Fuck religeon. I'll repent on the deathbed, and no fucking sooner.

It's only evil if you believe in good and evil. There may be a God and there may not be one. I don't know. But I'm not going to make one up or believe something someone else wrote in a book thousands of years ago.

If God existed and put us on this planet with no real time proof of his existence then told us that we have to believe or suffer eternal damnation in a fire pit of hell he's a real ass. Seriously, what kind of asshole would do that? We have no way of knowing the truth? Am I to burn in hell for not believing something that is in a book?

The problem with your type is that you are quick to damn me for something that you feel is wrong. What you don't see is that one who has no religion has to come up with what is right and wrong based on logic.

I see no wrong in posting violent imagery on my websites. Yet, I'm ethical to the core and you won't find anyone in this business to dispute that.

The biggest difference between you and myself is that you judge people. Art thou holier than thy?

Would I? I am a pathetic hypocrit. How many times do I need to state that. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand.

I believe in God's existance for a number of reasons, many of which are personal and many of which are based on reason. I have said this before and will say it again. The ONLY alternative explanation of the existance of life and the universe outside of divine intervention is one based on solely chance and chance alone. On one side we have an intelligent CAUSE and on the other side we have blind CHANCE. I don't believe that any rational person can come to the conclusion that chance is the better of these two alternatives.

If I were to write a grant proposal to study the origin of any substance in nature and tried to prove it had no cause, my proposal wouldn't get past the first series of reviews. Nowhere else in science would CHANCE be an acceptible explanation for the existance of something. So why is it the accepted origin of the universe and of life?

Boobmaster,

Why are you trying to understand the origin of the universe. If you accept for a moment that our infantile human brains on this spec of a planet aren't capable of knowing the meaning of the universe than you must either A. Throw in the towel and have a free life with no worries of a God or B. Put a sandwich sign on and spend the rest of your life promoting God's existence because if you think there is a God for God's sake don't take any chances of missing heaven by that inch.

On one hand you have "chance" and the proven fact that all life has in fact evolved... since the age of the planet and the fossil records are not in dispute - only the origin of life is.

On the other hand, you have CHOSEN TO BLINDLY BELIEVE IN THE IDEA OF AN ONMIPRESENT, INVISIBLE AND ALL POWERFUL BEING that shows up out of nowhere who, according the bible was bored (a contradiction) and created everything we know.

That seems like a bizarre choice to some. Just because I don't know the answer to how life began on this planet... doesn't make creating an easy answer, the one correct answer.

Those types of religions are VERY DIFFERENT from the indigenous types found in primitive cultures. You can't use them as evidence because they do not originate as a response to fear and uncertainty in the same way that polytheistic religious systems do. The majority of such systems evolve out of educated societies.

Because our lives are a mere spec of dust on the timeline of eternity. I believe that these questions are the most important ones faced by mankind and I am hopelessly lost in trying to resolve them. Frankly, I don't know how ANYONE could NOT be interested in an answer to such questions.

Are you ignoring my responses? The only reason we have the one God system now is because Abraham was smart enough of think it up. You can't prove that there isn't this one God out there any more than you can prove there is. Then Jesus comes along and says, "Hey, look at the potential market size out there with the non-Jews". He realized that if he told everyone else they could have the same God he could scoop that market up. Then Muhammed comes along. He says, "hey Jesus didn't get to the Arab market so that can be all mine".

What do Abraham, Jesus and Muhammed have in common? They were the first and last people to bring the one God formula to their respective markets.

it seems to me that everyone who has replied in this thread has found an answer they are happy and content with... just as you have.

Nowhere else in science would CHANCE be an acceptible explanation for the existance of something. So why is it the accepted origin of the universe and of life?
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Science is the only thing we have and it is consistent.

So, why not ask . . . if science fails you (and your religious beliefs) when it comes to things so very important as the origin of the universe and life, why trust it for anything?

You seem like you want to pick and choose beliefs as they suit your needs.

We should start burning those damn math and science books otherwise others might start to wonder . . .

I'm done with this thread. Boobmaster, this is the only topic that would have gotten me to have a conversation with you.

You need to get your facts straight about evolution. Microevolution is not in dispute. There is abundant evidence that species evolve. However, there is not a single shred of verifiable evidence for macroevolution, i.e., the idea that all species evolved from a single cell over many billions of years. And the origin of that first, simple cell needs to be explained before one can even begin to accept the theory behind its evolution. Each and every attempt to find our primordial ancestor in 'the biotic soup' has been an embarrassing and complete failure.

As you keep telling everyone. However this is not proof of anything except that you paid your tuition and attended class. (unless you got one of those mail-order/internet PhDs) Any moron can get a PhD behind his name. Countless do. The fact that they give out PhDs for religious studies demonstrates the worthlessness of a title. Any moron can commit the 'right answers' to memory and then parrot them back. A teaching position in texas is not something to brag about. :2 cents:

that highlights the silliness of your arguments and beliefs.

conversly, do the origins of the Bible need to be revealed or proven in anyway before you chose to believe in God? no. because as you obviously know.. the origins of the bible are unclear, not the mention the fact that it has been translated and rewritten countless times.... yet you accept the Bible as a record which cannot be proven over the arguments of science which as you just said yourself can at least be partially proven.

