[Debate] Is God real? [Religion] (445)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2007-07-01 19:02 ID:4LYwyQQi

To start off on a debate since it is allowed, I am going to go with one of the main subjects that appear in most people's discussions. Is God real?

RULES
-No flaming or trolling. Emphasis on flaming. Keep the argument down to a mild level.

-Back up what you say. I know it's hard for this, but don't just say something like "God is fake". Tell WHY you think God is fake, and use science to back it up if you have to. If you want to say "God is real", then the same goes for you. If you are going to use sources, then make sure they are credible, not just from someones blog (unless they source on that, and THAT source is credible).

-Keep this as mature as possible. This is basically like repeating the first rule, but don't let your emotions/beliefs get in the way of your argument. It makes you and your whole case look childish.

STARTING ARGUMENT:
God is not real because there is no scientific proof that he ever existed and did what he did (create people, make the world, etc.).

396 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-05-28 20:39 ID:Heaven

One afternoon a student said "Roshi, I don't really understand what's going on. I mean, we sit in zazen and we gassho to each other and everything, and Felicia got enlightened when the bottom fell out of her water-bucket, and Todd got enlightened when you popped him one with your staff, and people work on koans and get enlightened, but I've been doing this for two years now, and the koans don't make any sense, and I don't feel enlightened at all! Can you just tell me what's going on?"

"Well you see," Roshi replied, "for most people, and especially for most educated people like you and I, what we perceive and experience is heavily mediated, through language and concepts that are deeply ingrained in our ways of thinking and feeling. Our objective here is to induce in ourselves and in each other a psychological state that involves the unmediated experience of the world, because we believe that that state has certain desirable properties. It's impossible in general to reach that state through any particular form or method, since forms and methods are themselves examples of the mediators that we are trying to avoid. So we employ a variety of ad hoc means, some linguistic like koans and some non-linguistic like zazen, in hopes that for any given student one or more of our methods will, in whatever way, engender the condition of non-mediated experience that is our goal. And since even thinking in terms of mediators and goals tends to reinforce our undesirable dependency on concepts, we actively discourage exactly this kind of analytical discourse."

And the student was enlightened.

397 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-09 08:11 ID:jBkzcQIv

dont worry, when we die, one of us is going to be VERY dissapointed

398 Name: RedCream : 2008-06-16 00:37 ID:6eVkmr2j

>>397
FALSE. Please submit the evidence you have of the continuance of consciousness after death. You have to be CONSCIOUS in order to be DISAPPOINTED.

399 Name: No. : 2008-06-19 22:19 ID:aAQqNSam

>>398
I've submitted the evidence online. Simply click on my name.

400 Name: 400get : 2008-06-20 00:05 ID:KDsr1daN

yaaaay~ (・∀・)

401 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-20 08:34 ID:+0NX+SW+

>>398
the point of that statement was that either the religious dude wasted his entire life worshipping a god that doesnt exist, or the guy who doesnt believe in god and being sent to hell. from a 3rd person's pov, one side is going to lose

402 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-20 19:07 ID:CgcdUHVe

ITT we're not aware that other people have indeed heard of Pascal's Wager, and might even reject it on the grounds of the false dichotomy it presents.

403 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-25 13:30 ID:GA6sNpUK

>>402

I wonder what world Pascal was living in. For his theory to work, there can only be one existing religion or atheism. Yet there are thousands of them.

I think we have several possible solutions to the GOD problem

1.) Monotheism
2.) Polytheism
3.) Spirits
4.) Atheism

And of course even then, you are left with the question of which rule set to follow and which beliefs you must hold. If Allah is the true God, he won't take your Buddhism, and if it's the Norse pantheon, then Odin may not like Christians.

404 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-25 18:49 ID:BoJlmizH

>>403

I'll take number three.

Here's to Alcohol-- The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.

405 Name: NE1W GOD : 2008-06-25 19:15 ID:QpZaH/oM

FOOLS!

