Does God Exist?

[Eagalya]

Yes, there is. I am 100% sure that you cannot have a perfect triangle with angles totaling more than 180 degrees.

Outside of strict mathematical definitions, there's no such thing as 100%.

Hmm. I am 100% sure that the Earth is affected by the Sun's gravity. I am 100% sure that the Earth has water (H2O molecules) on it. On and on.

[Twilight Imperium]

Outside of strict mathematical definitions, there's no such thing as 100%.

Hmm. I am 100% sure that the Earth is affected by the Sun's gravity. I am 100% sure that the Earth has water (H2O molecules) on it. On and on.

How can you be so sure?

[The Sons of Adam]

Hmm. I am 100% sure that the Earth is affected by the Sun's gravity. I am 100% sure that the Earth has water (H2O molecules) on it. On and on.

How can you be so sure?

The scientific method + religion = Grounded belief systems full of logic, without mysticism.

[Twilight Imperium]

How can you be so sure?

The scientific method + religion = Grounded belief systems full of logic, without mysticism.

That gets you to 97. 98, tops. Not 100.

[Risottia]

There's no such thing as 100%,

Yes, there is. I am 100% sure that you cannot have a perfect triangle with angles totaling more than 180 degrees.

Any triangle on the surface of a sphere totals more than 180 degrees.
Example: start at 0°W, 0°N. Go straight to the North Pole (90°N) on the meridian. Turn left 90° and go south following the meridian until you meet the Equator at 90°W, 0°N. Turn left 90° and go back to the starting point along the Equator.
There. A triangle totalling 270°.

[Shaggtopia]

On the subject of God:

God may or may not exist. their is no way to be sure as faith itself is believing in something intangible. the question here isn't really "Does God Exist?" as much as it is "If God Exists Who Cares?" allow me a moment to explain.

If God DOES exists then all things are as they are currently based on divine will, and human effort is entirely devoid of it's meaning for all that is good or ill is done through God's will. meaning that if you're a good person then that's god's plan but if you're an awful person then it is also god's plan. the fault no longer lies in human error, in human decision making, in human governance or in human emotion. the fault lies entirely on an unaccountable omnipotent being with entirely unclear motives for the existence that they have brought to bear upon us all. this ideology would more closely favor the behaviors of socio and psychopaths that are devoid of empathy for their fellow human and are therefore less likely to care about the damage that they do to other members of society, because "it's not my fault, blame GOD!!"

on the other hand

If God DOESN'T exist, then we are all subject to those same human forces and the condition of our living rests squarely on our collective shoulders, suddenly we are each individually responsible for the conditions that plague our fellow human, because there is no god that will rapture them to a wonderful and better life, and it is for this reason alone that I admire a kind atheist over a kind fundamentalist because the atheist does it solely because it's the right thing to do while the fundamentalist does the same action not just because it's the right thing to do but also for fear of damnation.

Ultimately Religious belief doesn't change the action itself, it changes the motivations for the action. and it is with this in mind I ask again, Who cares if God exists? Surely the only thing that matters in either case is whether or not you as an individual are willing to take up the burden to prevent the suffering of those around you.

[Eagalya]

Hmm. I am 100% sure that the Earth is affected by the Sun's gravity. I am 100% sure that the Earth has water (H2O molecules) on it. On and on.

How can you be so sure?

Both scientific theory and/or actual observance/evidence prove it.

[Dumb Ideologies]

If gods do exist they're keeping it very quiet from me. I don't ask them to worship me, it seems only polite it works the other way around too.

[The Sons of Adam]

On the subject of God:

God may or may not exist. their is no way to be sure as faith itself is believing in something intangible. the question here isn't really "Does God Exist?" as much as it is "If God Exists Who Cares?" allow me a moment to explain.

If God DOES exists then all things are as they are currently based on divine will, and human effort is entirely devoid of it's meaning for all that is good or ill is done through God's will. meaning that if you're a good person then that's god's plan but if you're an awful person then it is also god's plan. the fault no longer lies in human error, in human decision making, in human governance or in human emotion. the fault lies entirely on an unaccountable omnipotent being with entirely unclear motives for the existence that they have brought to bear upon us all. this ideology would more closely favor the behaviors of socio and psychopaths that are devoid of empathy for their fellow human and are therefore less likely to care about the damage that they do to other members of society, because "it's not my fault, blame GOD!!"

on the other hand

If God DOESN'T exist, then we are all subject to those same human forces and the condition of our living rests squarely on our collective shoulders, suddenly we are each individually responsible for the conditions that plague or fellow human, because there is no god that will rapture them to a wonderful and better life, and it is for this reason alone that I admire a kind atheist over a kind fundamentalist because the atheist does it solely because it's the right thing to do while the fundamentalist does the same action not just because it's the right thing to do but also for fear of damnation.

