If you asked me to blow you, and I didn't, would I also not exist?
Last night, I asked God for it to rain again tonight, and it is. So he does exist.
Edited By Cakedaddy on 1306036527
Hawking: There aint no heaven.
In as much as the word "valid" can be used with the word "religion", then yes, Scientology is a valid religion. Pretty much any belief system that has reached a second generation is as "valid" as any other religion. Presumably this includes Jedi at his point.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
I'm just saying, your argument that there is no God because he won't do what you say, when you say it "Strike you down", is as valid as people saying there is a God because "I believe there is".
Arguing the existence of God with some people (Gordon) is impossible because they've closed their minds to it (end of discussion). They don't really base that on anything other than weak arguments (lack of falsifiability or religion if fake). They provide no science to prove God false, just other theories. (you can't prove Him false)
When I said that He tried to prove his existence 2000 years ago, I was of course referring to Christ. There were the miracles and what-not, but those are instantly rejected as fake. Pics or it didn't happen, I guess. It just depends on which version of history you want to believe. The Christians that said He was here and did all that stuff, or the Jews who say He was here, but all of the stuff claimed by Christians was fake. It will be interesting to see what history looks like 2000 years from now when people talk about WWII. Was there really a holocaust, or is it just Jewish ramblings. They recorded what was going on the best way they could back then. Because people choose to reject it now doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.
And even if all of religion is fake and made up. That still doesn't disprove God, or an afterlife.
Was listening to the radio on the way to New York last week. Came across a religious channel and decided to see what they had to say. They just happened to be debating the existence of God. It was a dumb debate as a pastor/minister/whatever was playing the part of the disbeliever, so, whatever. But, they brought up some interesting points. One, they conceded there was a Big Bang. So, they asked what was before the BB? All that mass, crammed together waiting to go Bang, and that matter had existed for an eternity. It just always was. Implying it's acceptable to believe matter just was and always has been. Then they brought up intelligence. Matter is matter. It has no intelligence. It's just stuff. Yet, when you put matter together in a certain way, it suddenly has intelligence. The dandelion knows to grow it's seeds attached to little puffy things so the wind will carry it. Where does that intelligence come from? Because again, matter can not think. It just exists. So that intelligence is being introduced from somewhere. Just two points they were trying to make that I found interesting. Oh ya, the other option for the matter, if it hadn't been around for eternity, was that it blinked into existence simply to go Bang.
Lastly, if you believe Hawkings, then you also must believe that there is no such thing as free will. Something I have argued for many years. I KNOW we talked about this back at OAPI and Gordon and Leisher disagreed. Hawkings said we are simply computers reacting to stimuli. If there really is no intelligence, and we are simply computers. Then, you are reacting to situations per your programming. This brings up the question of who's doing the programming? But, if no one is, then in some distance part of the universe, is there a world where IBM PCs are just randomly forming and running spreadsheets battling against Apple IIs and Commodores? Because technically, that would be possible.
Edited By Cakedaddy on 1306100099
Arguing the existence of God with some people (Gordon) is impossible because they've closed their minds to it (end of discussion). They don't really base that on anything other than weak arguments (lack of falsifiability or religion if fake). They provide no science to prove God false, just other theories. (you can't prove Him false)
When I said that He tried to prove his existence 2000 years ago, I was of course referring to Christ. There were the miracles and what-not, but those are instantly rejected as fake. Pics or it didn't happen, I guess. It just depends on which version of history you want to believe. The Christians that said He was here and did all that stuff, or the Jews who say He was here, but all of the stuff claimed by Christians was fake. It will be interesting to see what history looks like 2000 years from now when people talk about WWII. Was there really a holocaust, or is it just Jewish ramblings. They recorded what was going on the best way they could back then. Because people choose to reject it now doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.
And even if all of religion is fake and made up. That still doesn't disprove God, or an afterlife.
Was listening to the radio on the way to New York last week. Came across a religious channel and decided to see what they had to say. They just happened to be debating the existence of God. It was a dumb debate as a pastor/minister/whatever was playing the part of the disbeliever, so, whatever. But, they brought up some interesting points. One, they conceded there was a Big Bang. So, they asked what was before the BB? All that mass, crammed together waiting to go Bang, and that matter had existed for an eternity. It just always was. Implying it's acceptable to believe matter just was and always has been. Then they brought up intelligence. Matter is matter. It has no intelligence. It's just stuff. Yet, when you put matter together in a certain way, it suddenly has intelligence. The dandelion knows to grow it's seeds attached to little puffy things so the wind will carry it. Where does that intelligence come from? Because again, matter can not think. It just exists. So that intelligence is being introduced from somewhere. Just two points they were trying to make that I found interesting. Oh ya, the other option for the matter, if it hadn't been around for eternity, was that it blinked into existence simply to go Bang.
