either way is valid.

Rockchalk, what you are asking for is illogical. You must understand the burden of proof. He who makes the claim is he who must provide the evidence. I have made no claim. Unbelief is the logical default until affirming evidence is offered. Since I never claimed god doesn't exist I have no burden to prove he doesn't exist. Again, the only logical position to hold is one of unbelief.

And btw, just because something is believed by billions of people doesn't mean anything. You're making an argument from popularity. A logical fallacy. Dester's theoretical 10-armed green bean monster is no less valid than god simply because less people believe in it. His point was that there is equal evidence for both (none) therefore unbelief is the only logical position.

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by guitarmas5

Rockchalk, what you are asking for is illogical. You must understand the burden of proof. He who makes the claim is he who must provide the evidence. I have made no claim. Unbelief is the logical default until affirming evidence is offered. Since I never claimed god doesn't exist I have no burden to prove he doesn't exist. Again, the only logical position to hold is one of unbelief.

And btw, just because something is believed by billions of people doesn't mean anything. You're making an argument from popularity. A logical fallacy. Dester's theoretical 10-armed green bean monster is no less valid than god simply because less people believe in it. His point was that there is equal evidence for both (none) therefore unbelief is the only logical position.

I agree totally with what you said in the first paragraph. I wasn't the one who asked for proof originally. I was simply pointing out while I cannot give concrete, scientific evidence of God's existence the one guy cannot give any to prove otherwise. He made "the claim", not I.

Your second paragraph is rhetoric.

PS, are you under the impression that I am trying to convince you or anyone else that God exists? If you reread my posts you will see I have done nothing of the sort.

[guitarmas5]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

I agree totally with what you said in the first paragraph. I wasn't the one who asked for proof originally. I was simply pointing out while I cannot give concrete, scientific evidence of God's existence the one guy cannot give any to prove otherwise. He made "the claim", not I.

Your second paragraph is rhetoric.

PS, are you under the impression that I am trying to convince you or anyone else that God exists? If you reread my posts you will see I have done nothing of the sort.

My second paragraph is sound and accurate. I simply pointed out the logical problem with even mentioning how many people believe in god. It means literally nothing and was a mistake to even bring it up in a rational conversation.

Secondly, asking for evidence that god doesn't exist is likewise irrational. The only scenario in which asking for proof of a negative is when someone is asserting the negative. I've read through this thread a few times and I haven't found any assertions of the negative. A couple of people have voiced their unbelief, but that is not that same as asserting the negative. It's merely expressing the logical default position. Saying, "I don't believe in god," is very different from saying, "God does not exist." The first is a rational and sound position. The second is asserting a negative which would require evidentiary support. No one has done the second, therefore, asking for proof that god doesn't exist is non sequitur, irrational and gets us nowhere.

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by guitarmas5

My second paragraph is sound and accurate. I simply pointed out the logical problem with even mentioning how many people believe in god. It means literally nothing and was a mistake to even bring it up in a rational conversation.

Secondly, asking for evidence that god doesn't exist is likewise irrational. The only scenario in which asking for proof of a negative is when someone is asserting the negative. I've read through this thread a few times and I haven't found any assertions of the negative. A couple of people have voiced their unbelief, but that is not that same as asserting the negative. It's merely expressing the logical default position. Saying, "I don't believe in god," is very different from saying, "God does not exist." The first is a rational and sound position. The second is asserting a negative which would require evidentiary support. No one has done the second, therefore, asking for proof that god doesn't exist is non sequitur, irrational and gets us nowhere.

You're getting annoyed and frustrated and though you will respond and say that is untrue your words say otherwise. I really didnt mean to take it this far. Rockchalk2010 laid down what he called "a challenge". I felt no need or desire to convince him of anything and playfully challenged him.

This is why along with politics religion is a taboo subject. I'm not even taking a side and things are getting a tad testy. I'm gonna bow out now so you get the last word and the chance to look like you nailed it home.