As i have said.. you have chosen to believe on argument and chosen not to believe another. Don't play them off as fact or as if one is better than the other. its a personal choice. nothing more.

. double post.

I'm not sure I understand. Please explain. Thanks!

I realize I'm not your favorite person on GFY but I respect your views on this topic.

You are an extremely mean spirited person. Please take note of the fact that I have not choosen to treat you in the same manner. The only reason I mentioned my credentials was to combat your assertion that only stupid people believe in god. Having a PhD is generally not evidence of stupidity. You are quite correct in stating that anyone can get an advanced degree through a 'degree mill', but degree mills are easy to identify. My degree, which BTW is not in religious studies, is from a reputable institution (University of Texas) that does not sell them or give them away to anyone. You are still free to think of me as an idiot if you like.

Evolution is a scientific theory put forth by scientists. As a scientific theory, in order for it to be maintained, it needs to be supported by empirical scientific data. There is much empirical evidence supporting microevolution. There is none which supports macroevolution. Religion is a system of faith and is not subjected to the same standards. Nowhere in this thread do I claim that the existance of God is supported through empirical data. It is a question of faith. I believe he exists.

I will return to this thread after Mr. Kerry's speech.

" 'Have faith' in the Christian sense, means 'make yourself believe that there is a god without regard to evidence.' Christian faith is a habit of flouting reason in forming and maintaining one's answer to the question whether there is a god."

- Richard Robinson

Quoted for truth

You understand little of science if you think it is also not a system of faith... instead of..."theory" - a beleif in an idea which has yet to be proven is the foundation of any science. It's how we learn... it's a belief that is put forth and subject to the scrutiny of the scientific world. We knew atoms existed long before it could be proven. Just like black holes and a gazillion other things that exist on this planet and in the universe that we cannot see, touch, feel or smell.

Science can offer evidence to support its views. Religionists can only offer the bible, blind faith and circumstantial evidence all coupled with denial.

I never said that science and faith were mutually exclusive. I agree with your logic (you express yourself quite well). However, God (or our conception of God), unlike the atom, transcends the universe. As a result, it is not available for science, which is primarily concerned with explaining phenomena within the universe.

w0rd

But it does not combat that assertion.
This is exactly what I mean about lacking sophisticated critical thinking skills.
You made a leap of faith by connecting a diploma to superior intelligence.
The arguement doesn't work because you can have either without the other.
There is no dependent relationship. You see a connection where there is none.
This sort of flawed reasoning is why you see evidence where there is none.


You may call it "mean spirited" . . .
but, without being mercilessly critical, it's easy to give in to comfy delusions.

i think you right i got 1 sell today .. maybe its from god

hey yah all... vist this one here

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

If God exists why 2pac didnt return as it was supposed to? Is God racist or what?

To get an advanced degree, one must write a thesis. To write a thesis, one generally needs to have intelligence. It is usually assumed that a person with an advanced degree is an intelligent person. Intelligent people can believe in God. My personal belief in God is not based on reason. It is based on faith, and it is not contradicted by reason.

You'll never find him that way.

Nothing more amusing than a 'believer' trying to argue theological points when he has no real clue about the subject. Please don't let this stop too soon it's very entertaining :)

are you saying that your heart is an apartment complex?

amen brother

I love it how you idiots post shit saying I that don't know what I'm talking about without ever citing a specific case. Put your money where your VERY LOUD mouths are. Tell me where I am in error and correct me. If you're not prepared to at least ATTEMPT to do that, then STFU. Your hostility is due to the fact that YOU DON'T LIKE THE MESSAGE

a lottta proof there!

Yes, it proves that witty people with a lot of time on their hands can sit down and come up with lots of cute little examples of bullsit philosophical proofs and then post them on the internet for people to laugh at.

I think that if you could prove the existence of God, then there would be much less "faith" based religion.

You can sort of prove the existence of the concept of "good and evil" by the very contrast between the too. And since it's relative, replace "good" with a mountaintop and "evil" with a deep valley. Now you can see the contrast/difference between them.
If things were all level, they each cease to exist.
Light and darkness, good and evil, highs and lows, black and white. The differences are what gives perspective.

Its an interesting topic, but the very question "does god exist?" tends to answer itself I think. Once you're questioning, then theres going to be perspectives both ways of neutral. If you think so, then yes. If you dont, then no.

boobmaster, please show us show real proof that "god" exists. do you have photos of "god"? why didnt he/she videotape themself writing a new bible? if this "god" really wanted humans to worship him/her then why wouldnt "god" show himself/herself? do you really think your "god" gives a fuck about humans when he/she watches thousands of people die each day from starvation, disease and murder? why didnt "god" stop the people from burning the cat on CJ? :1orglaugh


we want real proof. dont quote shit from some 2000 year old book.

I believe in him too...so what?