God and the World, what do you think? [Does God Exist II]

[Vilatania]

As I stated when I first joined the discussion many posts ago, I believe they have a disorder because they cannot face evidence without either ignoring it, or replying with more unprovable concepts. They think they have evidence, but when asked to provide it they can't. It's really just a label, theres no medical basis to it. Your all a bunch of kids with ADD to me.

This is absolutely ridiculous, and quite frankly, idiotic. You don't have to be religious to see that. You call on Christians (as though they are the only religious people in existence) to give you evidence, then you say they cannot face YOUR evidence, then you say that Christians think they have evidence even though before that you said they relied on unprovable concepts. What exactly would you consider adequate evidence for the existence of God? Answer me that question.

Not only have you clearly no idea what religion actually is, you are also unable to string together a coherent sentence, and then you blanket call everyone at large immature as well as saying they have a REAL mental illness, which is totally tactless. And then you delete your original post because people are trying to bait you into a confrontation? Read the Bible or any other book about culture and religion before you comment on religion. Don't read a Dawkins textbook and think that the idea that "there is no evidence" should trigger some kind of epiphany in your head where you have the right to walk around being unbelievably arrogant about a concept that has pervaded all cultures and all of human history as if you're talking about it being a simple case of "bring me the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast and then I'll change my national flag and believe". People like you are not helping the discussion because you aren't involved in it. You believe you have all of the answers when it is evident you know nothing, including the fact that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EITHER WAY, meaning you are as wrong as anybody else about this. Christians strongly believe they're right and you think you know you're right. I know which one is more mentally ill and abrasive to me.

If you don't want to read the Bible, at least read Jute's original post and maybe you will have some clarity, or else just stop trolling.

Read the bible. I suggest that I know more about religion than you do. I possess large amounts of evidence to suggest that the god in the bible doesn't exist. I ask for evidence that definitively proves that the conclusion that my evidence brings me to is incorrect. Again, the evidence is that we can prove that most of the nonsense in the bible is a load of rotting horse poop.

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

Actually no. I'm basing it on personal experience in 12 US states, England, Scotland, Spain, Italy, as well as encountering numerous muslims in several African Countries as well as some experience in United Arab Emirate. I've also encountered Christians from all over the parts of the US that I Haven't been too while serving in the Navy and met ALOT of different people. Did I mention I've been to St. Peter's Square?

Interesting that such religious bigotry is spread so far and wide in the world. It does give a broad sampling of religious prejudice, although I do think that's probably just an issue with vocal minorities. I live in a military community, but everybody isn't a bigot. In Afghanistan, not everybody's a holy warrior or supporting anti-western ideas. In Okinawa, where many people are religious, religious crime is unheard of. When you and your atheist friends where being bullied by the religious, how many religious people were not being bullying you? Should religion be destroyed for its bigot minority?

[Glamour]

This is absolutely ridiculous, and quite frankly, idiotic. You don't have to be religious to see that. You call on Christians (as though they are the only religious people in existence) to give you evidence, then you say they cannot face YOUR evidence, then you say that Christians think they have evidence even though before that you said they relied on unprovable concepts. What exactly would you consider adequate evidence for the existence of God? Answer me that question.

Not only have you clearly no idea what religion actually is, you are also unable to string together a coherent sentence, and then you blanket call everyone at large immature as well as saying they have a REAL mental illness, which is totally tactless. And then you delete your original post because people are trying to bait you into a confrontation? Read the Bible or any other book about culture and religion before you comment on religion. Don't read a Dawkins textbook and think that the idea that "there is no evidence" should trigger some kind of epiphany in your head where you have the right to walk around being unbelievably arrogant about a concept that has pervaded all cultures and all of human history as if you're talking about it being a simple case of "bring me the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast and then I'll change my national flag and believe". People like you are not helping the discussion because you aren't involved in it. You believe you have all of the answers when it is evident you know nothing, including the fact that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EITHER WAY, meaning you are as wrong as anybody else about this. Christians strongly believe they're right and you think you know you're right. I know which one is more mentally ill and abrasive to me.

If you don't want to read the Bible, at least read Jute's original post and maybe you will have some clarity, or else just stop trolling.

Read the bible. I suggest that I know more about religion than you do. I possess large amounts of evidence to suggest that the god in the bible doesn't exist. I ask for evidence that definitively proves that the conclusion that my evidence brings me to is incorrect. Again, the evidence is that we can prove that most of the nonsense in the bible is a load of rotting horse poop.

