Does the (Christian) God Exist?

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

Im tired of these kinds of discussions. Atheists and Christians (Note: I am a Christian myself) debate over the existence of a God endlessly. The truth is it is nonsense for one to argue if the Christian God exists because a Christian will always believe in a God and an atheist will always believe there is no such thing as a Christian God no matter what you say.

I find myself a hypocrite.

[Menassa]

I was raised a devout Catholic. Now I'm one of the most non-spiritual, passionately anti-religious people you'll ever meet. People change their religious views all the time.

Yes, people change their religious views but my point is- It is very difficult to change one's opinions and most Christians stay Christian and most atheists stay atheist. Leopards hardly change their spots. My problem is, I find it hard to state what I am saying directly and always ends up saying it in an indirect manner.

So you're saying deep down, Zott believes in Gott?

[The New United States]

Yes, people change their religious views but my point is- It is very difficult to change one's opinions and most Christians stay Christian and most atheists stay atheist. Leopards hardly change their spots. My problem is, I find it hard to state what I am saying directly and always ends up saying it in an indirect manner.

So you're saying deep down, Zott believes in Gott?

"Most" isn't a synonym for "all," in case you did not know. You're welcome.

[United States of White America]

1) Science is immoral: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/dea ... periority/
2) Intelligent design: http://www.gotquestions.org/evidence-in ... esign.html
3) Believing in God = positivity = higher life span: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2013/04/ ... 367195880/
4) Science cannot explain everything, so it must be God: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilder ... se-of-myst

Checkmate

Are you serious, brother?

Yes.

[Ashmoria]

Pretty much everyone that's atheist says that.

Really? The majority of us went with the whole "I don't care what people believe as long as they keep out of school and government" schtick.

of course

but do you believe in god?

No. That's the point.

you didn't say so.

[United British Union]

Are you serious, brother?

Yes.

Jolly well said, sir.
God created the universe. Science believes the creation of the Earth via God is the Big Bang. This is why they are wrong.

[Jormengand]

Are you serious, brother?

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?

God created the universe.

Source thy claim, claim-maker!

[Divair]

Are you serious, brother?

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?

People not to feed. But they will.

[Greater Istanistan]

In that case could you explain, elaborate or provide evidence for your views then?

1) Science is immoral: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/dea ... periority/
2) Intelligent design: http://www.gotquestions.org/evidence-in ... esign.html
3) Believing in God = positivity = higher life span: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2013/04/ ... 367195880/
4) Science cannot explain everything, so it must be God: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilder ... se-of-myst

Checkmate

Alright. This is not checkmate. And you sound so horribly egotistical saying that. Like "I have a God. You have a Darwin. My God is bigger than your Darwin."

A) Just as you can't judge religion by Westboro Baptist or pedo priests, you can't judge atheists by those jackals. And furthermore, that link just basically proves that some people are assholes on the internet. So? How can you condemn an inherently rational and unbiased system by Twitter? It's TWITTER! You are doing here exactly what that article was arguing against!

"Dear Science,

While was praying for the salvation of the world by Jesus Christ our Saviour, oh save me, Atheists were making ignorant remarks on Twitter.

Thanks,

White America"

Hypocrisy.

And there is only one morality of true science - and that is truth. If science discovered your God, and objectively proved it, then I'd accept the existence of your God. That's science. It's a concept, not a person. It's a model for making objective and fair conclusions based on hard evidence that you yourself can see.

B) Alright. Let's see.

Biology: Says DNA is like computer code. That's because it's a template for life. It's the basic, simple code which gives each inddividual cell a template for existence. It evolves to fit requirements of environment. It changes from earlier versions. But if God created the original template, and God is perfect, the template is perfect. God cannot be anything but perfect, can He? So why does it evolve from this hypothetical perfect template? Does Satan adapt crells for changing environments?

And that argument says basically that God writes computer code. So where does Widows come from? Kidding. But it's ridiculous.computer code is like cell code because they SERVE THE SAME FUNCTIONS.

Physics: So it argues that the universe is perfectly suited to life and was built for life. That's totally not cool. That assumes that organic life is the norm and the be-all, end-all. That an infinite expanse was built for us. But if it was intelligently designed to be perfectly suitable for us organics, why aren't there more species out there? Why, in this intelligently designed paradise for us, are most other planets completely uninhabitable? Why are there gas giants? They serve us no purpose. They contribute little. Many are, in fact, failed stars. Why would a star fail? They are supposedly God's creation. Why would stars die or go supernova? That would endanger organic life? Why is space so dangerous for us when this universe is supposed to be perfect for us?

