Does God exist?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

You'll have proof for this, then, of course.

I have evidence against the Atheist World View (IE, a world in which no god exists).

No, you don't, you have circular logic.

The Foundation of the Atheist World View is the Big Bang. Well, I have to ask: What created the big bang? What created the cause of the cause. What created the cause of the cause of the cause. This is an infinite regression which makes it impossible for the Big Bang to have happened. At some point down the line, you'd have to have an uncaused cause to cause the causes of all of the causes that caused the Big Bang. It's simple logic: From nothing, nothing comes.

Except nothingness is inherently unstable, and so something may arise from it, AFAIK.

http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news ... ossibility

Now, your rebuttle is "Where did god come from." well, God, existing outside of time and space and not having to comply with the Laws of Nature, is the uncaused cause. The Big Bang must comply with the laws of nature, making it impossible under the reason I stated above, however God does not comply with the laws of nature, and is therefor free from needing a cause or a creator.

So you're rejecting science and the fact that things can come from nothing with "God's different and special and doesn't need a cause because he's God".

Or, more simply, "God exists because God doesn't need to obey the laws of physics so God exists".

[Liriena]

1) How can you believe such a thing in a Universe that has been designed with the odds stacked against you?

2) I've heard that tale...and all it does is prove how Christianity is basically sugar-coated misanthropy. Also...the Biblical god is self-contradicting. He makes claims that his own book then refutes, or even worse, that the natural world he himself allegedly created refutes.

3) Argumentum ad numerum? Yeah...

1) This, I admit I don't have an answer to. I've never given a great deal of thought to that specific topic. I'll gladly look into the 'origins of the Universe' question more fully and get back to you. Thanks for bringing it up!

2) I disagree, and again, it's off-topic.

3) You're trying to tell me that the majority of the population is schizophrenic. I don't think that's any less ridiculous.

1) No problem.

2) I'll drop the subject.

3) Not schizophrenic per se...but the majority of the world population is living a life of self-imposed intellectual dishonesty, to justify faith in implausible, but comforting explanations for many complex questions.

[Distruzio]

Meh... i meant, laws of physics as we understand them. Shoot me.

nah...I like your pro-bacon stance

As a curious, and rather ironic, aside... if you and I convert to baconism and manage, through the power of bacon, to convert two more to our cause, we'd be the fastest growing religion on earth. Maybe that'd shut those fear-mongering Protestant whiners up about the dangers of Islam once and for all.

You game?

[Liriena]

You'll have proof for this, then, of course.

I have evidence against the Atheist World View (IE, a world in which no god exists). The Foundation of the Atheist World View is the Big Bang. Well, I have to ask: What created the big bang? What created the cause of the cause. What created the cause of the cause of the cause. This is an infinite regression which makes it impossible for the Big Bang to have happened. At some point down the line, you'd have to have an uncaused cause to cause the causes of all of the causes that caused the Big Bang. It's simple logic: From nothing, nothing comes. Now, your rebuttle is "Where did god come from." well, God, existing outside of time and space and not having to comply with the Laws of Nature, is the uncaused cause. The Big Bang must comply with the laws of nature, making it impossible under the reason I stated above, however God does not comply with the laws of nature, and is therefor free from needing a cause or a creator.

Thanks for proving your lack of understanding of Quantum Physics.

[Mirage]

Well, you could get a polar bear, but i wouldn't recommend that...

(seriously though, i have only tried it with house flies)

Huh... what about frogs? I hear that some of them freeze themselves to hibernate. I'd have to go up North to get one, though...

Well the trick is to heat them up with your body heat from your palms. the smaller the better in this case. Also another part of the trick to make it convincing is to put the insect at a seemingly random spot and act as if you found it by chance. You know, the presentation part. Frogs are harder to pull of in this case too (as in to make it convincing).

But all that said, anything that only requires the heat from your palms to wake up works for the trick. It also helps to have something that appears dead while hibernating and commonly found in the area.

[Cosara]

If God does can freely violate the laws of nature, then God is omnipotent.

He is.

If God is omnipotent and benevolent, God is not aware of human existence (shown by the immense suffering in the world), and therefore, your claims to understand God cannot be true because God would never have shown his/her/itself to humanity.

He is well aware of human existence and has shown himself to humanity through Jesus of Nazareth.

If God is benevolent and aware of humanity, God is not omnipotent, because previously mentioned suffering has not been fixed.

If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?

If God is aware of humanity and omnipotent, then God cannot possibly be benevolent, because God has either freely allowed evil and cruelty, or outright enforced it.

See the above statement.

Where do you turn now?

To resting my case on everything you just said.

I'm a Jewish-agnostic, by the way.

I'm an Evangelical Christian, by the way.

[Koumakan Underground]

Huh... what about frogs? I hear that some of them freeze themselves to hibernate. I'd have to go up North to get one, though...