Ultimately Religious belief doesn't change the action itself, it changes the motivations for the action. and it is with this in mind I ask again, Who cares if God exists? Surely the only thing that matters in either case is whether or not you as an individual are willing to take up the burden to prevent the suffering of those around you.

Why should we care? It is because if God exist, he is in control of our very lives. That means he decides your fate. Religious people want to get in the good graces of God, so they might receive his favor, (eternal life).

[Lost heros]

Religion is something that can be neither proven nor disproven. This goes for creationism and evolutionism, neither have been 100% proven.

He might exist and he might not. Who knows for certain, the Universe is too large to grasp.

I have seen good religious people and bad religious people and the I say the same for the non religious too. Not everyone in a group is a dangerous radical.

Creationism, strictly speaking (the idea that the Deity directly made each species as they exist in present form), has obviously already been disproven. Evolution, while not entirely 100% proven (gaps existing due to questions over how single-celled life came about in the first place, etc), is the only theory which is rationally sound.

That debate (if we can even call it that) has little to do with the very specific question regarding the existence of God though.

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of single-celled life. And yes we have observed evolution making it a scientific fact.

[Lost heros]

On the subject of God:

God may or may not exist. their is no way to be sure as faith itself is believing in something intangible. the question here isn't really "Does God Exist?" as much as it is "If God Exists Who Cares?" allow me a moment to explain.

If God DOES exists then all things are as they are currently based on divine will, and human effort is entirely devoid of it's meaning for all that is good or ill is done through God's will. meaning that if you're a good person then that's god's plan but if you're an awful person then it is also god's plan. the fault no longer lies in human error, in human decision making, in human governance or in human emotion. the fault lies entirely on an unaccountable omnipotent being with entirely unclear motives for the existence that they have brought to bear upon us all. this ideology would more closely favor the behaviors of socio and psychopaths that are devoid of empathy for their fellow human and are therefore less likely to care about the damage that they do to other members of society, because "it's not my fault, blame GOD!!"

on the other hand

If God DOESN'T exist, then we are all subject to those same human forces and the condition of our living rests squarely on our collective shoulders, suddenly we are each individually responsible for the conditions that plague or fellow human, because there is no god that will rapture them to a wonderful and better life, and it is for this reason alone that I admire a kind atheist over a kind fundamentalist because the atheist does it solely because it's the right thing to do while the fundamentalist does the same action not just because it's the right thing to do but also for fear of damnation.

Ultimately Religious belief doesn't change the action itself, it changes the motivations for the action. and it is with this in mind I ask again, Who cares if God exists? Surely the only thing that matters in either case is whether or not you as an individual are willing to take up the burden to prevent the suffering of those around you.

Why should we care? It is because if God exist, he is in control of our very lives. That means he decides your fate. Religious people want to get in the good graces of God, so they might receive his favor, (eternal life).

If God was just, he would act justly with our fate regardless of our worship of him.

[The Sons of Adam]

Creationism, strictly speaking (the idea that the Deity directly made each species as they exist in present form), has obviously already been disproven. Evolution, while not entirely 100% proven (gaps existing due to questions over how single-celled life came about in the first place, etc), is the only theory which is rationally sound.

That debate (if we can even call it that) has little to do with the very specific question regarding the existence of God though.

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of single-celled life. And yes we have observed evolution making it a scientific fact.

Yeah. Evolution is actually common sense. Variation within species.

I just don't know how that has to do with millions of years and the Big Bang.

Don't tie up a combination of theories, that ends up to messy.

[The Sons of Adam]

Why should we care? It is because if God exist, he is in control of our very lives. That means he decides your fate. Religious people want to get in the good graces of God, so they might receive his favor, (eternal life).

If God was just, he would act justly with our fate regardless of our worship of him.

But by which moral code would this God judge?

[Eagalya]

Creationism, strictly speaking (the idea that the Deity directly made each species as they exist in present form), has obviously already been disproven. Evolution, while not entirely 100% proven (gaps existing due to questions over how single-celled life came about in the first place, etc), is the only theory which is rationally sound.

