God.

[ShadowBlink]

Re: God.

God wont exist until you step towards him in faith. Faith is not something that can be truely understood through purely logical thought.

In my opinon this thread is just a load of Religion vs Science and God cant be truely found in eithier.

While that might be true, that would exist in the sole believer. The believer would blindly have faith so much, that God would be existent, to them, and only them.
Maybe what it all comes down to is what you individually think.

[windsurfer-sp]

Re: God.

While that might be true, that would exist in the sole believer. The believer would blindly have faith so much, that God would be existent, to them, and only them.

Thats why Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus

[ShadowBlink]

Re: God.

Thats why Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus

I find that Christianity asks for a lot more than faith.

[windsurfer-sp]

Re: God.

I find that Christianity asks for a lot more than faith.

Real Christianity is just a relationship with Jesus. All the things you have "found" are derivatives of that or false.

(This is swinging off the OP's main thread point feel free to tell me to stop.)

[Reach]

Re: God.

Intelligent Design != Religion in disguise
Intelligent Design != Disbelief in Evolution
Intelligent Design != Universally Religious

There are basically two groups of intelligent designers. I am well aware of the group that support intelligent design and do not associate themselves with creationists...but the initial intelligent design was a (biblical) creationist movement.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I guess it's just a misunderstanding. You're more or less referring to the concept, which would put you in the non creationist group. I'm more or less referring to the *very* large sect of the intelligent design movement that has a creationist agenda. Biblical creation failed in and around the early 80's to get into the education system and thus spawned intelligent design. It is, at heart, an attempt to stir up the pot among the public and try to make creation sound like it's science.

That's all. Sorry for confusion.

Evolution is perfectly able to coexist with creationism

Too bad just about all 'creationists' are biblical creationists, which is completely incompadible. At least in america anyway. It's a little different in Canada. People that attempt to fuse creation with evolution are rarely religious (though I suppose there are some here)...I don't think they can afford to be if they're going to make a logical approach to theology without having it clouded by dogma.

[hayatewillown]

Re: God.

There are basically two groups of intelligent designers. I am well aware of the group that support intelligent design and do not associate themselves with creationists...but the initial intelligent design was a creationist movement.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I guess it's just a misunderstanding. You're more or less referring to the concept, which would put you in the non creationist group. I'm more or less referring to the *very* large sect of the intelligent design movement that has a creationist agenda. That's all. Sorry for confusion.



Too bad just about all 'creationists' are biblical creationists, which is completely incompadible. At least in america anyway. It's a little different in Canada.

Canada Also has a French government and just like the French, they are cowards.

[Kilgamayan]

Re: God.

That sounds like a breach of this warning to me.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

Those are all wise words, everyone, but what if.. You're your own God. You yourself makes your own life, and your actions decide your future. Not some outerworldly force.
Think about that.

That's just it. That's exactly how I feel. No matter how big of a force (even some super natural being like god) probably can't govern how I want to act. I have my own individuality which allows me to possibly defy a god even if I was easily sent to some place like hell. Anyone can choose to accept help from some "outerworldly force", but this idea of being a slave to anything like that is probably not what I along with many other people would like. Search your minds for a new religion I like to call individuality and logic.

[devonin]

Re: God.

You will find very few people who are reasonable about their religion who would ever classify themselves as being "slave to" their God. Christianity, as is the common choice of religion for this forum to discuss has no problem whatsoever acknowledging that you have the power to defy God, that you have free will and individuality. In fact, the practice of that free will is integral to their faith system.

[Rhapsodic Truth]

Re: God.

There's a big difference between the force of gravity (something that never fails to work) and God (some invisible thing floating out in space with with the power to do EVERYTHING and ANYTHING possible, but chooses to spend its time watching people masturbate and sending homosexuals to hell).

It seems like everyone here thinks they have their god concept down to a science, so I'm not going to argue. I'm going to state a fact:

You have no real evidence of the source of gravity (which is supposedly matter, but how does that theorically true for all things?), and you have no evidence there is anti-matter (the opposite of gravity, for those of you who haven't taken a physics class). So you can't disprove the idea of God all together. The IDEA of gravity is consistent on this planet, in this galaxy, but who says it still works outside of the milky way, or off the planet?

Theory.
"Science."
Isn't "science" the same as "God"? You can't be completely sure of either. You can only prove your theories and test a hypothesis on THIS planet, as far as I have seen. You can trust what people tell you and what you learn. You can't ever really be sure of either.

There's plenty of evidence supporting God as there is supporting Science.

And your idea, concept, conviction of god is as childish as they come, but I'm not going to be a jerk, so I accept your opinions.

[Relambrien]

Re: God.

You have no real evidence of the source of gravity (which is supposedly matter, but how does that theorically true for all things?),

The "source" of gravity? Gravity is the force that pulls objects towards each other, so I don't know what you mean by "source." Each object would be a "source" the way I'm thinking of it.