406 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-25 22:17 ID:alAUknvQ

I've only read the first post, but (straight from wikipedia):

In the philosophy of religion, Occam's razor is sometimes applied to the existence of God; if the concept of God does not help to explain the universe, it is argued, God is irrelevant and should be cut away (Schmitt 2005). It is argued to imply that, in the absence of compelling reasons to believe in God, disbelief should be preferred. Such arguments are based on the assertion that belief in God requires more and more complex assumptions to explain the universe than non-belief.

people who think life without god is too complex (ie: EYES ARE JUST SO COMPLEX) don't understand evolution

407 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-26 02:25 ID:hXL/GrFk

>>403

Buddhism doesn't endorse any Gods. In the original form of Buddhism, the ultimate reward for enlightenment is Nirvana, or death. True death, release from the cycle of reincarnation which just creates more suffering. The only reason why reincarnation occurs is because we are attached to this world in one form or another. Love of self, love of consciousness, love of material things, love of others. That is what brings us back, even if all things are flux, which in turn, results in loss, which results in suffering.

408 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-26 22:22 ID:Dbp92vkm

>>407

>the ultimate reward for enlightenment is Nirvana, or death

I think this is a bit of a simplification. It's true that nirvana means "blowing out" and a lot of people take it to mean that nirvana is the blowing out of consciousness like the extinguishing of a candle, but buddhists seem to be more concerned with the overcoming of the ego rather than consciousness as such, and since they hold that the ego and consciousness are distinguishable, and that there is a universal consciousness, they believe that the dissolution of the ego does not result in the annihilation of consciousness in the absolute sense, only the disappearance of that ego.

409 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-06-27 23:07 ID:wQV3p09a

death prevails......yes....

But as a new user for this board, an active Wikipedia reader (or researcher), being used to hear and trying to understand religious doctrines and getting used to the rationality on the side makes live in agnosticism forever....

(throws himself to the bed in blank, sad mood)

410 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-05 05:40 ID:Ou6Bf4Wv

God exists... that's that

411 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-05 21:41 ID:Heaven

>>410
what a convincing argument!

412 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-07 09:30 ID:Heaven

>>410
Cannot prove, cannot disprove.

Agnosticism wins again.

Seriously, I'm very tired of this argument. It's 400+ posts long. Can't we just agree to disagree?

413 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-08 06:49 ID:QBtLOhlZ

Another agnostic here. You, all except us fucked our world so much that we are living in your own created hell.

FUCK FOR BOTH OF YOU BELIEVERS AND ATHEIST!

414 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-08 07:30 ID:Heaven

   人     
  (__)    
  (__)   
 ( __ )    
 ( ・∀・) < My name is Squeeks and I'm here to settle this argument once and for all.
 (つ   つ Atheism is the best religion.
 | | |     
 (__)_)

415 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-09 12:01 ID:Heaven

>>414
Is this true?

416 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-09 20:51 ID:Heaven

>>415

If Squeeks said so then it must be.

417 Name: A-Mask : 2008-09-10 05:13 ID:2tBadgJ8

Agnostics say you can't prove or disprove a God.

So frankly, it's much more intelligent to not believe in one.

Just because it's POSSIBLE, doesn't mean you have to consider it as true. Anything is POSSIBLE, but most things aren't Probable.

418 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-10 08:11 ID:V9K0fBva

>>417
so that means we can only either believers and unbelievers right?

419 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-10 08:12 ID:V9K0fBva

>>418

>and

or

fixed

420 Name: Søren Kierkegaard : 2008-09-16 18:39 ID:Heaven

But what is this unknown something with which the Reason collides when inspired by its paradoxical passion, with the result of unsettling even man's knowledge of himself? It is the Unknown. It is not a human being, insofar as we know what man is; not is it any other known thing. So let us call this unknown something: God. It is nothing more than a name we assign to it. The idea of demonstrating that this unknown something (God) exists could scarcely suggest itself to the Reason. For if God does not exist it would of course be impossible to prove it; and if he does exist it would be folly to attempt it.

