Is god real?

[ALMF]

Not a very useful method. Fuzzy logic is better for empiricism. That being said, if you want to use binary logic to describe knowledge, then knowing something DOES necessarily mean that you're right, so you're first and second statements contradict. In fuzzy logic, knowing something doesn't guarantee correctness, but that's because fuzzy logic knowledge does not require absolute certainty.

If it does not require absolute certainty, then how do you claim that God does not exist?

becous the burden of proof is on the clame of existence and is bond all reasonable doubt.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

If it does not require absolute certainty, then how do you claim that God does not exist?

becous the burden of proof is on the clame of existence and is bond all reasonable doubt.

So, basically what you're saying is that becasue the burden of proof is on me, I lose the argument, despite the fact that he can't prove anything either?

BTW you do realize that I was NOT arguing that God exists, rather that no can make any claim to say that he doesn't? Please read the entire debate if you're going to critique me please.

No one can make any claim that he does or does not, I should say.

[ALMF]

Statistical theory agrees.
In the same way any truly random list of a finite number of real or complex numbers contains no integers.
Unless of corse there are an infinite number of ways to be right of the same order of infinity: anyone have a bijection?

Theoretically anything is possible, however ridiculously unlikely.

not true but the proof is beyond the mathematical ability of this goop
the matrix proof shows there are a higher order of infinity real numbers than integers so it is acutely impossible to choose an integer at random.

[ALMF]

becous the burden of proof is on the clame of existence and is bond all reasonable doubt.

So, basically what you're saying is that becasue the burden of proof is on me, I lose the argument, despite the fact that he can't prove anything either?

BTW you do realize that I was NOT arguing that God exists, rather that no can make any claim to say that he doesn't? Please read the entire debate if you're going to critique me please.

No one can make any claim that he does or does not, I should say.

I'm saying in the absence of definitive evidence, it is unreasonable to bleave god exists or is reasonably likly to exist.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Theoretically anything is possible, however ridiculously unlikely.

not true but the proof is beyond the mathematical ability of this goop
the matrix proof shows there are a higher order of infinity real numbers than integers so it is acutely impossible to choose an integer at random.

No, just really, really, really, really(x8398491902) unlikely.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

So, basically what you're saying is that becasue the burden of proof is on me, I lose the argument, despite the fact that he can't prove anything either?

BTW you do realize that I was NOT arguing that God exists, rather that no can make any claim to say that he doesn't? Please read the entire debate if you're going to critique me please.

No one can make any claim that he does or does not, I should say.

I'm saying in the absence of definitive evidence, it is unreasonable to bleave god exists or is reasonably likly to exist.

There is no definitive evidence He doesn't exist. Frankly there is no definitive evidence ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist.

[Bawantu]

There's no actual evidence that God exists, and Occam's Razor is against it; God is an unknown, unmeasurable variable. Any equation which includes this should be discarded in favor of the shortest one where all the known variables can be measured, making the theory workable.

While there is always a chance that we're wrong, the only reason anyone would believe in an afterlife is a fear of death. We all hope that death is not the absolute end of our time, and that after dying we can continue to live. As an atheist, I have a healthy fear of it. The concept of nonexistence is absolutely terrifying. This is why I try not to dwell on it and enjoy as much of the universe as I can.

[ALMF]

not true but the proof is beyond the mathematical ability of this goop
the matrix proof shows there are a higher order of infinity real numbers than integers so it is acutely impossible to choose an integer at random.

No, just really, really, really, really(x8398491902) unlikely.

the proof is in Galian "abstract algebra" also better Bubarki "a theory of sets" if you can get threw Bubarki or evan gallian talk to me, otherwise take my word for it it is acculy impossible to a mathematical certainty: in fact the words "mathematical certainty" are used to reffer to the proof in question or were before they became clechey.

[ALMF]

I'm saying in the absence of definitive evidence, it is unreasonable to bleave god exists or is reasonably likly to exist.

There is no definitive evidence He doesn't exist. Frankly there is no definitive evidence ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist.

that was true: hence "i think therefore i am" is profound: I have definitive proof i exsist.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

There is no definitive evidence He doesn't exist. Frankly there is no definitive evidence ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist.

that was true: hence "i think therefore i am" is profound: I have definitive proof i exsist.