That debate (if we can even call it that) has little to do with the very specific question regarding the existence of God though.

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of single-celled life. And yes we have observed evolution making it a scientific fact.

I suppose that depends on how broadly we define it. Whether the "evolution" i.e. coming about of single-celled life is to be included in the theory of evolution in determining whether its valid or not. Speaking in terms of what we might perceive to one form of life slowly changing, over millennia, into something which would be perceived as being an entirely different form of life, then yes, evolution has already been proven. I suppose the former is not necessary to conclude that evolution is valid.

[Mavorpen]

Yeah. Evolution is actually common sense. Variation within species.

And then there's the part where it creates new species.

I just don't know how that has to do with millions of years and the Big Bang.

The former, plenty. The latter, nothing.

[Mavorpen]

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of single-celled life. And yes we have observed evolution making it a scientific fact.

I suppose that depends on how broadly we define it. Whether the "evolution" i.e. coming about of single-celled life is to be included in the theory of evolution in determining whether its valid or not. Speaking in terms of what we might perceive to one form of life slowly changing, over millennia, into something which would be perceived as being an entirely different form of life, then yes, evolution has already been proven. I suppose the former is not necessary to conclude that evolution is valid.

We're going by biological evolution, not chemical evolution.

[Eagalya]

If God was just, he would act justly with our fate regardless of our worship of him.

But by which moral code would this God judge?

As a not-so-religious theist in much the same way some of the founding fathers of the US were and several enlightenment thinkers were, I would say that this moral code would be what is self-evident to us by scientific rationale and evidence and observance of nature. (Which is what makes me conclude that human rights are universal as they are divinely ordained, for example).

[Lost heros]

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of single-celled life. And yes we have observed evolution making it a scientific fact.

Yeah. Evolution is actually common sense. Variation within species.

I just don't know how that has to do with millions of years and the Big Bang.

Don't tie up a combination of theories, that ends up to messy.

Well, the prevailing idea is that by current methods, mutations, evolution from single-called organisms to all of the species we have today will take millions of years, based on natural selection, sexual selection, random selection, the frequency of mutations, and the magnitude of such mutations.

The Big Bang is a separate viable theory for the origin of the cosmos

If God was just, he would act justly with our fate regardless of our worship of him.

But by which moral code would this God judge?

Presumably if a God were to exist, there would be a universal (or at least very similar) moral code found throughout His creations no?

[The Sons of Adam]

But by which moral code would this God judge?

As a not-so-religious theist in much the same way some of the founding fathers of the US were and several enlightenment thinkers were, I would say that this moral code would be what is self-evident to us by scientific rationale and evidence and observance of nature. (Which is what makes me conclude that human rights are universal as they are divinely ordained, for example).

Yes, but how can we be sure of this without divine revelation?

[Shaggtopia]

On the subject of God:

God may or may not exist. their is no way to be sure as faith itself is believing in something intangible. the question here isn't really "Does God Exist?" as much as it is "If God Exists Who Cares?" allow me a moment to explain.

If God DOES exists then all things are as they are currently based on divine will, and human effort is entirely devoid of it's meaning for all that is good or ill is done through God's will. meaning that if you're a good person then that's god's plan but if you're an awful person then it is also god's plan. the fault no longer lies in human error, in human decision making, in human governance or in human emotion. the fault lies entirely on an unaccountable omnipotent being with entirely unclear motives for the existence that they have brought to bear upon us all. this ideology would more closely favor the behaviors of socio and psychopaths that are devoid of empathy for their fellow human and are therefore less likely to care about the damage that they do to other members of society, because "it's not my fault, blame GOD!!"

on the other hand

If God DOESN'T exist, then we are all subject to those same human forces and the condition of our living rests squarely on our collective shoulders, suddenly we are each individually responsible for the conditions that plague or fellow human, because there is no god that will rapture them to a wonderful and better life, and it is for this reason alone that I admire a kind atheist over a kind fundamentalist because the atheist does it solely because it's the right thing to do while the fundamentalist does the same action not just because it's the right thing to do but also for fear of damnation.

Ultimately Religious belief doesn't change the action itself, it changes the motivations for the action. and it is with this in mind I ask again, Who cares if God exists? Surely the only thing that matters in either case is whether or not you as an individual are willing to take up the burden to prevent the suffering of those around you.

