Does God Exist?

[Umikai]

But then they fail to take into account the fact that Christianity IS THE GLOBAL MAJORITY.

Christians (33.32%)
Muslims (21.01%)
Hindus (13.26%)
Buddhists (5.84%)
Non-religious (14.09%)
Other (12.48%)

YEEHAH, lets jump on dem der bandwagon.

Not even a Majority, #Plurality

[Umikai]

They're not proven, "It makes falsifiable predictions." They're just held to be true.

That's referring to how much sense it makes.

What's referring to how much sense it makes?

[New Libertarian States]

That's referring to how much sense it makes.

What's referring to how much sense it makes?

Sorry, left for a sec, brother got on.
But appearntly, he was right.

[The Rich Port]

Buy TRUTH, you mean FACT, right? First of all, there isn't a theory of gravity- that one's a law. Theories are completely true, but not proven by facts, correct?

Maybe. We can't be 100% sure.

... No. Gravity is a theory. It explains why objects have a tendency to attract smaller ones.

Theories are never completely true AND are evidenced by OBSERVATION of certain facts about reality.

You'll have to ask someone else because I think you're confusing what scientific laws are.

They're not proven, "It makes falsifiable predictions." They're just held to be true.

That's referring to how much sense it makes.

Indeed.

If something is "unfalsifiable", we can't test it. And whatever results come from their "observation" can't be called science. It's usually because they're perceived to be outside of this universe or they do not conform to any known physical models and are, therefore, physically impossible.

Note: "unfalsifiable" usually means "bullshit".

See: astrology, Creation science, intelligent design, phrenology.

[The Islands of Metanoia]

USUSALLY the norm and reality is different.

Since norm and reality are Usually different, then by your logic, usual normal things such as water being wet or saints as generally being virtuous is not applicable because what is normal and what is real is dissonant.

Therefore, water is dry, saints are evil, logic is stupid and a Noble Peace Prize winner is a heartless bitch because of a minority view.

Very good misconstruing my logic.
100 points for Griffindor.
No, I was referring to history and science, more then anything else.
If you cared to look at the Huffington post article, you'd know she wasn't a very good woman
.

I already read about her, including the comments section saying that her order is an evil organization allowing people to die.
And if I wasn't balanced enough to read the counter-article in the same Huffington Post magazine.

Me in my propagandized state would assume that she's an evil bitch and that's all she is. But I'm sorry, I'm not that imbalanced.

[Flagsia]

Yes

[New Libertarian States]

Very good misconstruing my logic.
100 points for Griffindor.
No, I was referring to history and science, more then anything else.
If you cared to look at the Huffington post article, you'd know she wasn't a very good woman
.

I already read about her, including the comments section saying that her order is an evil organization allowing people to die.
And if I wasn't balanced enough to read thecounter-article in the same Huffington Post magazine.

Me in my propagandized state would assume that she's an evil bitch and that's all she is. But I'm sorry, I'm not that imbalanced.

I like how even in the counter article writer dosent deny what she did.
He debates why she did it, and to what extant.
Not only that, but his counter arguments are argued aganist in the orginal paper.

[Umikai]

What's referring to how much sense it makes?

Sorry, left for a sec, brother got on.

Np, my general idea is that a theory is the truth, a "predictive and explanatory force," without being 100% fact. In the same way, the existence of God is true, even if there isn't a brilliant factual basis for God's existence.

[Ostroeuropa]

Sorry, left for a sec, brother got on.

Np, my general idea is that a theory is the truth, a "predictive and explanatory force," without being 100% fact. In the same way, the existence of God is true, even if there isn't a brilliant factual basis for God's existence.

Make a prediction. Go ahead.

[Umikai]

Buy TRUTH, you mean FACT, right? First of all, there isn't a theory of gravity- that one's a law. Theories are completely true, but not proven by facts, correct?

Maybe. We can't be 100% sure.

... No. Gravity is a theory. It explains why objects have a tendency to attract smaller ones.

Theories are never completely true AND are evidenced by OBSERVATION of certain facts about reality.

