God is quite busy
- Started
- Last post
- 301 Responses
- gramme0
I think it's been tied up as well as one can hope for in a day.
- designbot0
---------------------END THREAD-------------------------
Nothing here but the usual intolerance from the folks who not only don't beleive in God...but for some unkown reason get pissed off when other people do. So instead of trying to have a quality debate, we have the usual insults being hurled and name calling going on. Take this thread or any other thread like it, and it is clear as day where the true fundamentalism is.
I would love to see someone look to science the next time they are faced with a major life dilema or crisis....I would bet money that most the peeps spouting the anti-God rhetoric are the first ones to pray/beg/plead with the God they don't believe in when something is out of their control.
- sorry, i never pray/beg/plead to any "god" when something is out of my control...********
- ..it's called "life". you move on.********
- fair enough....I'll have to take your word on that. I do think most people have though.designbot
- you'd be surprised. the religious love to assume that, deep down, the non-believers believe.. the truth is, we dont.********
- I can only go off my experiences so far....and from what I have seen from close friends and aquaintances who claim to be athiest/agnostic or whatever....deep down they all really beleive in something else.designbot
- athiest/agnostic or whatever....deep down they all really beleive in something else...designbot
- mmk.********
- hahadesignbot
- Many of the Agnostics I know are spiritual people.metal_leg_will
- "spiritual". wtf is that? i'm sick of hearing that shit.********
- people love to glorify themselves.********
- http://letmegoogleth…metal_leg_will
- yeah designbot is really reaching with this one. decrying insults than hurling them back himself.spifflink
- i do look to the scientific method to determine important courses of action. so don't put us 'non-believers' into a pitiful framework you cobbled together from anecdotal evidencespifflink
- framework you cobbled together from anecdotal evidencespifflink
- sorry, i never pray/beg/plead to any "god" when something is out of my control...
- Fariska0
Has the thought that Georges was taking the piss out of you all crossed your minds?
- BrokenAC0
You should all read "Rule By Secrecy" by Jim Marrs,
"Fingerprints of the Gods" and "The Message of the Sphinx," both by Graham Hancock.Then talk about "that which cannot be named." ;)
this is also a really good listen:::
(start from part 1 though)best wishes,
AC- yes. Some noble and entertaining authors them, thanks :)mikotondria3
- you're welcome!BrokenAC
- ********0
dear god,
why must it be a game for you? why do you have to toy with our feeble little minds? why not just make yourself COMPLETELY obvious to everyone? what the hiding all about?
you coward :)
best wishes,
A- The evidence is there....but God will never "force" you to beleive. It all boils down to free will...and faith.designbot
- the faith part is true of any beleif system, including the scientific one.designbot
- I do think God will make himself known to anyone willing to seek him in ways that are simply inexplicable.designbot
- there is no real evidence and you know it. and im not talking about "force". just asking to show himself.********
- beyond comprehension because they are spiritual, but as real as any tangible thing.designbot
- man, everything you said is just baseless rambling.. "he'll make himself known to anyone who seeks him".. lol********
- it all holds no ground... it just.. SOUNDS good to your mind.. so you say it.********
- I think the evidence that I speak of can only give give tremendous credit to the Bible (historical and archeological evidence) but in the end, the supernatural parts always take faith.designbot
- evidence) but in the end, the supernatural parts always take faith. In other words there is no way to prove Moses parted the Red Sea.designbot
- the Red Sea.designbot
- God has shown himself physically in the past, there have been a ton of witnesses. We live in the age of faith.gramme
- So we wait, and we hope. Hope is never a bad thing, especially when the looked-for result is good.gramme
- Corvo20
The problem is not if God exists or not. That's personal. The problem is people (from both quarters) are trying to conquer "the other side". Why? What for? If God doesn't exist it's pretty useless - and if God exists it's pretty useless too, because our measure is to shallow for what is described as divine evaluation. So, what we have to do is to get along the best we can - do good and better for each and everyone by an indistinct, abstract principle. That's all we're supposed to do. Let the evaluation be in the end.
- Why is that personal? If God is omni–(pick your suffix), then he's public property, so to speak.gramme
- VectorMasked0
lol at every single pro-gawd answer in this thread.
All based on "blind faith" and "denial" that their roots are not what they actually are.
- ********0
it's so very primitive to me.. believing in gods. they deny their caveman ancestry, yet completely act as such. fucking cavemen looking up at the moon and thinking it's a god. how fucking ironic.
- designbot0
Okay, how about this.