Yet I do not have definite proof you exist. Reality is subjective.

[The Christian Reich]

I have an example why I don't believe in god.

God made the earth in three days, according tot he bible, however he made the sun the moon and the stars in one day. I might be able to believe that at the rate he was going he could have made the moon in one day, but the sun is over 1,000 times more massive then the earth, therefore it should have taken more then 3,000 days to create the sun alone! let alone the trillions of other stars, there is no way that he could have done that all in one day!

The sun is a giant ball of fire while the earth is a albeit smaller ball, with millions of multitudes of life. I would still think the earth took longer.

[ALMF]

that was true: hence "i think therefore i am" is profound: I have definitive proof i exsist.

Yet I do not have definite proof you exist. Reality is subjective.

either you think thus you exist and so something (you) exists or you don't exist and cannot dispute evadance that "ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist."

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Yet I do not have definite proof you exist. Reality is subjective.

either you think thus you exist and so something (you) exists or you don't exist and cannot dispute evadance that "ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist."

It is possible that I am simply the figment of someone's imagination (possibly my own, but that would fit your definition of existing), and I most certainly can dispute my own existence.

Anyway I just had virtually this same dicussion with Unhealthy2. I am really not in the mood start it all over agin. If you're interested read pages 25-32 for the full dicussion between me and him and others. I think it's pretty interesting. If you're not interested, then don't Either way I really need to go to sleep.

[Norstal]

either you think thus you exist and so something (you) exists or you don't exist and cannot dispute evadance that "ANYTHING exists or doesn't exist."

It is possible that I am simply the figment of someone's imagination (possibly my own, but that would fit your definition of existing), and I most certainly can dispute my own existence.

Anyway I just had virtually this same dicussion with Unhealthy2. I am really not in the mood start it all over agin. If you're interested read pages 25-32 for the full dicussion between me and him and others. I think it's pretty interesting. If you're not interested, then don't Either way I really need to go to sleep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUbjpwye ... re=related

NO, WE WANT A DEFINITIVE ANSWER. IS IT YES OR NO???
jk obviously and there are no conclusive proof that god exists or do not exists.

[Hathradic States]

I know this is a touchy subject to some people, however due to my recent observations I see that most people in Nationstates can have a good argument without throwing in rage, or insults so let the discussions begin.

Personally I used to believe in god but now I just don't see how its possible.

Either there is a God, and evidently you have some purpose living, or their isn't, and all reasons for living cannot be justified.

[JJ Place]

Yep. They always go silent when I asked them: "Who created God?"

They've always replied "He's always existed!" to me.

Yep. They always go silent when I asked them: "Who created God?"

No one created God. God always was, and will always be.

To that argument , the response to the belief that God has never been created , because he's always existed , continues to be the observation that no one can actually prove that God has ever existed. A vast quantity of theists will then point to the belief that the Universe is so incredibly complex , that God must have created the Universe ; the flaw with that argument remains that the Universe very well could have existed far all of eternity , and , if God would not exist , the Universe can still exist perfectly , as it's possible that the Universe does not need a God in order to exist , noting the massive amount of natural phenomena , and even phenomena that exists only because of sentient beings such as humanity. The response to that is that God is behind all of this ; and the response to that is that we have no proof that God is behind any of these activities. These can all be used as beliefs of either Theists or Atheists , or Devil ' s Advocate arguments by Agnostics , such as myself , and arguments that prove that , without actually knowing if God exists , we cannot simply believe that God does or does not exist , regardless of how seemingly reasonable an argument for or against the existence , or lack of existence of God or a God like being in existence . The moral of the story is, that A) belief is un - reasonable , and B ) I don't know if God exists , and unless you either know God , or have managed to scope out all of existence of everything , than neither can anyone or anything else prove that any being of or of if God exists .

[JJ Place]

I'm not sure if God exists , and nor do I take either side of the beliefs , and believe that either God exists, or does not exist, even in the slightest of amounts , as belief is both self - destructive , and the highest extent of illogicality.

: D

[Sociobiology]

I look t the universe and I am left with only two options there is no god, or there is any number of gods that have never interacted with this universe.
this makes the existence of god a Symantec argument at best,
but like any real scientist when given two options that explain all available data with equal precision I must work under the assumption that the simpler one is true.

