Existance of God argument+vid - Page 3

Kryptic · 08-22-2008, 06:02 AM

last time i made a thread like this.

It got locked within 3 minutes...

Evolution.

Remember that... Everyone is biased. EVERYONE.

Oh wow. He tried to use the bible as evidence ?

I guess that means that any book or scripture is real and should be taken 100% literaly.

ChaoticMercy · 08-22-2008, 08:27 AM

I agree with Colby. Although i DO believe in God. The main point here is that. No one has the right or knowledge to claim that there actually is no God. For all WE know. Gorillas made the world. And Zebras are our fathers. Us as humans think we know so much when there are still trillions of unanswered questions, when this is suppose to be OUR world. We know nothing.

And if believing in God makes me ignorant then so be it =]

manofsparrow · 08-22-2008, 09:04 AM

It's more about how specific religions are about God.

Christianity says there's a God, and then it says what God likes, what he wants, what he wants us all to do, and tries to give a detailed explanation for the creation of the world, and tries to predict the future.

STM1993 · 08-22-2008, 09:33 AM

I can see some flaws in the argument which contradict it, though it is pretty well said and I applaud his effort.

You see, everyone is biased. There is no one who is absolutely neutral, because everyone has their own different view point. Even this post I make here, can be biased, just that it is seen by most people as "neutral" and therefore people would say this post is "neutral".

Secondly, evolution and God. He said that God's creation is all around us. Yes, I can agree with this, but it is possible that evolution is also all around us. I mean, don't the animals eventually change and learn when they encounter a problem and they happen to survive it through? For example, a rat eating a rat poison. Normally, this poison can kill it, but it somehow miraculously survives. The body will in a way learn how to cope with this poison, and eventually, the rat and possibly the future offspring of the rat may also become immune to this poison. This is basically a bit of evolution at work already, because the animal is slowly changing to become a possibly different animal as a result of adapting into a different environment.

I can also say, from all this, that God made life in such a way that living things know how to learn to adapt and their bodies will change in a way to suit the environment, and if their adaptations were to change greatly over a long period of time, they can actually evolve to become a new type of animal.

This is all theory, we can't really prove it right or wrong. Like he said, evidence does not prove something to be definitely true, but can be used to analyze a possibility of something to be true. However, I'd like to add on that whether an evidence is seen as reliable or not, is also based purely on personal opinions and estimation.

The reason why there are facts is because something is proven many times and the result has always been, generally, the same, and so we infer that what we have estimated is correct based on our results and our personal opinions. But usually, this kind of facts can be proven wrong overtime if evidence (that we can now analyze) arise. For example, fingerprints. Originally, people would say they look same and therefore infer that all fingerprints are the same, becomes widely accepted and it becomes a fact. However, overtime, scientists have discovered that fingerprints are actually, in fact, different for every single person, as they have learned how to analyze this piece of information.

A fact may also arise if such evidences are confirmed by the subject of experiment themselves (Eg: A criminal admits honestly that he commits a crime and confirms the evidence. This proves that all relevant evidences against him is confirmed to be true.). Though we can't possible ask the the air: "Hey, does Brownian motion really happen?" and criminals may lie, so we use experiments and make inferences which, if are consistent, become facts (as said in the paragraph above).

If you are a Christian, you experience God, and you'd see it as truth. If you're a non-believer, the same thing happens, but maybe you brush it off and see it as another thing or you take time to ponder whether God is true or not. See, it is all opinion, but we cannot prove who is right and who is wrong.

Those are a few things I'd like to point out.

manofsparrow · 08-22-2008, 09:58 AM

So... can you really write "Batman was here" on a piece of paper and use it as evidence in court to tell everyone that Batman was here?

Quote:

If you are a Christian, you experience God, and you'd see it as truth. If you're a non-believer, the same thing happens, but maybe you brush it off and see it as another thing or you take time to ponder whether God is true or not. See, it is all opinion, but we cannot prove who is right and who is wrong.

Nice job on making Christianity the only theistic religion in the world.

STM1993 · 08-22-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manofsparrow

So... can you really write "Batman was here" on a piece of paper and use it as evidence in court to tell everyone that Batman was here?

No, because it is already known and confirmed 100% that Batman is a fictitious character by Marvel and references may be coincidental.

Quote:

Originally Posted by manofsparrow

Nice job on making Christianity the only theistic religion in the world.

Meh, that's just one example. I know I'm a pretty biased towards Christianity and I'm just going with what the topic is mainly about. Of course there are other theistic religions around like Islam, but I don't really know much about it.

Admiral Awesome (115 votes) · 08-22-2008, 03:17 PM

What I gathered as the flaw was he seems to have given Evidence two definitions, one being not proof and the other being solid proof. I didn't actually watch the whole thing as Ive heard both sides of the story and similar arguments to that hundreds of millions of times(exaggeration). The thing he is right about however is we can't prove one way or another what is the truth right now.