You'll have to ask someone else because I think you're confusing what scientific laws are.

That's referring to how much sense it makes.

Indeed.

If something is "unfalsifiable", we can't test it. And whatever results come from their "observation" can't be called science. It's usually because they're perceived to be outside of this universe or they do not conform to any known physical models and are, therefore, physically impossible.

Note: "unfalsifiable" usually means "bullshit".

See: astrology, Creation science, intelligent design, phrenology.

Find me the wiki on the "Theory of Gravity" that applies to the modern times. We know it works, we just don't know why, therefore it's a law.

Are you saying that God is impossible because he is unfalsifiable? If so, you just assumed you know every physical model, and that all unfalsafiable things are bullshit.

[Luveria]

Yes

Why?

[Ostroeuropa]

Maybe. We can't be 100% sure.

... No. Gravity is a theory. It explains why objects have a tendency to attract smaller ones.

Theories are never completely true AND are evidenced by OBSERVATION of certain facts about reality.

You'll have to ask someone else because I think you're confusing what scientific laws are.



Indeed.

If something is "unfalsifiable", we can't test it. And whatever results come from their "observation" can't be called science. It's usually because they're perceived to be outside of this universe or they do not conform to any known physical models and are, therefore, physically impossible.

Note: "unfalsifiable" usually means "bullshit".

See: astrology, Creation science, intelligent design, phrenology.

Find me the wiki on the "Theory of Gravity" that applies to the modern times. We know it works, we just don't know why, therefore it's a law.

Are you saying that God is impossible because he is unfalsifiable? If so, you just assumed you know every physical model, and that all unfalsafiable things are bullshit.

Define your god. It's probably impossible and falsifiable.

[The Islands of Metanoia]

I already read about her, including the comments section saying that her order is an evil organization allowing people to die.
And if I wasn't balanced enough to read thecounter-article in the same Huffington Post magazine.

Me in my propagandized state would assume that she's an evil bitch and that's all she is. But I'm sorry, I'm not that imbalanced.

I like how even in the counter article writer dosent deny what she did.
He debates why she did it, and to what extant.

I like how you totally ignored the difficulty of running a multi-national organization subsisting merely on donations, and then expect them to come-up with modern hospitals in the middle of the slums.

I also like how you totally concluded that Rev. Mother Teresa is a heartless bitch despite several books written about her by "eye-witness accounts" over how she starved herself continuously as an ascetic practice, but rather, base all your assumptions on Canadian Academics who didn't even set foot in Calcutta, but rather based their research on biased detractors and published it for a Newspaper for the purpose of creating controversy-publicity.

[Umikai]

Np, my general idea is that a theory is the truth, a "predictive and explanatory force," without being 100% fact. In the same way, the existence of God is true, even if there isn't a brilliant factual basis for God's existence.

Make a prediction. Go ahead.

I predict that there will be an afterlife when I die. Also, it's a metaphor to help you understand my position, I'm not saying its law (or theory, lol).

[The Rich Port]

Maybe. We can't be 100% sure.

... No. Gravity is a theory. It explains why objects have a tendency to attract smaller ones.

Theories are never completely true AND are evidenced by OBSERVATION of certain facts about reality.

You'll have to ask someone else because I think you're confusing what scientific laws are.



Indeed.

If something is "unfalsifiable", we can't test it. And whatever results come from their "observation" can't be called science. It's usually because they're perceived to be outside of this universe or they do not conform to any known physical models and are, therefore, physically impossible.

Note: "unfalsifiable" usually means "bullshit".

See: astrology, Creation science, intelligent design, phrenology.

Find me the wiki on the "Theory of Gravity" that applies to the modern times. We know it works, we just don't know why, therefore it's a law.

Are you saying that God is impossible because he is unfalsifiable? If so, you just assumed you know every physical model, and that all unfalsafiable things are bullshit.

... Yes, and then relativity came along, and after that, quantum physics.

Never said they ALL were. I said they USUALLY were. And they USUALLY are because people LOVE to lie, especially when it will earn them a whole lot of money.