Lastly, if you believe Hawkings, then you also must believe that there is no such thing as free will. Something I have argued for many years. I KNOW we talked about this back at OAPI and Gordon and Leisher disagreed. Hawkings said we are simply computers reacting to stimuli. If there really is no intelligence, and we are simply computers. Then, you are reacting to situations per your programming. This brings up the question of who's doing the programming? But, if no one is, then in some distance part of the universe, is there a world where IBM PCs are just randomly forming and running spreadsheets battling against Apple IIs and Commodores? Because technically, that would be possible.
Edited By Cakedaddy on 1306100099
No, I said there is no god because no one can provide me a shred of evidence that it exists. The 'strike me down' stuff was just to give vapors to the True Believers.Cakedaddy wrote:I'm just saying, your argument that there is no God because he won't do what you say, when you say it "Strike you down", is as valid as people saying there is a God because "I believe there is".
Come back when you have some.
The onus of proof is not on me, it is on those saying "god exists because I believe it in my heart to be true." That aint evidence. Please, PLEASE prove me wrong. I fucking dare you.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Holy shit.Cakedaddy wrote:Arguing the existence of God with some people (Gordon) is impossible because they've closed their minds to it (end of discussion).
My mind is completely open, it's just that
THERE
IS
NO
EVIDENCE.
Is this really such a hard concept to understand?
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Cakedaddy wrote:Then they brought up intelligence. Matter is matter. It has no intelligence. It's just stuff. Yet, when you put matter together in a certain way, it suddenly has intelligence. The dandelion knows to grow it's seeds attached to little puffy things so the wind will carry it. Where does that intelligence come from? Because again, matter can not think. It just exists. So that intelligence is being introduced from somewhere. Just two points they were trying to make that I found interesting.
Except it isn't interesting, it is just straight-up lack of understanding how evolution works. But, you don't need to convince me that many, many arguments in support of "intelligent design" are based simply on ignorance of science.
I wonder if there is an "Evolution for Dummies" book. I get tired of saying the same things over and over.
Do y'all need a Praise God and Sunny Jesus subforum so y'all can talk about how eyeballs are just so "irreducibly complex" that they couldn't have possibly evolved naturally, where I won't go and call all of you morons?
Edited By GORDON on 1306107444
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
There's no evidence that you choose to accept or even consider. You chalk it all up to 'fake'. So, like I said, it's impossible to have a discussion with you. You always end up at "You are nuts (or a moron)".
There is lots of proof that MANY of the stories in the bible actually happened. You choose to ignore that. Like I said, "Pics or it didn't happen."
There is lots of proof that MANY of the stories in the bible actually happened. You choose to ignore that. Like I said, "Pics or it didn't happen."
Unless I missed something, the bible isn't god. Please point out where I said nothing in the bible happened so I can stand corrected.Cakedaddy wrote:There's no evidence that you choose to accept or even consider. You chalk it all up to 'fake'. So, like I said, it's impossible to have a discussion with you. You always end up at "You are nuts (or a moron)".
There is lots of proof that MANY of the stories in the bible actually happened. You choose to ignore that. Like I said, "Pics or it didn't happen."
Citation or it never happened.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Evolution for Dummies.
I've never read this particular book, but it couldn't possibly hurt.
Here is an essay I wrote back in 2005, it bears reading again.
This quote jumped out at me: "Now, I figured out years ago that it doesn't accomplish anything to debate people on whether or not God exists, no matter which side you're arguing. You will never convince anyone, ever."
But for me, this is the funnest debate ever, because I can't possibly be proven wrong. Peeps have failed for several to provide evidence that their gods existed, and it aint going to happen today.
I've never read this particular book, but it couldn't possibly hurt.
Here is an essay I wrote back in 2005, it bears reading again.
This quote jumped out at me: "Now, I figured out years ago that it doesn't accomplish anything to debate people on whether or not God exists, no matter which side you're arguing. You will never convince anyone, ever."
But for me, this is the funnest debate ever, because I can't possibly be proven wrong. Peeps have failed for several to provide evidence that their gods existed, and it aint going to happen today.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
You get hostile when this topic comes up. Are you sure you are having fun?!
So you concede that some of the stories happened, but not all of them. And the ones that didn't happen, are the ones that support proof of God. Neither of us can prove or disprove that Christ turned water into wine, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, rose from the dead, etc. Some of us choose to believe that happened, some of us don't. Not much you can do now because God chooses not to be as blatantly in our faces as he once was. He came to us, said "I'm here and here is my son to die for all of your sins. Fresh slate for everyone." And now he leaves it up to you to believe or not.