Why should we care? It is because if God exist, he is in control of our very lives. That means he decides your fate. Religious people want to get in the good graces of God, so they might receive his favor, (eternal life).

EXACTLY, how better to curry favor from an omnipotent existence than to behave in such a way that protects their creation? Lets assume again that god exists, 100% absolutely exists without doubt (as is the basis of most faiths) would any god worth following approve of the active destruction of their creation in the form of holy wars, apathetic treatment of the 'unfaithful' and the innumerable tragic events that have plagued human existence by design of humanity itself (everything discounting disease, and natural disaster)? EVEN IF those tragedies ARE a part of god's will would you honestly believe that those who are behind them are in gods favor regardless of the religion that they follow? I personally think not, even the atheist who practices no faith save for their own internal morality can gain god's favor through action here on earth.
What I'm saying is that Religious faith is by no means required for ascension, and that it doesn't matter how many hymns you sing in praise of creation's architect, all that is required is the willingness to behave as though death is a forgone conclusion and all that matters is what you do with each moment of life that has been granted to you be it from a deity or from nothing more than the seemingly endless random twists of universal history. because reward shouldn't be expected but graciously accepted for the effort that was required to attain it whether you knew of it beforehand or not.

[The Sons of Adam]

Yeah. Evolution is actually common sense. Variation within species.

I just don't know how that has to do with millions of years and the Big Bang.

Don't tie up a combination of theories, that ends up to messy.

Well, the prevailing idea is that by current methods, mutations, evolution from single-called organisms to all of the species we have today will take millions of years, based on natural selection, sexual selection, random selection, the frequency of mutations, and the magnitude of such mutations.

The Big Bang is a separate viable theory for the origin of the cosmos

But by which moral code would this God judge?

Presumably if a God were to exist, there would be a universal (or at least very similar) moral code found throughout His creations no?

Are you sure of this? How can all humanity have a universal code? There are nihilistic humans, after all.

[The Sons of Adam]

Why should we care? It is because if God exist, he is in control of our very lives. That means he decides your fate. Religious people want to get in the good graces of God, so they might receive his favor, (eternal life).

EXACTLY, how better to curry favor from an omnipotent existence than to behave in such a way that protects their creation? Lets assume again that god exists, 100% absolutely exists without doubt (as is the basis of most faiths) would any god worth following approve of the active destruction of their creation in the form of holy wars, apathetic treatment of the 'unfaithful' and the innumerable tragic events that have plagued human existence by design of humanity itself (everything discounting disease, and natural disaster)? EVEN IF those tragedies ARE a part of god's will would you honestly believe that those who are behind them are in gods favor regardless of the religion that they follow? I personally think not, even the atheist who practices no faith save for their own internal morality can gain god's favor through action here on earth.
What I'm saying is that Religious faith is by no means required for ascension, and that it doesn't matter how many hymns you sing in praise of creation's architect, all that is required is the willingness to behave as though death is a forgone conclusion and all that matters is what you do with each moment of life that has been granted to you be it from a deity or from nothing more than the seemingly endless random twists of universal history. because reward shouldn't be expected but graciously accepted for the effort that was required to attain it whether you knew of it beforehand or not.

That's a good idea, we'll just have to ask God about that first if we meet him.

[Eagalya]

As a not-so-religious theist in much the same way some of the founding fathers of the US were and several enlightenment thinkers were, I would say that this moral code would be what is self-evident to us by scientific rationale and evidence and observance of nature. (Which is what makes me conclude that human rights are universal as they are divinely ordained, for example).

Yes, but how can we be sure of this without divine revelation?

I would argue that no divine revelation is required (if we're talking about some magical scroll appearing from nowhere or something like that!), as scientific rationale alone where validated by observance and evidence can determine facts which in turn reveal the universal moral code. For example, gay people should be treated as equal citizens as scientists have determined that homosexuality is normal. Alternatively I would argue that the divine revelation that people seek is what is self-evident and is observable or provable via evidence.

[Twilight Imperium]

How can you be so sure?

Both scientific theory and/or actual observance/evidence prove it.

That gets you to 97. 98, tops. Not 100.

[Middle C]

No, but that degree of uncertainty is so minuscule that wagering one's life against a dollar on the truth of the matter would be more than a fair bet.

Sure, but that's still probability. And a minuscule degree of uncertainty remains a degree of uncertainty.

Not practically speaking, no, since you aren't even capable of imaging such a small degree in proportion. There's more rat feces allowed in your food than that degree of uncertainty.