Semi-Off Topic:

"Something can't come from nothing, so what made that?"
"Well if God was there first, then what created God?"

Both arguments are stuck in a deadlock as neither can actually disprove the other.

My point, this argument(God or no God) is senseless right now.

Colby · 08-22-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admiral Awesome (115 votes)

What I gathered as the flaw was he seems to have given Evidence two definitions, one being not proof and the other being solid proof. I didn't actually watch the whole thing as Ive heard both sides of the story and similar arguments to that hundreds of millions of times(exaggeration). The thing he is right about however is we can't prove one way or another what is the truth right now.

Semi-Off Topic:

"Something can't come from nothing, so what made that?"
"Well if God was there first, then what created God?"

Both arguments are stuck in a deadlock as neither can actually disprove the other.

My point, this argument(God or no God) is senseless right now.

Exactly, looking at it simplistically, we don't know nor can we possibly know what is true.

Grey · 08-22-2008, 07:45 PM

The law of conservation of matter states that matter can't be created or destroyed, and it stays constant. How do people "create" things? They simply change what they already have. A man can "create" a tool from a stick, but not from nothing.

And since no matter can be created, all the matter in the universe has always existed. There is no creator.

Colby · 08-22-2008, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grey

The law of conservation of matter states that matter can't be created or destroyed, and it stays constant. How do people "create" things? They simply change what they already have. A man can "create" a tool from a stick, but not from nothing.

And since no matter can be created, all the matter in the universe has always existed. There is no creator.

To our knowledge, but we've been through countless generations of scientists who were wrong, laws don't really mean anything because some are as loosely based on assumptions as some God theories are.

manofsparrow · 08-22-2008, 11:05 PM

Maybe Time doesn't have a beginning?

slingblader · 08-23-2008, 12:07 AM

Err, ok.

"Evidence is basically worthless! I mean, it's just worthless and non-binding possibilities. Now, would you like my evidence?"

How truly deep and powerful this child is! And wtf. Our existence in no way even remotely points to a god. Go home.

Oh wow! People have bias to their own ideals. Somebody better get this kid a movie deal, he's got it on lock.

I think my IQ just dropped 20 points.

**Paul** · 08-23-2008, 08:45 PM

Just some uppity, self-righteous douche bag who thinks he's spreading some type of holy light amongst the cretans of the world. Jerk me the **** off please.

I'm not even going to get started on this guy because I wouldn't know where to begin or where to end, but he has a warped definition of "biased"(especially for someone who would clearly never consider the possibility of God not existing), and he makes the term "evidence" far too technical. The court of law only considers strong supportive evidence to be evidence. Poor evidence can surely still be called "evidence", but after being revealed as nonsensical bull ****, it usually doesn't even earn that title. Evidence is generally associated with "proof" or strong evidence, which is what an atheist would most certainly assume would be the case if such a question was presented to them.

08-22-2008, 06:02 AM	#31 (permalink)
Kryptic Gunzfactorian Veteran Hero Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Scotland Posts: 4,002	Re: Existance of God argument+vid last time i made a thread like this. It got locked within 3 minutes... Evolution. Remember that... Everyone is biased. EVERYONE. Oh wow. He tried to use the bible as evidence ? I guess that means that any book or scripture is real and should be taken 100% literaly. Last edited by Kryptic; 08-22-2008 at 06:07 AM.

08-22-2008, 08:27 AM	#32 (permalink)
ChaoticMercy Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 14 ChaoticMercy's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid I agree with Colby. Although i DO believe in God. The main point here is that. No one has the right or knowledge to claim that there actually is no God. For all WE know. Gorillas made the world. And Zebras are our fathers. Us as humans think we know so much when there are still trillions of unanswered questions, when this is suppose to be OUR world. We know nothing. And if believing in God makes me ignorant then so be it =]

08-22-2008, 09:04 AM	#33 (permalink)
manofsparrow Gunzfactorian Commando Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,682 manofsparrow's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid It's more about how specific religions are about God. Christianity says there's a God, and then it says what God likes, what he wants, what he wants us all to do, and tries to give a detailed explanation for the creation of the world, and tries to predict the future.

