God.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

I would somewhat be an agnostic because I don't care about the universe's creation or any god(s) unless they link to something useful for humans. As I have explained before, we have no such leads to finding any god(s) unless this supposed god(s) decides to reveal itself/themselves. However, I don't jump to the conclusion that we won't ever find any god or that they don't exist. I simply think that it would be more meaningful to find a way to live for ever and not worry about what happens as far as death goes. Living for ever would pretty much eliminate any reason for a person to wonder why something is the way it is because you could just sit around and do nothing for all of eternity. Also, if finding god(s) were to be possible, I would to think that humans would have to find a way to be immortal in order to find any god while we are still considered alive on Earth. Of course even though my goal is for humans to eventually live for ever, that doesn't mean it's possible,but it hasn't been proven to be impossible either. I would say that people pray to god(s) to hope that they can have strenght to live properly, not die, to honor those who have died, etc. However, I don't value religion too much because it is so time consuming and would a human be weak if all they did was pray to a higher being for help? Would god(s) even respond to such prayers if they existed? I don't think that humans need too much assistance from any god unless all they do is sit in a church and arrogantly go along with what they say to be 100% true. Perhaps prayers can do something and god(s) do exist, but if there were god(s) that mankind would truely consider righteous, would god(s) require us to stay in a church and be their servant? Would a god of any decency have its followers bomb the World Trade Centers on 9/11? I would to think not and if that is the type of god that humanity prays for, I would hope that someone or something could kill that god or stay away from it for ever if it would exist.

Edit: I suppose that by Hollus' definition, I am a weak agnostic person for the time being.

[Hollus]

Re: God.

Personally, I have to agree with Master_of_the_Faster. Even if there's no real evidence for or against God, I don't believe at all. All the evil in the world isn't really convincing proof. I also disagree with organized religion. For example, the cathedrals built in the medieval ages were certainly works of art, but they took hundreds of people years to build, and they didn't serve any really purpose. All that wasted work to indoctrinate and teach close mindedness.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

I can understand that some people are so opposed to religion because religion itself is pure manipulation (as far as I know) for "normal" standards, but I want to make it clear that religion isn't just about society. Religion represents everything that science hasn't proven yet (may not be able to prove) and should be given a chance. When I say science hasn't proven yet, I mean that science can prove religion to be true or false (if provable).

[Hollus]

Re: God.

Religion represents everything that science hasn't proven yet (may not be able to prove) and should be given a chance.

Religion is a gap theory. In the pre-historic times, or even quite recent times, religion filled in the gaps of science with "God made it that way". Now that science is closing up the gaps so quickly, religion has to get more and more aggressive to keep up. (Evangelicals, crazy televangelists, fundamentalists). Science is progressive and continually improves itself and expands it's knowledge. Religion hates change and preys on the uneducated fears of innocent people. This is why science will the war on ignorance in the end.

[banditcom]

Re: God.

This flow chart basically explains my feelings towards the whole thing.

Oh and just because there isn't a scientific explanation for everything, doesn't mean it's way off or completely wrong. Just because we don't know all the details, you don't throw the whole thing out.

As the flow chart shows, theories are constantly worked on and scrutinized. Religion and God? God did it, He made this happen, etc. No backing evidence, just belief and assumptions or different interpretations of a books/prophets from sooooooo long ago.

All arguments against science for religion and God are completely illogical and full of fallacies. All arguments against evolution are completely misunderstood and spun off in a way where, yes, it is wrong. Because it's not what evolution is about. Then you have people who try to say this science isn't credible, yet use other science (that they have wrong) to use for backing their statements.

Like this guy, who is COMPLETELY off of what Evolution is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvyQRdlKiwI

He has another vid "proving" the Earth is ~6000 years old. He startsoff by his "calculations" of adding ages in the Bible, then tried to pick and choose science. All his comments in that vid, as well as this, are positive... Because, well, he has to approve the comments. So he only approves the positive ones. -_-

*sighs*

Here is a link to a guy who reposted the vid and acting like him: http://www.youtube.com/comment_servl...%3DTZxoU6Y0LRs Comments that aren't restricted; though, he acts like a complete illogical jackass to all of them. XD Which, isn't far off.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: God.

Einstein clearly stated that the universe had 3 very real and important factors; Space, Time, and Matter.

I seriously doubt the man who discovered the concept of spacetime would make such a lame statement. Sorry, but your argument died right there. God's dead too.

[evilcowgod]

Re: God.