Your pastors, for example.

Or am I getting falsifiability wrong?

[Ostroeuropa]

Make a prediction. Go ahead.

I predict that there will be an afterlife when I die. Also, it's a metaphor to help you understand my position, I'm not saying its law (or theory, lol).

Unfalsifiable prediction.
Your theory is not a theory.
Want to try again?

[Sierra Lobo]

A personal question I alone can answer.

Note: I refused to believe that my ultimate goal as a member of a logical specie is to be a compost for worms.

[Umikai]

Find me the wiki on the "Theory of Gravity" that applies to the modern times. We know it works, we just don't know why, therefore it's a law.

Are you saying that God is impossible because he is unfalsifiable? If so, you just assumed you know every physical model, and that all unfalsafiable things are bullshit.

Define your god. It's probably impossible and falsifiable.

Disproving God is your problem, not mine. Read the Bible if you want a better picture of God, and ps- defining him is kinda hard, he isn't the most predictable or easy to understand.

[Ostroeuropa]

A personal question I alone can answer.

Note: I refused to believe that my ultimate goal as a member of a logical specie is to be a compost for worms.

Why do you think what you believe has any impact on reality?

[The Rich Port]

Sorry, left for a sec, brother got on.

Np, my general idea is that a theory is the truth, a "predictive and explanatory force," without being 100% fact. In the same way, the existence of God is true, even if there isn't a brilliant factual basis for God's existence.

That's what separates the men from the boys.

There isn't any factual basis for a God. Therefore, there's a reasonable expectation it doesn't exist.

Hence, atheism.

[Ostroeuropa]

Define your god. It's probably impossible and falsifiable.

Disproving God is your problem, not mine. Read the Bible if you want a better picture of God, and ps- defining him is kinda hard, he isn't the most predictable or easy to understand.

The god of the bible is easily disproved.
I'm asking you to define YOUR god so I can disprove him.
What are the charateristics and traits of your god.
Too many atheists go wishy washy and decide that they'll say "God cannot be disproven" because not EVERY god can.
Yours?
He probably can.

[New Libertarian States]

I like how even in the counter article writer dosent deny what she did.
He debates why she did it, and to what extant.

I like how you totally ignored the difficulty of running a multi-national organization subsisting merely on donations, and then expect them to come-up with modern hospitals in the middle of the slums.

I also like how you totally concluded that Rev. Mother Teresa is a heartless bitch despite several books written about her by "eye-witness accounts" over how she starved herself continuously as an ascetic practice, but rather, base all your assumptions on Canadian Academics who didn't even set foot in Calcutta, but rather based their research on biased detractors and published by a Newspaper for controversy publicity.

No, I'm not dismissing how hard it is.
But, leaving people to die is different then not being able to treat them.
I never said she was heartless or a bitch, where did you get that from?
Cool, she starved, that dosent dismiss what she did.
Neither article writers stepped foot in Calcutta.
One did research it though.
Any who, this is way off topic.
It's not relevant to this.
If you'd like to discuss it further, fell free to Tg me.
Otherwise, lets both get on topic.

[Umikai]

I predict that there will be an afterlife when I die. Also, it's a metaphor to help you understand my position, I'm not saying its law (or theory, lol).

Unfalsifiable prediction.
Your theory is not a theory.
Want to try again?

Who said I had a theory?

[Umikai]

Disproving God is your problem, not mine. Read the Bible if you want a better picture of God, and ps- defining him is kinda hard, he isn't the most predictable or easy to understand.

The god of the bible is easily disproved.
I'm asking you to define YOUR god so I can disprove him.
What are the charateristics and traits of your god.

My God is the God of the Bible. Your turn: disprove him.

[New Libertarian States]

Define your god. It's probably impossible and falsifiable.

Disproving God is your problem, not mine. Read the Bible if you want a better picture of God, and ps- defining him is kinda hard, he isn't the most predictable or easy to understand.

Most people have read the bible in the thread.
It's a contributing factor to why some turn non religious.