421 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-09-28 11:08 ID:HABGnVRC

422 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-03 16:38 ID:/A0eLSqY

Agnostic here;

The fact that it is possible means that it could be true. As we have no information for or against the overall idea of a god, we can't logically say that we know anything about how likely it is that there is a god.

If we go by the old standard of ignorance, then the chance that there is a god is 50/50. It is no more intelligent to BELIEVE that there isn't a god than to BELIEVE that there is one. Either way, both views are steeped in 'faith' and 'belief', as there is no concrete evidence at all either way.

The most logical path, then, is to admit ignorance; we just don't know. If you can do that, then you can take steps to remedy any lack of knowledge or insight, instead of putting all your faith into your guess.

423 Name: Subuchi Atsuda : 2008-10-13 16:19 ID:kYJPYNiZ

no god only facts.

youtube.com
^
search
^
proof that god dosn't exist.

424 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-16 05:09 ID:pOjbbQrT

     ∧_∧∩ / ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄
    ( ´∀`)/<  Can God create a boulder so heavy he
 _ / /   /   \  cannot lift it? Not so omnipotent, is he?
\⊂ノ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄\  \_______________
 ||\        \
 ||\|| ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄||
 ||  || ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄ ̄||
    .||          ||

425 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-16 06:57 ID:T1sOmo5b

wrong since God is omnipotent he contains all reasoning and truth so He would not do something that would be the abscense of reason since that would be contrary to his nature. One cannot act irrationally if he contains the essence and is reason. creating a rock that you cannot lift is irrational therefore God would not do such a thing as it would be contrary to himself as he is truth and reasoning
or whatever

426 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-25 22:03 ID:belT443U

> creating a rock that you cannot lift is irrational

I'm pretty sure I could do that, without being irrational in any way whatsoever.

427 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-26 00:49 ID:Heaven

>>424
In the words of "Jesus-H-Christ", who posts on reddit, discussing how He (God) can be His own son:
"Humans can comprehend only one internally consistent logical model, but gods can hold several mutually inconsistent models in their mind at the same time (like superposition in quantum physics). Reality does not match any single model (or meta model at infinitum, you get the idea), you need to apply several at once. I contain multitudes, so I can grok reality easily. You guys are left with one truth at the time (you can switch between them though, like in binocular rivalry)."
Thus, God can create a boulder in one logical model which humans using another logical model (such as atheism) may perceive Him as being unable to lift.

428 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-26 11:15 ID:Heaven

I WANT TO BELIEVE*

*that this is all trolling and no one could possibly believe this stuff

429 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-10-26 18:44 ID:LdHpeChk

>>426
He just means to say that God makes up clever arguments for not proving himself wrong. You know, kind of like that kid in middle school who always bragged about his ten video game systems but never invited you to his house.

430 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-11-04 01:50 ID:4KHm9bri

What are we calling god, and why are we assuming we know any damn thing about its attributes?

"God does this, god thinks this way, god has these attributes."
"Just being good won't cut it for salvation."

How do you know ANY of this??

"God's attributes explain x, y, and z."

Yeah, isn't that convenient that we've made up a story that seems to work as long as you don't think too hard?

431 Name: Mandy : 2008-11-18 04:40 ID:Heaven

how caress??

432 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-02 21:53 ID:Wvly9vTm

>>430

>>What are we calling god, and why are we assuming we know any damn thing about its attributes?

We can only take God's own words, the Bible, to get a picture about him.

433 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-04 01:16 ID:pImw1sDV

Don't worry >>432, people will stop thinking you're an idiot if you just look at facts, not a fairy tale story.

434 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-04 14:41 ID:Heaven

how do you know the bible is god's own words?

435 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-04 22:52 ID:BoJlmizH

>>431

Gently so.

436 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-21 07:54 ID:P+xX243s

Question: "Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?"