The simple thing is that the universe did not arise because life demanded it. If it was, we'd certainly see more life. Organic life was, in the words of Sovereign, an accident. We arose because because conditions were right. If intelligent design was legit, we'd have arisen ages ago and conquered the cosmos, a friendly place. Instead we haven't gotten a human past the Moon and it took the universe five billion years to get us there (by your views). Nope. Eefinitely not intelligent design.

Cosmology: No. The article is ignorant. The universe was already there. It expanded. It did not spontaneously generate. Ever heard of the big crunch hypotheses? Pretty legit evidence.

C) And I'll live longer because I have socialized health care. So?

D) No. Science just hasn't discovered it yet. We don't understand everything yet. Scoentists accept not knowing. Religious people would rather know all on an imperfect model.

[Jormengand]

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?

People not to feed. But they will.

*Shrug.* Power to them.

[Republic of Astana]

The Christian god = the muslim god = the jewish god = pretty much all gods.

Hint: There is only one God.

This

[Caecuser]

Are you serious, brother?

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?

God created the universe.

Source thy claim, claim-maker!

You have to remember that God's Kingdom is not a democracy.

[United States of White America]

Are you serious, brother?

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?

So? What has this got to do with anything?

[Jormengand]

He's against peace and democracy. What do you expect?


Source thy claim, claim-maker!

You have to remember that God's Kingdom is not a democracy.

Nor is it peaceful, given the whole "Murder most of humanity! Send all the jews to war! Destroy two cities!" and all that.

[Freiheit Reich]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

[Mavorpen]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

So basically God doesn't exist?

[United States of White America]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

THANK YOU.

[Caecuser]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

The very first article's first argument is because the Earth (amongst other things) is complex - I think I'm going to have a hard time even getting through the rest of that article.

[Saint Kitten]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

I love how people use opinion articles as "facts"

[Lost heros]

In that case could you explain, elaborate or provide evidence for your views then?

1) Science is immoral: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/dea ... periority/
2) Intelligent design: http://www.gotquestions.org/evidence-in ... esign.html
3) Believing in God = positivity = higher life span: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2013/04/ ... 367195880/
4) Science cannot explain everything, so it must be God: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilder ... se-of-myst

Checkmate

1. More like science is amoral. I don't see how logical deductions and scientific query can have a morality.
2. Haha, no. The argument for Intellignet design is basically, "I don't know" or "That's complex" therefore "God." Which is terrible reasoning. And is very fallacious
3. This assumes people are unhappy when they don't have a religion and that having a religion is the only way to happiness. Both of these are false because there are such a thing as happy atheists.
4. Again, horrible jumping to conclusions. You can just as easily say "Science can't explain everything therefore Flying Spaghetti Monster"

[Jormengand]

Here is some proof for those that doubt the existence of God:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

http://realtruth.org/articles/070601-006-teog.html

The first lists a rehash of arguments that have already been debunked (What designed/ first cause'd god?)

The second, I got: "The Proof that God exists is that without Him you couldn't prove anything." which... is balls. I can prove things, god doesn't come into it.

The third is design argument. Again.

[Distruzio]

Yes. The Christian God does exist.

No. The Protestant God does not.

If the Christian God did not exist, it wouldn't matter.

If the Protestant God did exist, itd be an asshole undeserving of praise. Fuck that guy.

Why do i believe that? Because i like being confusing and the coffee is still brewing.

[Darwinish Brentsylvania]

Yes

[Kelinfort]

As a deist, I do believe in a deity...though nothing like the Christian God. The Bible is clearly not a factual text, at least in the Old Testament. The messages of the Old Testament mainly regard old shepherd view of the world. In fact, Genesis has two contradicting stories of creation; so does the famous flood story. Most of these stories represent an archaic view of the world.

The New Testament, by comparison, is written in a completely different format. While it does resemble some of the historical books of the Old Testament, it lacks the strict morality (by strict I mean absolutely oppressive) and it doesn't show as much deviation. If a Christian God does exist, he/she/it would most likely resemble the New Testament account. The God of the Old Testament may seem capricious today, but with the logic these shepherds used, it was more likely "Everyone is evil but us" philosophy.

[Caecuser]

Yes. The Christian God does exist.

No. The Protestant God does not.

If the Christian God did not exist, it wouldn't matter.

If the Protestant God did exist, itd be an asshole undeserving of praise. Fuck that guy.

Why do i believe that? Because i like being confusing and the coffee is still brewing.

What? Why did you even come into this thread if the reason you're going to give for your viewpoint is because you like being confusing?