[FREEaquaticdancelesson]

Ok... here's the roots of your "sacred religion" known as Christianity.

Early Canaanites settle into the region, today known as Israel in order to establish trade routes Between Egypt and Mesopotamia.

It took the two religions and mixed them together to create the "Canaanite religion" which, of the Gods in it included "Yahweh", though he was just a mediocre God.

Eventually due to Egypt and Mesopotamia making claims toward Canaan and both enslaving and conquering it The Canaanites wanted nothing to do with the two regions and formed a new religion that held "Yahweh" as the Prime God, although it wasn't the only accepted one.

This evolved into Traditional Judaism

Because of Alexander the Great's conquest on the region, A new "Hellenistic Judaism" began that fused the two philosophies together, probably to help integrate the region into his empire. This was the "Proto-Christianity"

Eventually the Romans took control of Israel and tried to appeal to the traditional Jews by Wiping out the Hellenistic Jews, the persecution of the Hellenistic Jews created a great exodus of many people around the empire and actually helped spread early Christianity, many of them were very educated and claimed to be prophets to help spread it around.

Constantine was raised in Nicomedia, (modern day turkey) where Hellenistic Jews had spread their religion to, as well as many pagans. He saw the many persecutions that were done of the Early Christians and saw how powerful they were on the people of the empire, Eventually His dad was made Junior Emperor or the eastern Half of the Roman Empire, and Diocletian goes ill and gives power to his two emperors of the Eastern and Western halves. The western Emperor got ill as well and gave power to Constantine, but Galerius wouldn't have it and imprisoned Constantine, his dad rescued him through warfare from the East against the west and Eventually Constantine came out on top, emperor or all of Rome.

He then saw a young Christianity that was a mix of many cultural beliefs, as well as appealed to the Roman populous seeing as how many of them witnessed them die in horrible and brutal ways, as well as "miracles" that took place (Using the ICP philosophy), He fused Christianity with Peganism to form a unique blend of it that he could sell to his new Holy Roman Empire and made the first Catholic Church.

This church wasn't very progressive however and Martin Luther reformed it, causing a wave of reform, and eventually, due to the new world mostly and religious freedom it evolved into many new forms including baptism and congregationalism, all sensationalism.

It's a very, very refined religion that has roots in Egyptian Mythology, Mesopotamian Mythology, Greek philosophy, Roman politics, Pegan beliefs, and finally touched up with reforms and interpretations.

[West Zamunda]

In other words: We can't tell anyway, so there's absolutely no point in wasting our time discussing it.

So because we can't be absolutely totally 100% certain, there's no point discussing anything? The fact that we could become more certain of something isn't good enough to give merit to discussions? We must be capable of absolute certainty or all pursuit of knowledge is completely without merit?

No, but since there is simply no way we can know, discussion wont help us since our minds are fallible.

[The Alma Mater]

So because we can't be absolutely totally 100% certain, there's no point discussing anything? The fact that we could become more certain of something isn't good enough to give merit to discussions? We must be capable of absolute certainty or all pursuit of knowledge is completely without merit?

No, but since there is simply no way we can know, discussion wont help us since our minds are fallible.

Ah - Apathic Agnosticism. "We cannot know"

But what do ou believe ?

[Georgism]

Dunno really, it tends to come down to what side of the bed I got out of on a given day.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Depends. If I call this apple in front of me 'God', then clearly I have discursively constituted the aforementioned fruit as God (the irony of God being a fruit given the sexual doctrines of many religious organizations is not lost upon me). But let us not stop there. That light switch is God, this calculator is God, and this holepunch...well, how could it be more godly? And now I've eaten the apple. God is dead. Or is God inside me? Is God inside us all?

[South Norwega]

Dunno really, it tends to come down to what side of the bed I got out of on a given day.

Do people really put their beds so one side isn't against the wall?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Dunno really, it tends to come down to what side of the bed I got out of on a given day.

Do people really put their beds so one side isn't against the wall?

I have a theory on this. I think what you say is true, but that the statements aren't mutually exclusive.

Wouldn't you be angry if you got out of bed on the side of the wall? The sheer amount and force of head-bashing to make a person-sized hole to climb out would indeed make you very grumpy