Well I suggest you don't, considering I've studied theology as well as science and psychology and philosophy. You never answered my question about what you would consider satisfactory evidence for God's existence, so until you do the conversation can't continue because the entire premise of your argument is baseless. You want evidence and can't delineate the parameters of what that would constitute. You also say you have evidence which disproves God. Well, why don't you give it to me? Or better yet, why don't you write a treatise and take it to the Nobel committee and claim your millions and save humanity from religion forever, because you're certainly the first person in known history to possess such fantastic knowledge, with evidence to confirm that "God does not exist" can indeed be empirically known as a fact.

[The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact]

Religion has not caused most wars according to what I know.
BUT it is one of the biggest handful of major reasons we declare war.
What makes religion the worst cause of war is that there Is this air about religion where you're "not supposed to criticize it" that most people take seriously. People find it much easier to justify their action when they do that action for a religion reason. Which means a failed idea will continue to persist.
While most of the world now realizes communism was a failed idea after the Cold War ended, the same will not happen with religion. At least, it doesn't happen as fast.

Ideas of god are far more controversial than any political idea. But religion is given a particular form of tolerance and respect it doesn't deserve. All ideas are not above criticism, and religion claims to be above it most, if not, all the time.

Do ou have any sources on those claims made by officials?

[Vilatania]

Looks like I have a few posts to respond to. But first: viewtopic.php?p=23837241#p23837241 Let this be the end of the subject.

Now..

@Glamour

Did you read my post at all? I require evidence that definitively proves that God exists. I don't care WHAT evidence that is, because to this point there is none. I also think your are playing with words. The bottom line is, while it is possible for a God of some kind to exist without evidence there is no basis for believing that one does exist. Christians base their version of God based on what is written in the bible but the bible is an inaccurate source of information. It is full of things that contradict science and what we've learned about the world. Things that we can observe with our eyes and often do on a daily basis without thinking about it. It's also full of self contradictions, saying one thing is good in one part while saying it's bad in another.

The reason why I am not going to go out of my way for you and dig up each individual example is simple. I'm not the one making the claim, I don't have any responsibility to prove to you that he doesn't exist because you've failed to provide any reason to believe otherwise anyways.

@The East Asian Post-Apocalyptic Pact

To answer your questions, not all but most. Typically if I walk into a room full of Christians and point out that I don't believe in God I get cast out. Even if they don't bash me, I get treated as a lesser individual by these people. A recent example would be my former place of employment(notice how I said former). I used to be everyones best friend there, I was moving up the career ladder to boot. Then a simple conversation lead me to admitting I was an Atheist. The initial reaction was "Oh i'm so sorry for you", then it turned into them saying "how can you say god doesn't exist that's horrible" then utter silence. No one wanted anything to do with me anymore and I hadn't even gone into debate and conquer mode like on here. I was cast out by friends only for saying I don't believe that god exists. Eventually I was fired, conveniently set up. Someone forged my signature on a receipt that had a dick drawn on it and given to a customer.

To the second question, I don't think that religion should be eliminated specifically because of bigotry but rather all of it's flaws together. Religion as a whole has done a lot of negative things to the world and is continuing to do so. I just don't buy the whole "that's a minority" thing, because their religion is still the cause. I won't forgive them for thousands of years of prejudice, death, social and technological setbacks and yes bigotry. I definitely don't think that the limited good it has done justifies the bad, I believe that there is reason to believe that had religion not existed the need for the good that it has done would also have not existed.

[Glamour]

@Glamour

Did you read my post at all? I require evidence that definitively proves that God exists. I don't care WHAT evidence that is, because to this point there is none. I also think your are playing with words. The bottom line is, while it is possible for a God of some kind to exist without evidence there is no basis for believing that one does exist. Christians base their version of God based on what is written in the bible but the bible is an inaccurate source of information. It is full of things that contradict science and what we've learned about the world. Things that we can observe with our eyes and often do on a daily basis without thinking about it. It's also full of self contradictions, saying one thing is good in one part while saying it's bad in another.

The reason why I am not going to go out of my way for you and dig up each individual example is simple. I'm not the one making the claim, I don't have any responsibility to prove to you that he doesn't exist because you've failed to provide any reason to believe otherwise anyways.

