Is god real?

[Innsmothe]

Adam and Eve;s children did Eve, Incest is supported and encouraged by God and the Bible.

No god gets off on watching it. He doesn't nessecarily want to partake in human form.

And Freddy Mercury was straight.

[The Parkus Empire]

That's because despite the enduring lack of evidence one side presents, that one side refuses to acknowledge that its beliefs are not backed by reality.

Lack of evidence? That itself ignores reality.

Reality proves this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdVivT0ShC4

[Unchecked Expansion]

Lack of evidence? That itself ignores reality.

Reality is really bad evidence for a deity when the only deity supported by it is non-interventionist, undetectable and irrelevant

[The Parkus Empire]

Lack of evidence? That itself ignores reality.

Reality is really bad evidence for a deity when the only deity supported by it is non-interventionist, undetectable and irrelevant

*snaps* I always knew God was a libertarian.

[New Heliopolis]

Lack of evidence? That itself ignores reality.

Reality is really bad evidence for a deity when the only deity supported by it is non-interventionist, undetectable and irrelevant

There are other supportable things. Deity=/=omnipotent, and undetectable to us certainly hasn't proven meaningful over the millenia.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Reality is really bad evidence for a deity when the only deity supported by it is non-interventionist, undetectable and irrelevant

There are other supportable things. Deity=/=omnipotent, and undetectable to us certainly hasn't proven meaningful over the millenia.

Well no. But those millennia were when 'god' was a useful shorthand for 'No, I don't understand it either, but I think it means I should be in charge'.
However, to date we have found nothing that required a creator. We have found lots of ways in which everything we have found could have been created without any kind of divine intervention though

[New Heliopolis]

There are other supportable things. Deity=/=omnipotent, and undetectable to us certainly hasn't proven meaningful over the millenia.

Well no. But those millennia were when 'god' was a useful shorthand for 'No, I don't understand it either, but I think it means I should be in charge'.
However, to date we have found nothing that required a creator. We have found lots of ways in which everything we have found could have been created without any kind of divine intervention though

So, as we've already argued, it could be either. A creator is still sufficient.

[Dakini]

Well no. But those millennia were when 'god' was a useful shorthand for 'No, I don't understand it either, but I think it means I should be in charge'.
However, to date we have found nothing that required a creator. We have found lots of ways in which everything we have found could have been created without any kind of divine intervention though

So, as we've already argued, it could be either. A creator is still sufficient.

How is a creator sufficient?

Nature offers sufficient explanations for itself.

[New Heliopolis]

So, as we've already argued, it could be either. A creator is still sufficient.

How is a creator sufficient?

Nature offers sufficient explanations for itself.

Under a different set of rules, anything could happen.

Why do you assume a god can't be from the multiverse? (And that's supportable)

[Unchecked Expansion]

So, as we've already argued, it could be either. A creator is still sufficient.

It could be. But the problem is, evidence for an interventionist god: absolutely nothing. Evidence for nature not needing any form of divine creation: absolutely everything

[Benutanairan]

I'd rather grow up believing in God then die and find out he's not real. Than growing up not believing in God then dying and finding out he is real.

[St George of England]

I'd rather grow up believing in God then die and find out he's not real. Than growing up not believing in God then dying and finding out he is real.

But would rather grow up believing that abortion, no matter what, is wrong? And that contraception is wrong? And that Homosexuality is wrong?

[New Heliopolis]

So, as we've already argued, it could be either. A creator is still sufficient.

It could be. But the problem is, evidence for an interventionist god: absolutely nothing. Evidence for nature not needing any form of divine creation: absolutely everything

The evidence favoring any method of creation over another is nothing, though.

[Lancaster of Wessex]

I'd rather grow up believing in God then die and find out he's not real. Than growing up not believing in God then dying and finding out he is real.

But would rather grow up believing that abortion, no matter what, is wrong? And that contraception is wrong? And that Homosexuality is wrong?

Not all Christians wear the same clothing of belief. I don't believe contraception is wrong, for example.

It seems most non-Christians equate Christianity meaning Roman Catholic. It ain't so.

[St George of England]

But would rather grow up believing that abortion, no matter what, is wrong? And that contraception is wrong? And that Homosexuality is wrong?

Not all Christians wear the same clothing of belief. I don't believe contraception is wrong, for example.

It seems most non-Christians equate Christianity meaning Roman Catholic. It ain't so.

Whilst I agree with you, it's not just Catholics who beleive that.

[Unchecked Expansion]

It could be. But the problem is, evidence for an interventionist god: absolutely nothing. Evidence for nature not needing any form of divine creation: absolutely everything

The evidence favoring any method of creation over another is nothing, though.

Well, we know it wasn't Genesis. Probably wasn't the earth forming of nothing and giving birth to the sky. It's doubtful it was ejaculated by an Egyptian god either.

[New Heliopolis]

The evidence favoring any method of creation over another is nothing, though.

Well, we know it wasn't Genesis. Probably wasn't the earth forming of nothing and giving birth to the sky. It's doubtful it was ejaculated by an Egyptian god either.

Excluding the wildly off ones. But that leaves an infinite number to take their place.

[Innsmothe]

I'd rather grow up believing in God then die and find out he's not real. Than growing up not believing in God then dying and finding out he is real.

I'd rather the latter, Because, if he really is God then he will forgive me.

[Innsmothe]

The evidence favoring any method of creation over another is nothing, though.

Well, we know it wasn't Genesis. Probably wasn't the earth forming of nothing and giving birth to the sky. It's doubtful it was ejaculated by an Egyptian god either.

What about being formed from the corpse of a giant?

[Conserative Morality]

Reality is really bad evidence for a deity when the only deity supported by it is non-interventionist, undetectable and irrelevant

*snaps* I always knew God was a libertarian.

That one was good.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Well, we know it wasn't Genesis. Probably wasn't the earth forming of nothing and giving birth to the sky. It's doubtful it was ejaculated by an Egyptian god either.

What about being formed from the corpse of a giant?

Well, it would explain the 20ft tooth I dug up in my garden.

[New Heliopolis]

Well, we know it wasn't Genesis. Probably wasn't the earth forming of nothing and giving birth to the sky. It's doubtful it was ejaculated by an Egyptian god either.

What about being formed from the corpse of a giant?

That...actually could make perfect sense. Source of energy to drain--found.

[Dakini]

How is a creator sufficient?

Nature offers sufficient explanations for itself.

Under a different set of rules, anything could happen.

Why do you assume a god can't be from the multiverse? (And that's supportable)

Why do you assume a multiverse?

And define your god. If your god is a creator, how can your god be "from" somewhere? Who created the universe of the god's origin?

[New Heliopolis]

Under a different set of rules, anything could happen.

Why do you assume a god can't be from the multiverse? (And that's supportable)

Why do you assume a multiverse?

Because even if the universe came from nothing, a similar event could happen again.

And define your god. If your god is a creator, how can your god be "from" somewhere? Who created the universe of the god's origin?

In this case, I'll leave it at creator, though I'd personally put in more specifics. Anyway, that's up for debate as well.

[Dakini]

Why do you assume a multiverse?

Because even if the universe came from nothing, a similar event could happen again.

Why does this mean you should assume a multiverse? What if an old universe has to die before a new one can be born? Is your multiverse testable?

And define your god. If your god is a creator, how can your god be "from" somewhere? Who created the universe of the god's origin?

In this case, I'll leave it at creator, though I'd personally put in more specifics. Anyway, that's up for debate as well.

Creator of what? You have to be more specific. I'm a creator too, I create scarves, paintings, computer programs to name a few things. Am I god?