EDIT: Apparently you meant what allows for gravity's existence, not what causes gravitational effects (we could debate what I'm saying, but just know that I understand what you mean by "source" now even if I can't explain it). So yeah, look at Grandiagod's post for that.

and you have no evidence there is anti-matter (the opposite of gravity, for those of you who haven't taken a physics class).

I have not taken a physics class, so I cannot respond to this.

So you can't disprove the idea of God all together. The IDEA of gravity is consistent on this planet, in this galaxy, but who says it still works outside of the milky way, or off the planet?

Neil Armstrong. It worked on the moon, therefore it works outside of the planet. Oh, and scientists have found other galaxies, with orbits, and therefore gravity.

Theory.
"Science."
Isn't "science" the same as "God"? You can't be completely sure of either.

No. They're opposites. "Science" attempts to explain the natural world through laws and observations. "God" is a way of explaining the natural world without having to do much work, because "some omnipotent divine being did it." Not that there's a problem with believing that, but that's just what it boils down to.

You can only prove your theories and test a hypothesis on THIS planet, as far as I have seen. You can trust what people tell you and what you learn. You can't ever really be sure of either.

You can also prove your theories and test a hypothesis in space. We have space shuttles and space stations, you know? What do you think those astronauts are doing up in the International Space Station?

There's plenty of evidence supporting God as there is supporting Science.

Please list it?

[Grandiagod]

Re: God.

It seems like everyone here thinks they have their god concept down to a science, so I'm not going to argue. I'm going to state a fact:

You have no real evidence of the source of gravity (which is supposedly matter, but how does that theorically true for all things?),

Gravitons are responsible for gravity. Read next time.

and you have no evidence there is anti-matter (the opposite of gravity, for those of you who haven't taken a physics class).

Anti matter has been created by scientists.

So you can't disprove the idea of God all together.

And you can't disprove I have a pink fairy in my pants.

The IDEA of gravity is consistent on this planet, in this galaxy, but who says it still works outside of the milky way, or off the planet?

I'm just going to sit back and laugh at this one.

Isn't "science" the same as "God"?

Science doesn't claim to have created the universe and doesn't try to govern humanity through an obtuse set of morals.

You can't be completely sure of either. You can only prove your theories and test a hypothesis on THIS planet, as far as I have seen.

Oh god, this is embarrassing.

You can trust what people tell you and what you learn. You can't ever really be sure of either.

DEM LIBRAL SCEINTISTS IZ TEACHIN ME LIEZ

There's plenty of evidence supporting God as there is supporting Science.

Orly, why don't you show the rest of us?

And your idea, concept, conviction of god is as childish as they come, but I'm not going to be a jerk, so I accept your opinions.

Irony alert.

[devonin]

Re: God.

Isn't "science" the same as "God"?

No, that is why they are different words that refer to demonstrably different things. This statement makes the same sense as "Aren't badgers the same as cupboards?"

You can't be completely sure of either.

the integral difference is that science admits its margin for error and constantly seeks to find errors and correct them, while religion is static and tends towards stating that things are universally "this way" always have been and always will be, and brook no attempts to disprove.

You can only prove your theories and test a hypothesis on THIS planet, as far as I have seen.

For hypotheses and theories that refer to this planet and the things on it, I'm pretty sure that "this planet" is a pretty accurate sample size.

There's plenty of evidence supporting God as there is supporting Science.

Please supply this evidence. Ensure that it is tested, testable, reproducable, and consistant across all attempts to examine it.

And your idea, concept, conviction of god is as childish as they come, but I'm not going to be a jerk, so I accept your opinions.

Just because you feel God is involved in doing more things than watching Jewp masturbate (And god knows, jewp spends enough time doing that) you must admit that an omniscient deity is by definition watching jewp masturbate.

Edit: Wow, poor guy got triple teamed all at once. (Was god watching that just now? Oof)

[Rhapsodic Truth]

Re: God.

Thank you. I FINALLY got a response worth listening to.
But I rest my apparently "awful" case.

But these are my humble last statements, that will most likely result in complete failure:

When you do something bad, something bad will happen to you. The Bible claims this is God's punishment. Now, as far as I have seen, this is true, depending on the way you look at it (which won't be true in your eyes). "For every action, there is an equal, but opposite reaction." (please don't assume bad = bad is the same reaction)

Specific occurences in the Bible have been proved to have actually happened in history. I'm not going to look it up for you.

-
Off the record of evidence and all this "you believe this and i think it is wrong" and vice-versa, I personally think it sucks at the end of the day to know that there's nothing out there but a world full of people who can't do anything but empower themselves, rather than something greater than all of those people who think they've got everything figured out. Something to really be there for you when everyone else abandons you.

Thanks for hearing my side of things.

[Ichiro_Suzuki_desu]

Re: God.

Gravitons are responsible for gravity. Read next time.

Gravitons are currently speculation. They have never been directly observed, only implied by gravity's effects.