So really, the only evidence are the stories in the bible. Are they just stories, or historical records?
Also, I'm pretty sure you were the one that made this debate about God. My original reply was challenging Hawkings claim to a lack of an afterlife. God or no God, you still can't prove there's no afterlife. Only evidence to support it that I know of would be the many documented cases of near death or actual death and brought back experiences. Proof of an after life? Of course not. Evidence that there might be something? I think so. But for Hawkings to state the theory (or fact?) that there's no after life. . . well, I guess I need pics now.
So you concede that some of the stories happened, but not all of them. And the ones that didn't happen, are the ones that support proof of God. Neither of us can prove or disprove that Christ turned water into wine, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, rose from the dead, etc. Some of us choose to believe that happened, some of us don't. Not much you can do now because God chooses not to be as blatantly in our faces as he once was. He came to us, said "I'm here and here is my son to die for all of your sins. Fresh slate for everyone." And now he leaves it up to you to believe or not.
So really, the only evidence are the stories in the bible. Are they just stories, or historical records?
Also, I'm pretty sure you were the one that made this debate about God. My original reply was challenging Hawkings claim to a lack of an afterlife. God or no God, you still can't prove there's no afterlife. Only evidence to support it that I know of would be the many documented cases of near death or actual death and brought back experiences. Proof of an after life? Of course not. Evidence that there might be something? I think so. But for Hawkings to state the theory (or fact?) that there's no after life. . . well, I guess I need pics now.
Rereading, my main statement time and again has been, "Theology, psychology, (something else), but not science," because nothing about a supreme being stands up to scientific scrutiny. This is incontrovertible fact, and I have asked anyone to prove me wrong, time and again. Nobody has, because nobody can. God aint science.
And nope, not angry at all, because I'm not wrong. You keep bringing things up I never said... apparently I have now admitted to "some stories in the bible are true." I haven't, in this thread, though I have done several studies and have empirical evidence that a book called "The Bible" does indeed exist, and of several different versions the most common one that is studied (and claimed to have been read) was edited by some government official named "King James." I "concede" that as a historical text it might have some value, in spite of having been edited and censored for thousands of years, and if we are talking about the New Testament (which the Jews do not... are they all wrong, too?), then I think as a philosophical leader, Jesus Christ had a lot of good ideas, many of which I have taught to my son without the religious spin. But do I think Jesus is the offspring of some diety? Nope. But no one has asked me what I thought about Jesus, or the significance of the bible, they are just assuming they know what I think about it.
Your zeal and the way you keep capitalizing pronouns like "He" and "Him" is making me uncomfortable, so I am backing out of this conversation. Another incontrovertible truth is that more blood has been spilled over the existence of gods than for any other reason, and often times it is the peeps who believe in the peaceful and benevolent gods killing the peeps who don't.
Someone else can take over for a while if they are so inclined.
Edited By GORDON on 1306112476
And nope, not angry at all, because I'm not wrong. You keep bringing things up I never said... apparently I have now admitted to "some stories in the bible are true." I haven't, in this thread, though I have done several studies and have empirical evidence that a book called "The Bible" does indeed exist, and of several different versions the most common one that is studied (and claimed to have been read) was edited by some government official named "King James." I "concede" that as a historical text it might have some value, in spite of having been edited and censored for thousands of years, and if we are talking about the New Testament (which the Jews do not... are they all wrong, too?), then I think as a philosophical leader, Jesus Christ had a lot of good ideas, many of which I have taught to my son without the religious spin. But do I think Jesus is the offspring of some diety? Nope. But no one has asked me what I thought about Jesus, or the significance of the bible, they are just assuming they know what I think about it.
Your zeal and the way you keep capitalizing pronouns like "He" and "Him" is making me uncomfortable, so I am backing out of this conversation. Another incontrovertible truth is that more blood has been spilled over the existence of gods than for any other reason, and often times it is the peeps who believe in the peaceful and benevolent gods killing the peeps who don't.
Someone else can take over for a while if they are so inclined.
Edited By GORDON on 1306112476
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
Yeah, that's not a religion. That's just tiny microbes that live in your blood and somehow talk to you with some kind of weird, fucked up hive mentality.Leisher wrote:Whoa! What are you implying?Presumably this includes Jedi at his point.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
"I'm here and here is my son to die for all of your sins. Fresh slate for everyone."
I don't recall asking anyone to die for me or expressing any desire for a slate to be refreshed. I don't recall asking the supreme being to come down/send down an avatar to this particular planet to die for my "sins," which back in the day pretty much meant "anything that isn't kowtowing to your local political/societal authority figure." Shit, that's still the main thrust of Catholicism, the "universal Christianity." You're literally born unclean and evil. On another note, "sin" looks to be positively vital to existing in an intelligent way.