Answer: Why do bad things happen to good people? That is one of the difficult questions in all of theology. God is eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, etc. Why should we human beings (not eternal, infinite, omniscient, omnipresent, or omnipotent) expect to be able to fully understand God’s ways? The book of Job deals with this issue. God had allowed Satan to do everything he wanted to Job except kill him. What was Job’s reaction? “Though he slay me, yet will I hope in him” (Job 13:15). “The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised” (Job 1:21). Job didn’t understand why God had allowed the things He did, but he knew that God was good and therefore continued to trust in Him. Ultimately, that should be our reaction as well. God is good, just, loving, and merciful. Often things happen to us that we simply cannot understand. However, instead of doubting God's goodness, our reaction should be to trust Him. "Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3:5-6).

Perhaps a better question is, "Why do good things happen to bad people?" God is holy (Isaiah 6:3; Revelation 4:8). Human beings are sinful (Romans 3:23; 6:23). Do you want to know how God views humanity? “As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know. There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Romans 3:10-18). Every human being on this planet deserves to be thrown into hell at this very moment. Every second we spend alive is only by the grace of God. Even the most terrible misery we could experience on this planet is merciful compared to what we deserve, eternal hell in the lake of fire.

“But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). Despite the evil, wicked, sinful nature of the people of this world, God still loved us. He loved us enough to die to take the penalty for our sins (Romans 6:23). All we have to do is believe in Jesus Christ (John 3:16; Romans 10:9) in order to be forgiven and promised a home in heaven (Romans 8:1). What we deserve = hell. What we are given = eternal life in heaven if we would just believe. It has been said, this world is the only hell believers will ever experience, and this world is the only heaven unbelievers will ever experience. The next time we ask the question, “Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?”, maybe we should be asking, “Why does God allow good things to happen to bad people?”

437 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-22 06:36 ID:Heaven

>>436
summary:
god has his reasons, he's fucking god you don't question him
things could be a lot worse you know
you should be asking a different question which i won't try to answer either

438 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-22 10:19 ID:Heaven

orz..God..orz

439 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-12-26 10:05 ID:4KHm9bri

Watch part 1 of the movie Zeitgeist. It's on Google video.

Basically, it's point is that all religions stem from ancient sun worship in some way.

Furthermore, don't say "It doesn't matter what I think," IT DOES. "God works in mysterious ways and we can't understand him," Yes, we can. Humans invented him. When he seems evil, rather than saying "Well, it's not my place to judge God," realize that it is.

When you doubt your god, when you "struggle" with your god, listen to yourself. That's your reason and sensibility kicking in. It will advance your knowledge and intelligence if you listen to it.

440 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-01-25 04:54 ID:cKimrJwa

The burden of proof is still with the side that has to explain why anything exists at all. Qualified deism FTW.

441 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-01-25 04:57 ID:cKimrJwa

>>31
HI KURT!

442 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-02-01 03:43 ID:xjktcdSa

Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market-place, and cried incessantly: "I am looking for God! I am looking for God!"

As many of those who did not believe in God were standing together there, he excited considerable laughter. Have you lost him, then? said one. Did he lose his way like a child? said another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? or emigrated? Thus they shouted and laughed. The madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances.

"Where has God gone?" he cried. "I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. But how ave we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God's decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us - for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto."

And the multitude said to the madman, "We are an Intenet Hate Machine, and we did it for the lulz!" And they went on their way, leaving the madman unable to respond.

443 Name: Shades : 2009-03-11 05:41 ID:dGFw4wMi

God Exist when Human Exist...
but God Doesn't when Human Doesn't Exist.

That is why Human creates Gods,
not Gods creates Human.

444 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-03-12 19:21 ID:7cANopdI

>>443

so what you're essentially saying is that once humans cease to realize an object's existence, that said object ceases to exist. OK

445 Name: Scotland : 2009-03-29 15:50 ID:CyRe2wau

>>443
The Best notion i heard all day.

This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.