Did you read my post at all? You claim to have evidence that definitively proves that God does not exist. Humanity cares about what that evidence would be, but unfortunately at this point there is none. That is why the words faith and belief apply when someone believes that God does exist. Can they prove it? No. Otherwise God would not be a matter for faith and belief, it would be a matter of simple common scientific knowledge, either in the affirmative or the negative. Precisely BECAUSE there is no evidence either way, as it stands, those who believe God does exist BELIEVE it because it is currently unknowable. Likewise, to claim that it is knowable that God does not exist, as you have done many times, is disingenuous, and furthermore it is ludicrous to claim that you have evidence to support your position, yet also claim that the onus is on those of the opposite position to refute your non-existent evidence with their own, even when they do not claim to have any because that isn't the nature of belief. Attitudes about God contradict materialism, Newtonian physics, time, space and empirical knowledge, but that is fine from a theological perspective, because God is said to transcend the physical world. And on top of that, even what the scientific method currently knows about the physical world is by no means the entire encyclopedia of all knowledge and discovery past and future. To claim that because God cannot be scientifically detected means that God does not exist is a misunderstanding of the theological nature of God, a philosophical belief in fundamentalist materialism and also the antithesis of the scientific method. As for the contradictions, it might help you to know that Biblically, the entire old testament was nullified by the first coming of Jesus which established the new covenant, so if anything it is contextual for the world that Jesus had to come and save. In other words, the same way someone would say that Leviticus means followers of Christ have to shun LGBT people is irrelevant in the face of Christ's message, which Christians should follow, hence the name, it is also irrelevant to take the old testament killings representative of a sinful world and to say that makes the entire Bible and faith in Christ and philosophical existence of God redundant, especially because the Bile itself says that this world elongs to Satan and is full of evil. Yes, including twisted religious justification for war.

No, you are making a claim. You think you are right. What I'm telling you is that you are no more "right" than any Christian is about the existence of God. And I mean purely the existence of God, not superflous bashings of creationism which is a fringe group who take the entire Bible literally, and it would appear you are making the exact same mistake as they do. I don't have to provide evidence for a belief. Nobody does. People can and do believe things all the time as they please. God is a nebulous concept. You are the one who came marching in here saying everyone who was religious was mentally ill and that you had evidence that they were empirically wrong, so I'm sorry but yes it is your responsibility to back that up. Or if you can't back up your claims, don't make them so assertively. Science as well as crazy fundamentalist religious people should both have indicated to you that that is a crazy thing to do.

[Glamour]

Except the the ten commandments. They were not nullified because Christ said explicitly to follow them and also added "love thy neighbour as thyself". I'm sure you know that the commandments include "thou shalt not kill". Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is using religion to serve their own means. This can manifest politically as well and has done in the past. That is nothing to do with the message of the religion itself. Why? Because, in fact, it flies directly in the face of the message of the religion. Islam is another story, but you were the one who decided to focus on Christianity. And I'm sorry about how you were fired from your job because of nasty people who constituted the majority and did not accept you since you were in the minority. But that can't be blamed on religion. It is simple in-group/out-group human psychology and it happens all the time under every guise imaginable.

[Vilatania]

I'm not really making a claim, I am merely making an observation and choosing not to believe something that doesn't have a basis for which to believe in it with.

[Glamour]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

[Vilatania]

Except the the ten commandments. They were not nullified because Christ said explicitly to follow them and also added "love thy neighbour as thyself". I'm sure you know that the commandments include "thou shalt not kill". Anyoone who kills in the name of Christ is a liar. Islam is another story, but you were the one who decided to focus on Christianity. And I'm sorry about how you were fired from your job because of nasty people who constituted the majority and did not accept you since you were in the minority. But that can't be blamed on religion. It is simple in-group/out-group human psychology and it happens all the time under every guise imaginable.

I appreciate your sympathy. I don't accept the nullification of any parts of the old testament, I find that to simply be an adjustment to align the religion with modern societal expectations of the time.

[The States of Balloon]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

This again.

[Vilatania]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=23837241#p23837241

They don't "have" to prove it unless they want the belief to be considerable as rational and justified.

[The Creepoc Infinite]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

The mentally ill part I disagree with.
But the burden of proof lies with whomever makes the claim.

Those who claim god exists is making a claim they have to back up with evidence if they are to be taken seriously.

Atheists do not "believe" god doesn't exist.
We lack belief that he does.

[Glamour]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

The mentally ill part I disagree with.
But the burden of proof lies with whomever makes the claim.

Those who claim god exists is making a claim they have to back up with evidence if they are to be taken seriously.

Atheists do not "believe" god doesn't exist.
We lack belief that he does.