God is an idea, an idea created by man, which is the beilef that if you know you can do something, and you want to do it, there is nothing holding you back except for what you may think are your limitations.

[Melone Marshe]

Re: God.

It's my opinion that god is a being brought forth by one's own thoughts, used by oneself to blame success, failures, or "fate" on. While there is no proof that a "god" or "gods" exist, probably the most reasonable evidence is that if one does exist, why they would allow such a horrible "fate" for one person, and yet such a pleasant "fate" for another?

For this reason, I see it impossible for any such being to exist, as one to be so giving to one being but cruel without reason to another seems relatively contradicting toward itself. Unless god = a jock.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: God.

It's my opinion that god is a being brought forth by one's own thoughts, used by oneself to blame success, failures, or "fate" on. While there is no proof that a "god" or "gods" exist, probably the most reasonable evidence is that if one does exist, why they would allow such a horrible "fate" for one person, and yet such a pleasant "fate" for another?

For this reason, I see it impossible for any such being to exist, as one to be so giving to one being but cruel without reason to another seems relatively contradicting toward itself. Unless god = a jock.

I have to agree with what you say about what a god could be, but it still has a chance of being an unreasonable god that exists if defined as a greater being. Just because a god has a chance of existing and being unreasonable doesn't give evidence that this god doesn't exist (however, it might mean that a religion can be wrong about a god if they see it as righteous and yet their customs make god to seem like a vicious dictator). If god is the kind of person who would hate homosexuals over heterosexuals for no reason then this god would not be a righteous being (who wouldn't ban life, liberty, or property for no apparent reason). Just because homosexuals don't make life doesn't automatically make them bad (especially since they aren't limiting life [no children are born so they can't be considered killed and people are accepted in society for not marrying or not having children], liberty or property). For the most part, I would say that religion is used to show a certain accepted or "normal" view in society. The problem is that no god has ever shown me or any other human (atleast not that there is proof of) that a god ever even gave consent to what is made by society (in which case, the failure to give proof is proof that religion does what it does to manipulate). Now there is the matter of Devonin's beautiful chart. Obviously religion keeps an idea for ever, but we need to get rid of that mentality. Religion should not be doubted or favored without evidence. Let religious thoughts move to the scientific part of the chart (the left side) and see what happens without being impatient and arrogantly bigoting society against each other. Just live life without constantly aiming to steal people's life, liberty, or property without a just cause or coming to a conclusion with no evidence.

[archbishopjabber]

Re: God.

Mmmm Russell's Teapot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

If god is real then there is a teapot between mars and earth.

[x So Sick x1]

Re: God.

Maybe religion and science is as infinite as our own thoughts. Our mind is what limits us and yet allows us to THINK about how things were and are.

[hayatewillown]

Re: God.

First of all, Spam +1 on all of you.
Second of all, I don't care what religion you are in, and I have no idea why you put forth and show other religions that have nothing to do with this topic. State your ideas on it.

And by the way, that lame statement? Excuse me? You are talking about one of the worlds most intelligent men. I think your problem is that he achieved more than you did. Sorry, but don't pick and poke at what he says.

[FRANKKK]

Re: God.

You can't prove that there is a God or that there isn't. It's all up to faith and whether you choose to believe in Him or not. Trying to convince people of swaying to the other side of the argument where he/she stands is quite futile unless he/she is agnostic.

I agree with you hooch.
Theres no way to prove it, only you can choose to believe or not to believe.
Me personally, believe he exists but thats just me.

[devonin]

Re: God.

First of all, Spam +1 on all of you.
Second of all, I don't care what religion you are in, and I have no idea why you put forth and show other religions that have nothing to do with this topic. State your ideas on it.

Discussions go where they go, and are still staying around the original topic even if they've developed slightly. That happens in forums, if the topic ranges too far afield, someone makes a new thread about the new topic.

And by the way, that lame statement? Excuse me? You are talking about one of the worlds most intelligent men. I think your problem is that he achieved more than you did. Sorry, but don't pick and poke at what he says.

I wasn't aware that being smart made every word you are thought to have said 100% utterly true, such that nobody is even allowed to analyse what you've said.

[Kit-]

Re: God.

And by the way, that lame statement? Excuse me? You are talking about one of the worlds most intelligent men. I think your problem is that he achieved more than you did. Sorry, but don't pick and poke at what he says.

Maybe you should reread Jewp's comment and understand it before jumping to a conclusion. Also, if you didn't even understand his language, maybe, just maybe, you didn't understand the words of "one of the world's most intelligent men."