Antonelli tell me exactly what you beleive in? If you can be so sure that Christianity is all rhetoric, then you must be at a place where you have the truth (otherwise you couldn't know it was rhetoric).
- i dont believe in any gods, especially those that we have to worship.********
- okay that is a start. So what do you beleive then?designbot
- where do you get the impression that we all have to believe in something???********
- i want to know why you think because someone decries christianity they obviously have it totally figured out.spifflink
- i dont believe in any gods, especially those that we have to worship.
- ********0
nobody has the absolute truth, but religion is so obviously flawed and full of holes it's ridiculous. the amount of substance it holds is comparable to a childrens fairytail.
- i'd have to disagree. at least science is in an impartial pursuit of truth by looking at verifiable evidence and coming to a tentative conclusion, whereas religion has a conclusion and tend to warp the world around it to fit thatspifflink
- tentative conclusion, whereas religion has a conclusion and tend to warp the world around it to fit thatspifflink
- mm yeah, the conclusions of science have never changed///gramme
- they have, and that is what is so great about science.spifflink
- designbot0
See but that statment "nobody has absolute truth" is not even logical.
I could then ask you....
is the statement "nobody has the absolute truth" absoultely true? You see where I am going with that?- assuming there IS an absolute truth. you're analyzing irrelevant parts anyway.********
- i have to get back to work...********
- assuming there IS an absolute truth. you're analyzing irrelevant parts anyway.
- designbot0
by that very statement you are claiming to have truth, otherwise you couldn't possible know that "no absolute truth" exists.
- designbot0
okay man, I should go as well.
have fun @ work.
- VectorMasked0
I think we can safely end this with this:
In terms of balance, there is more proof on the side of "gawd does not exist" than on the "i've never seen it, but it has to exist coz my daddy told me so".
this is the actual reality. The current proof that exists is that there is no proof at all whatsoever of the existence of a character. This gives "not believing in gawd" a clear edge.
- its not that god DOESNT exist, but that its very very very unlikely he does, and very very very unlikely that he exists in the form people think a deity ought to. the cards are stacked against it. maybe?spifflink
- people think a deity ought to. the cards are stacked against it. maybe?spifflink
- religious earthling maybe a bit egocentric?spifflink
- but then there's the whole factor of outside revelation, which you cannot prove to be non-existent.gramme
- Corvo20
What's the point of using logic in these matters? Logic is a human tool, based on technology and material observation. I've always wondered why people tend to use logic to justify beliefs. Beliefs are not logical. Beliefs are based on feeling and intuition, not reason. So the question God vs Science is (logically and sensibly) an impossible one. The question is what is the extent of what we know, which is limited by the method itself.
- bliznutty0
christian garbage:
"We must understand that God is not obligated to make sure that we understand everything about the Christian life, His concern is that we believe what He says about it."
wtf?! this is b.s.
- True. lol. Every religious answer leads to telling people to not question or discover the truth on their own.VectorMasked
- VectorMasked0
The words "belief", "faith" an such are abused by religion as a way to make people shut the fuck up.
Believing is something that can be normal when there is a certain degree of proof. So far in centuries, people not found a single minuscule proof of this existence, and rely rather quickly on "I swear" or "you'll see" or "when that times comes..."....all coming back to the same thing which i not having a shred of evidence.
Believing in something, anyways, leads to something material (something that can be proved) whereas this relation is immediate or distant. Bellieving in gawd leads to nothing but silly comments an comebacks on how someone "will burn in hell when he dies".
- dog_opus0
Oh, hey, it's an argument on the internet about the existence/nonexistence of God and/or evolution. I'll have to pay close attention to this entirely new development, which will surely result in a sensible, mature, and amicable conclusion.
- ukit0
The truth is that God does exist, but he hates all of you.
- Corvo20
That's because we're limited by our own language definitions. We perceive the world by the possibilities of our lexicon - we hardly perceive what's beyond the sphere of enunciation (we know something exists, because art - it's its purpose - can create objects beyond reasonable definitions. That brings us to Emmanual Kant: it is possible (in logic) that something exists beyond our limits of perception (the numeno), but that we will never be able to speak about it - because they are in the EXTERIOR landscape of what our language allows us to speak upon. And that's why Wittgenstein said that when we cannot speak of what we know (that which is in the limits of our capability of description), we must go by in silence.
- that's some nasty piece of Engrish, I can tell.Corvo2
- very good. It IS all about language. The world is made of language, as McKenna said, before dying, forever.mikotondria3