Well the trick is to heat them up with your body heat from your palms. the smaller the better in this case. Also another part of the trick to make it convincing is to put the insect at a seemingly random spot and act as if you found it by chance. You know, the presentation part. Frogs are harder to pull of in this case too (as in to make it convincing).

But all that said, anything that only requires the heat from your palms to wake up works for the trick. It also helps to have something that appears dead while hibernating and commonly found in the area.

Well, we actually have a lot of frogs where I live, so it wouldn't be surprising to see one in someone's house. A frog it is, then!

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

nah...I like your pro-bacon stance

As a curious, and rather ironic, aside... if you and I convert to baconism and manage, through the power of bacon, to convert two more to our cause, we'd be the fastest growing religion on earth. Maybe that'd shut those fear-mongering Protestant whiners up about the dangers of Islam once and for all.

You game?

It would be...interesting. However I could not do such a thing...and keep my integrity

[Distruzio]

As a curious, and rather ironic, aside... if you and I convert to baconism and manage, through the power of bacon, to convert two more to our cause, we'd be the fastest growing religion on earth. Maybe that'd shut those fear-mongering Protestant whiners up about the dangers of Islam once and for all.

You game?

It would be...interesting. However I could not do such a thing...and keep my integrity

Not even for teh lulz? You disappoint me.

[Gallifrey Express]

If God does can freely violate the laws of nature, then God is omnipotent.

He is.

If God is omnipotent and benevolent, God is not aware of human existence (shown by the immense suffering in the world), and therefore, your claims to understand God cannot be true because God would never have shown his/her/itself to humanity.

He is well aware of human existence and has shown himself to humanity through Jesus of Nazareth.

If God is benevolent and aware of humanity, God is not omnipotent, because previously mentioned suffering has not been fixed.

If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?

If God is aware of humanity and omnipotent, then God cannot possibly be benevolent, because God has either freely allowed evil and cruelty, or outright enforced it.

See the above statement.

Where do you turn now?

To resting my case on everything you just said.

I'm a Jewish-agnostic, by the way.

I'm an Evangelical Christian, by the way.

This entire concept requires a natural, objective moral code, which doesn't exist. We aren't born with a moral code, we're born selfish little fucks who can't do anything to make himself the ruler of the world. Then we learn moral behavior through conditioning. What we learn may be completely different from what God wants, and so, without any understanding of what this objective morality that doesn't exist is, that person will go to hell. Fuck your god, he's a dick.

[Duvniask]

If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

If God does can freely violate the laws of nature, then God is omnipotent.

He is.

Prove it.

If God is omnipotent and benevolent, God is not aware of human existence (shown by the immense suffering in the world), and therefore, your claims to understand God cannot be true because God would never have shown his/her/itself to humanity.

He is well aware of human existence and has shown himself to humanity through Jesus of Nazareth.

Prove it.

If God is benevolent and aware of humanity, God is not omnipotent, because previously mentioned suffering has not been fixed.

If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for.

If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell.

So right-wing war-mongering Republicans are going straight to hell?

If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven.

So atheist pacifist charity workers go to heaven?

That isn't how the idea of salvation through Christ works, is it?

[Koevoet]

Why do we actually give a damn about some thing or person while we don't even know if he or she or it even exists?

[Jefferstown]

1) No problem.

2) I'll drop the subject.

3) Not schizophrenic per se...but the majority of the world population is living a life of self-imposed intellectual dishonesty, to justify faith in implausible, but comforting explanations for many complex questions.

2) Thanks. Some other thread, perhaps!

3) It only has to be intellectually dishonest if you begin by assuming that I'm wrong about God lying beyond the reach of pure intellect. As far as I can tell, my reasoning there is internally consistent.

...

4) I notice you are a Roger Ebert fan. I am also a Roger Ebert fan. Let's discuss movies sometime.

[Algonquin Ascendancy]

Let's first all remember what "God" is gentlemen and gentlewoman.

God is, what most Christians from most dominions say, a Jewish zombie in the sky that watches over all of us, all the time. All 7 billion of us. Everyday, 24/7, nonstop. He supposedly protects us from dangers by sending his "angels" down to protect us. Although they seem to be invisible... which is a shame, because if I need help from him, I don't know when his angels arrive. His angels don't seem to do a good job protecting people either, considering almost 300,000 people on this planet die everyday. Maybe he just doesn't like us.

No, "God" is that which acts as a connection between everything, not any of what you mentioned...
Not everyone is Christian.

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

It would be...interesting. However I could not do such a thing...and keep my integrity

Not even for teh lulz? You disappoint me.

Well....for the lulz...now that's an entirely different proposition!

[Cosara]

If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

They go to heaven.

[Gallifrey Express]

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

They go to heaven.

They did nothing to deserve it. Why should the be rewarded for nothing when everyone else has to look over their shoulder to make sure they're been good little children for the oppressive, evil, overbearing and abusive father figure?

[Koevoet]

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

They go to heaven.

What is heaven?

[Duvniask]

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

They go to heaven.

Emphasis on the second question I asked.