A world without sin is boring as fuck and presumably would stagnate since you can't fucking play everything safe all the time. If you're not pissing off at least someone, your actions probably don't mean much. I'm sure the first time an ancient Greek portrayed Zeus in a theatrical production, there were some priests predicting thunderbolty retribution. When he didn't, they best they could probably do was backpedal with, "Well, Zeus must have a sense of humour or consider it flattery."
Neither of us can prove or disprove that Christ turned water into wine, healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, rose from the dead, etc.
If the creator thinks that's what we needed was a Jew turning H2O to merlot two thousand years ago only to be crucified by the local bureaucrats, I immediately retort with, "Well, the cure for cancer or AIDS or the plague might've made more of a point." You know what would go a long way towards convince me of god's existence? Discovering the cure for Alzheimer's written in old-time Aramaic in the same cave as the Dead Sea scrolls. The same way that a Nostradamus quatrain reading, "On September 11, 2001, a terrorist organization will fly planes into the World Trade Center," would've convinced me he had real prophetic powers.
So really, the only evidence are the stories in the bible. Are they just stories, or historical records?
Are there parts in the Bible that have some trappings of real, provable historical shit? Yeah, no doubt. I fully believe there were two cities that correspond, in some part, to descriptions of Sodom and Gomorrah. I have no doubt that the ancient Hebrews had to wage lots of wars to get/keep their land. When they won, they got to stay there and build up the temple. But like any other society, every now and again someone bigger moves in on the block and kicks your ass.
Let's talk about something else that used to be relegated to the vaults of mythology. I firmly believe there was a city the Athenians called "Troy" and they waged war against its inhabitants. I'm sure as fuck not buying the notion that Athens ultimately went to war with Troy because the gods got in a tiff over the results of a fucking beauty contest.
Only evidence to support it that I know of would be the many documented cases of near death or actual death and brought back experiences. Proof of an after life? Of course not. Evidence that there might be something? I think so.
So, LSD and magic mushrooms are possible proof of something beyond this life? Or perhaps your brain just gets into fucked up states with the proper chemistry. Every near death experience you can find, I can find an acid trip that's just as weird.
Not much you can do now because God chooses not to be as blatantly in our faces as he once was.
Odd how God got fewer and fewer things attributed to him as our understanding of science increased. When Port Royale, the infamous pirate city, was demolished by an earthquake and the resulting tsunami in the late 17th century, it was because its wickedness offended him, specifically the Christian God (I don't recall Buddha taking any credit, but who knows). Did Japan piss off God a few months ago with their constant Shinto worship or did they just happen to live in a tectonically active region of the planet? God's either lazy, schizophrenic, or is incapable of interacting with people on the grand scales he used to. I'm having a hard time believing any of those options if he's really the dude that inspired all the text in the Bible. If you can string all those words together, you understand humanity enough to keep a decent, active relationship going with it. Did the almighty develop stage fright or muteness?
And now that I'm on the Bible, damn near every "law" laid down has an asterisk after it.
"Thou shalt not kill ... well, unless..."
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour ... well, unless..."
"God is everywhere, but if you aren't in this specific type of building at least once a week singing badly-harmonized hymns to him, he gets really pissed at you."
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
That there are some people that actually believe they are Jedi. And they've had kids by now. That means second-generation Jedi, which I think is what makes it a religion.Leisher wrote:Whoa! What are you implying?Presumably this includes Jedi at his point.
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
Your zeal and the way you keep capitalizing pronouns like "He" and "Him" is making me uncomfortable, so I am backing out of this conversation.
This coming from a guy who capitalizes his entire name. . .
I guess God isn't science then. He's not an earthly being and is not bound by earthly rules. So, ya, I guess using science (man's rules) to prove/disprove something that doesn't live by man's rules can be difficult.
But over all, I don't think you really participate in discussions/debates about God and religion. It's seems more like an opportunity for you to mock and ridicule. TPR does the same thing. If there really ever was going to be an honest discussion, the condescending overtones should be left at the door.
I'm much like Leisher when it comes to God/religion. I believe because that's how I was raised and that's what I was taught. But I haven't been to church except for funerals and weddings since some time in the '80's. So, I'm not a die hard Christian. But, for the first time ever, after you brought up God/religion (even though you hate talking about it), I decided to participate in the discussion to see where it would lead. And like I said, it's impossible to have this type of discussion with you because of your attitude. Again, you just want to mock and ridicule. And that's fine. You be you. But don't act like you've been having an honest debate/discussion this whole time.