[guitarmas5]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

You're getting annoyed and frustrated and though you will respond and say that is untrue your words say otherwise. I really didnt mean to take it this far. Rockchalk2010 laid down what he called "a challenge". I felt no need or desire to convince him of anything and playfully challenged him.

This is why along with politics religion is a taboo subject. I'm not even taking a side and things are getting a tad testy. I'm gonna bow out now so you get the last word and the chance to look like you nailed it home.

I'm not frustrated in the least. I'm not sure which words you think say otherwise. I simply rebutted your post and restated my position in a different way to be more clear. That's all.

[Rockchalk2010]

God is dead. Nietzsche, Guitarmas and CalHawk killed her! j/k.

[Dr. Esquire]

Originally Posted by CalHawk

Proving a negative is a logical fallacy.

The mystical/divine nature of reality is not a rational argument. I don't say that to be dismissive. By its very nature, religious/mystical insight is said to be a "trans-rational experience". In other words, it includes yet transcends the rational interpretation of the rational world. If one could explain/prove/disprove something "trans-rational", it ceases to become such.

That's why mystics claim they cannot tell you what it is, you must see it/experience it for yourself. When they attempt to describe it, you get poetic language "sound of one hand clapping".

I believe there is a divine nature to reality, I do not personify it as a "being" with human desires and emotions.

You do realize that the belief of Gods existence has been around since man's inception into the world? So actually, "scientists" trying to prove God does not exist is the negative fallacy. I know God exists and his son Jesus Christ will come back again. The evidence is clear but those who are atheist will not believe.

[Dr. Esquire]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk2010

God is dead. Nietzsche, Guitarmas and CalHawk killed her! j/k.

You know Nietzsche was a schizophrenic right?

[dester30]

Originally Posted by Dr. Esquire

You do realize that the belief of Gods existence has been around since man's inception into the world? So actually, "scientists" trying to prove God does not exist is the negative fallacy. I know God exists and his son Jesus Christ will come back again. The evidence is clear but those who are atheist will not believe.

Nobody said they were trying to disprove god. Actually scientists openly admit that they can do no such thing. And just because the beliefe has been around forever doesnt make it true. People believed that the earth was flat forever. Last time i checked it wasn't. It's crazy to believe it because ancient cultures did. They also believed the earth was the center of theiverse, and that letting a leach bleed you out would cure your illnesses. Also what is this "clear evidence your talking about. I sure havnt seen any.

[Dr. Esquire]

I believe there are many men and women that have seen God. I believe that if these men and women told some of you this that you would scoff and scorn them. The Higgs Boson particle was recently found (supposedly); and the famous atheist Stephen Hawking lost a bet that the particle would never be found. He obviously believes these scientists although he has not seen the particle in person. He is taking there word on it. What is the difference with that and taking the Prophets and Apostles and those who are livings word that they have seen God. God wants us to keep his commandments he wants us to follow him. How much more condemnation would we be under if we had seen him and yet rebelled. God is real and I know he exists.

[dester30]

Originally Posted by Dr. Esquire

I believe there are many men and women that have seen God. I believe that if these men and women told some of you this that you would scoff and scorn them. The Higgs Boson particle was recently found (supposedly); and the famous atheist Stephen Hawking lost a bet that the particle would never be found. He obviously believes these scientists although he has not seen the particle in person. He is taking there word on it. What is the difference with that and taking the Prophets and Apostles and those who are livings word that they have seen God. God wants us to keep his commandments he wants us to follow him. How much more condemnation would we be under if we had seen him and yet rebelled. God is real and I know he exists.

The difference is if he wanted to see it he could. See the scientists used the scientific method to find it. The scientific method is a repeatable reliable way to find information about our world. Stephen hawking couldn't go talk to god if he wanted. The said experiences are not repeatable and therefore unscientifically able to be proven, unlike the higgs boson.

[sbruning29]

Science has never proven that there is no God. Thats just a stupid argument. There is no set "proof" for either side of the argument, but many people have had experiences with God and if all science people can say is. "they are wrong", then scientists is just plain stupid as far as God goes. You cant deny what millions of people have experienced.