[Liriena]

If God does can freely violate the laws of nature, then God is omnipotent.

He is.

If God is omnipotent and benevolent, God is not aware of human existence (shown by the immense suffering in the world), and therefore, your claims to understand God cannot be true because God would never have shown his/her/itself to humanity.

1) He is well aware of human existence and has shown himself to humanity through Jesus of Nazareth.

If God is benevolent and aware of humanity, God is not omnipotent, because previously mentioned suffering has not been fixed.

2) If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?

If God is aware of humanity and omnipotent, then God cannot possibly be benevolent, because God has either freely allowed evil and cruelty, or outright enforced it.

See the above statement.

Where do you turn now?

To resting my case on everything you just said.

I'm a Jewish-agnostic, by the way.

I'm an Evangelical Christian, by the way.

1) Why would a God as allegedly wise and omnipotent as he show himself through an illusive Jewish man in the middle of the uncivilized and uneducated Middle East, when he could have shown himself in far more advanced civilizations such as China and Rome.
Furthermore, why just show himself in one place? Why playing so hard to get? Is this God not aware that many civilizations live so isolated from the rest of the world that they still haven't heard of Jesus Christ?
Also, why only show himself dozens of thousands of years after the known birth of our species? For centuries, our species lived in the most horrifying conditions, and this God just watched, then suddenly decided that he had to step in, thousands of years after his "design" failed, to patch things up, with what was arguably the worst patch ever?

2) So, this God knowingly enables us to commit horrifying acts against our fellow humans...and then he punishes us for it? He commits reckless indifference...but only holds us accountable?
Also, if God expects us to act good in life, and rewards good actions, why does he send good non-believers to Hell, and forgives all the sins of his believers, regardless of their gravity? If a loving and generous man in China, who has never heard of Christianity, has spent his life doing nothing but good deeds for his fellow human beings...why doesn't God reward him?
On another note...if God respects our free will and our personal responsibility, then why does he have us live in a world where natural phenomena, which we cannot control, constantly kill innocent people?

Finally...why is the concept of good versus evil necessary? Why is it necessary to create humans in a flawed state and ask us to improve ourselves, without his help, in order to earn a reward? Why is this even reasonable?

[Distruzio]

He is.


He is well aware of human existence and has shown himself to humanity through Jesus of Nazareth.


If one wishes to use free will to cause suffering, God will not intervene and stop it because it is their will and we are judge on what we use our free will for. If we cause pain, suffering, death and other horrible things while we're alive, we are cast into hell. If we do good things, we are allowed into Heaven. Life is a test for the afterlife and god will not help someone cheat the test by intervening and stopping them from doing something. Our free will is our will entirely and if we wish to do something, God will not stop us in this life, but will judge us in the afterlife. How hard is this concept to grasp?


See the above statement.

To resting my case on everything you just said.


I'm an Evangelical Christian, by the way.

This entire concept requires a natural, objective moral code, which doesn't exist. We aren't born with a moral code, we're born selfish little fucks who can't do anything to make himself the ruler of the world. Then we learn moral behavior through conditioning. What we learn may be completely different from what God wants, and so, without any understanding of what this objective morality that doesn't exist is, that person will go to hell. Fuck your god, he's a dick.

Indeed. I dislike the evangelist description of God. Hell, I disagree with their definition of God entirely. We may agree that He is triune, but that's about as close as we get - which is a major contributing factor to why I consider Protestants bibliolatrous (at best) non-Christians (in general).

But, there are several issues with your post.

We do learn moral behavior through conditioning. This is also known as culture. Religion is a part of culture. Therefore, religion helps to mold a person for the better (the implication "better" derived from your own words).

Morality is not, as you say, objective. It is, however, universal. I'm not saying that morality is the same for everyone. I'm saying that the moral perspective of an individual is applicable for everyone. For example, I am Eastern Orthodox. If I believe (and I do) that my salvation lies wholly beyond my direct control (hence the requirement to live as much like Jesus as I can manage), then my place in Heaven is not guaranteed. If this be true (and it is), then that means I could still, very well, go to Hell (so to speak). Applied universally, this moral perspective means that anyone, regardless of their faith or lack thereof, regardless of their sexuality or lack thereof, regardless of their list of sins (mine is likely longer) or lack thereof, could still go to Heaven.

We Orthodox have a saying to describe this moral universalism: there are some within the Church but without the Grace of God and there are some within the Grace of God but without the Church.

What I'm saying is that morality ain't objective. I agree with you. But it ain't subjective either. It doesn't change depending upon who I am thinking about. It ain't so flexible.

[Neo Art]

What about people who die before or just after being born?

What purpose do they have in this 'test'?

They go to heaven.

Why don't you believe in the great Juju at the bottom of the sea?

[Koumakan Underground]

They go to heaven.

What is heaven?

A miserable little pile of secrets!

[Duvniask]

They go to heaven.

Why don't you believe in the great Juju at the bottom of the sea?

He should believe in Odin and his fellow gods of Valhalla.