So now you have to make your decision. When a religious person presents evidence for God, which is largely a concept related to internal perception and mysticism, and so the evidence is largely anecdotal or based on personal experience, then that evidence is said to be unscientific (and rightly so), and the religious person is accused of trying to shove their religion down the throats of those who are not converted. If, on the other hand, they claim that it is their personal belief and is based in symbolism and on concepts that are rooted in faith, meaning that to have scientific evidence or unquestionable knowledge would in fact cancel out the entire purpose of having a religion itself, they are accused of being mentally ill, literally. Or stupid, or arcane, or unversed in science. So which is it? Should they shut up about it and stop trying to convert people? Or should they try to convert you with physical evidence for a non-physically manifesting entity (except when He was Jesus, the evidence for which is the Bible, but that text now has religious stigma attached to it, meaning that it is seen as circular logic... but it would be helful that Jesus did not come to start "Christianity", people started it because they believed in his gospel and that is actually the main point of the whole faith. "Prove the gospel" does not make sense - it is something to be internally reflected on, not externally proved as having been said by a physical man who was a corporeal manifestation of the universal creator consciousness, however exactly that is supposed to even be proved)? Or maybe the solution is for religious people to comment on science with science and scientists to comment on religion with religion, because they are parallel lines that should not cross, despite people often trying their hardest to cross them, which only adds to the confusion and anomie. Then, if you want to talk about politics, talk in terms of nations and populaces and political history, not in terms of Muslims and Christians and atheists. If some fundamentalist comes along and says something outrageous and tries to monopolise the society based on their religious views, then point out how ridiculous that approach is and even go to their holy book and prove them wrong on a religious basis. Don't start bringing other things into it, calling them stupid, demanding evidence for their entire personal belief system that at no point even claimed to be provable, playing them at their own ridiculous game. You lack belief that God exists. You don't know that he does not exist as a fact, and you can't know that, so stop acting as if you can to try and rile up the religious for your own entertainment and to make yourself feel like you are part of the second Renaissance. Religion is not going to go away, so it is about time secularists (Jesus was one too, and that is partly why they murdered Him) accepted it and did the rational thing which is to stop attacking and start listening. Good listeners make the best scientists, the best religious people, the best society.

[Vilatania]

Wall of text >.>

[Genivaria]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

It is not snobbish to want proof before believing something no.
Try actually presenting evidence instead of stooping to personal attacks.

[Glamour]

All you have to do is read the last sentence, which talks about how it is helpful to listen, or in this case actually read. And then take or leave the rest based on that.

[Vilatania]

All you have to do is read the last sentence, which talks about how it is helpful to listen, or in this case actually read. And then take or leave the rest based on that.

Your really just going to keep on insulting me aren't you.

[Glamour]

I'm not insulting you. I wrote a post about the importance of listening to each other and you responded to it with "wall of text". What else do you want me to say to that?

[Arbolvine]

Okay then, if you believe God does not exist that is fair enough. But there is a danger of intellectual snobbery when you believe science strictly equals materialism and anyone who believes in God has to prove it or else they're mentally ill.

The mentally ill part I disagree with.
But the burden of proof lies with whomever makes the claim.

Those who claim god exists is making a claim they have to back up with evidence if they are to be taken seriously.

Atheists do not "believe" god doesn't exist.
We lack belief that he does.

Exactly. There is no empirical evidence for God's existence except that which can be more easily explained by the natural laws and theories.

[Genivaria]

I'm not insulting you. I wrote a post about the importance of listening to each other and you responded to it with "wall of text". What else do you want me to say to that?

Paragraphs are your friend.

[Vilatania]

Well I'm officially done with this conversation, does anyone want to have a constructive debate that doesn't have something to do with me personally?

[Glamour]

The mentally ill part I disagree with.
But the burden of proof lies with whomever makes the claim.

Those who claim god exists is making a claim they have to back up with evidence if they are to be taken seriously.

Atheists do not "believe" god doesn't exist.
We lack belief that he does.

Exactly. There is no empirical evidence for God's existence except that which can be more easily explained by the natural laws and theories.

No, there isn't any empirical evidence, you are correct. That doesn't mean God doesn't exist. It means there is no empirical evidence at the moment, the same as there aren't for many of the scientific discoveries that there will be evidence for in the future. The point of science is to be open-minded, not to say that because there is no evidence the hypothesis is unacceptable completely, otherwise there would be no scientific method and we would still be running around in loincloths. Chanting about God or something.

[The Creepoc Infinite]

Well I'm officially done with this conversation, does anyone want to have a constructive debate that doesn't have something to do with me personally?

Personally?
Did I miss something?

[The States of Balloon]

Well I'm officially done with this conversation, does anyone want to have a constructive debate that doesn't have something to do with me personally?

Personally?
Did I miss something?

Yes. You missed a lot.