08-22-2008, 09:33 AM	#34 (permalink)
STM1993 Gunzfactorian Guardian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,144	Re: Existance of God argument+vid I can see some flaws in the argument which contradict it, though it is pretty well said and I applaud his effort. You see, everyone is biased. There is no one who is absolutely neutral, because everyone has their own different view point. Even this post I make here, can be biased, just that it is seen by most people as "neutral" and therefore people would say this post is "neutral". Secondly, evolution and God. He said that God's creation is all around us. Yes, I can agree with this, but it is possible that evolution is also all around us. I mean, don't the animals eventually change and learn when they encounter a problem and they happen to survive it through? For example, a rat eating a rat poison. Normally, this poison can kill it, but it somehow miraculously survives. The body will in a way learn how to cope with this poison, and eventually, the rat and possibly the future offspring of the rat may also become immune to this poison. This is basically a bit of evolution at work already, because the animal is slowly changing to become a possibly different animal as a result of adapting into a different environment. I can also say, from all this, that God made life in such a way that living things know how to learn to adapt and their bodies will change in a way to suit the environment, and if their adaptations were to change greatly over a long period of time, they can actually evolve to become a new type of animal. This is all theory, we can't really prove it right or wrong. Like he said, evidence does not prove something to be definitely true, but can be used to analyze a possibility of something to be true. However, I'd like to add on that whether an evidence is seen as reliable or not, is also based purely on personal opinions and estimation. The reason why there are facts is because something is proven many times and the result has always been, generally, the same, and so we infer that what we have estimated is correct based on our results and our personal opinions. But usually, this kind of facts can be proven wrong overtime if evidence (that we can now analyze) arise. For example, fingerprints. Originally, people would say they look same and therefore infer that all fingerprints are the same, becomes widely accepted and it becomes a fact. However, overtime, scientists have discovered that fingerprints are actually, in fact, different for every single person, as they have learned how to analyze this piece of information. A fact may also arise if such evidences are confirmed by the subject of experiment themselves (Eg: A criminal admits honestly that he commits a crime and confirms the evidence. This proves that all relevant evidences against him is confirmed to be true.). Though we can't possible ask the the air: "Hey, does Brownian motion really happen?" and criminals may lie, so we use experiments and make inferences which, if are consistent, become facts (as said in the paragraph above). If you are a Christian, you experience God, and you'd see it as truth. If you're a non-believer, the same thing happens, but maybe you brush it off and see it as another thing or you take time to ponder whether God is true or not. See, it is all opinion, but we cannot prove who is right and who is wrong. Those are a few things I'd like to point out. __________________ ~Spy_The_Man1993~ I'm leaving GunZ, forever. Last edited by STM1993; 08-22-2008 at 09:40 AM.

08-22-2008, 03:17 PM	#37 (permalink)
Admiral Awesome (115 votes) Gunzfactorian Commando Tournaments Won: 1 Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 2,327 Admiral Awesome (115 votes)'s GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid What I gathered as the flaw was he seems to have given Evidence two definitions, one being not proof and the other being solid proof. I didn't actually watch the whole thing as Ive heard both sides of the story and similar arguments to that hundreds of millions of times(exaggeration). The thing he is right about however is we can't prove one way or another what is the truth right now. Semi-Off Topic: "Something can't come from nothing, so what made that?" "Well if God was there first, then what created God?" Both arguments are stuck in a deadlock as neither can actually disprove the other. My point, this argument(God or no God) is senseless right now. __________________ Give me or give me death! GunZ: ^1Sparta - N/A - 2x \| Belgianboy - N/A - 67 S4 League: Admiral - N/A - ? GMS: AdmAwesome (F/P) - Hypnotiq - 5x

08-22-2008, 07:45 PM	#39 (permalink)
Grey Newbie Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 4 Grey's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid The law of conservation of matter states that matter can't be created or destroyed, and it stays constant. How do people "create" things? They simply change what they already have. A man can "create" a tool from a stick, but not from nothing. And since no matter can be created, all the matter in the universe has always existed. There is no creator.

08-22-2008, 11:05 PM	#41 (permalink)
manofsparrow Gunzfactorian Commando Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,682 manofsparrow's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid Maybe Time doesn't have a beginning?

08-23-2008, 12:07 AM	#42 (permalink)
slingblader Gunzfactorian Guardian Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 1,316 slingblader's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid Err, ok. "Evidence is basically worthless! I mean, it's just worthless and non-binding possibilities. Now, would you like my evidence?" How truly deep and powerful this child is! And wtf. Our existence in no way even remotely points to a god. Go home. Oh wow! People have bias to their own ideals. Somebody better get this kid a movie deal, he's got it on lock. I think my IQ just dropped 20 points. __________________ Click or it'll die! Then your families shall fall peril.

08-23-2008, 08:45 PM	#43 (permalink)
Paul The One and Only Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Pennsylvania. Posts: 2,264 Paul's GamerBio	Re: Existance of God argument+vid Just some uppity, self-righteous douche bag who thinks he's spreading some type of holy light amongst the cretans of the world. Jerk me the ** off please. I'm not even going to get started on this guy because I wouldn't know where to begin or where to end, but he has a warped definition of "biased"(especially for someone who would clearly never consider the possibility of God not existing), and he makes the term "evidence" far too technical. The court of law only considers strong supportive evidence to be evidence. Poor evidence can surely still be called "evidence", but after being revealed as nonsensical bull **, it usually doesn't even earn that title. Evidence is generally associated with "proof" or strong evidence, which is what an atheist would most certainly assume would be the case if such a question was presented to them. __________________