On the Existence of "God"

[Guest]

Is there sex in Heaven? I mean for pleasure,not reproduction…To me,thats one of the greatest things about being alive…I cant imagine eternal life with no pussy…I would rather go to Hell if this is true…

[DeviantScripter]

Was that really a neccessary comment? Seems a little inappropriate…. :(

[Guest]

not so much innappropriate as out of place

[dIfrenT]

Quote:
… Religion is a system of works. Since a philosophy is a “system of values adopted by an individual, group, etc.” (New International Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary of the English Language) or “the general laws that furnish the rational explanation of anything” (same Dictionary) Hinduism could be considered either one. Semantics.

Call it semantics, then let me call it faith-arrogance .
Why does Christianity qualify as a religion, whereas Hinduism doesn’t?
(And i don’t really get what you mean by “system of works”)

A “system of works” is the things people do to achieve something. In this case it is the things they do to reach either heaven or the highest spiritual state, like nirvana. So in a non-spiritual sense, you could compare it to a businessman doing things to reach the top of the ladder. I’m sorry if I implied that Hinduism doesn’t qualify, but frankly I don’t see how you inferred that from my statement. It is a religion.

At least the ones who do believe in God have the humbleness to admit that they can’t be sure he’s out there, but it’s safer to side with believing in a God than not.

Excuse me as I make myself an exception. I am ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that there is a God. This is where I differentiate between faith and science. Faith is where my convictions lead me to be sure that there is a God. Science also brings me to this conclusion, but I can’t scientifically prove it. I know that’s confusing. I’ll try to explain it better later if I can, but right now I can’t find a better way to put it. Science can just as easily be taken to point toward evolution, but there are infinite ways to explain away its discrepancies (did I spell that right?), and more keep coming up.
So call me prideful and arrogant, but I KNOW that there is a God.

I know I just opened up another whole can of worms, but oh well. I guess Janus and I could be called the “extremes” of both sides. :) Although maybe Janus won’t want to have anything in common with me. :wink:

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” (I Corinthians 1:18, King James Version)

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do engender strifes.” (II Timothy 2:23, KJV)

[Janus]

not at all difrent, youve just made my statement seem valid. you KNOW there is a god, i KNOW that you are wrong, and there is no god. :). unfortunately, i can see the pro-god side on a few issues, but i refuse to play devils advocate in this case

[NatFedMike]

dont mean to butt in but, it seems quite logical to express your veiws on a God/Religon but trying to convert others and trying to prove others wrong has no point to it.

This topic is one based on Faith, and Faith for most does not need proof or logic to it its just there.

the only way your gonna conver people who have solid beleifs is to either/kill them or force them to shut up or just brainwash their children, otherwise this topic is pointless

my 2 cents :)

[Janus]

well, in that regard, you could consider most topics pointless. but im not trying to convert anyone, im perfectly happy to let you wallow in your ignorance. :)

[DeviantScripter]

@Janus:

well, in that regard, you could consider most topics pointless. but im not trying to convert anyone, im perfectly happy to let you wallow in your ignorance. :)

As we are with you… :wink:

[Janus]

haha, touche DS

[cystic crypt]

@NatFedMike:

dont mean to butt in but, it seems quite logical to express your veiws on a God/Religon but trying to convert others and trying to prove others wrong has no point to it.

This topic is one based on Faith, and Faith for most does not need proof or logic to it its just there.

the only way your gonna conver people who have solid beleifs is to either/kill them or force them to shut up or just brainwash their children, otherwise this topic is pointless

my 2 cents :)

Butt in any time (and welcome to the forums).

It’s interesting. The two “extreme” sides - D:S/Me and Janus are working off of faith. We have faith that God has given us that God exists (not only that, but wants to have a relationship with us). Janus has a considerable amount of Faith that God does not exist. I think we’ve done an adequate job of explaining the source of that faith - if not using science to “prove” that which can’t be proven.
At the same time, Janus, does your faith come from a vacuum? If not, then which influence in your ideology generated it? Or is it something that you feel? And how do you feel it - like gravity? Like love (or the opposite . . . apathy)? Like the rest of us feel God?

[Guest]

@cystic:

… We have faith that God has given us that God exists (not only that, but wants to have a relationship with us). Janus has a considerable amount of Faith that God does not exist. …
At the same time, Janus, does your faith come from a vacuum? If not, then which influence in your ideology generated it? Or is it something that you feel? And how do you feel it - like gravity? Like love (or the opposite . . . apathy)? Like the rest of us feel God?

looks, sees the rethoric tripwire, decides not to step on it :)

@dIfrent:

I’m sorry if I implied that Hinduism doesn’t qualify, but frankly I don’t see how you inferred that from my statement. It is a religion.

Oh just because you said
@an:

It’s not the same God. Jesus Christ is God, and reincarnation is a wrong philosophy.

[cystic crypt]

@F_alk:

@cystic:

… We have faith that God has given us that God exists (not only that, but wants to have a relationship with us). Janus has a considerable amount of Faith that God does not exist. …
At the same time, Janus, does your faith come from a vacuum? If not, then which influence in your ideology generated it? Or is it something that you feel? And how do you feel it - like gravity? Like love (or the opposite . . . apathy)? Like the rest of us feel God?

looks, sees the rethoric tripwire, decides not to step on it :)

awwwww?!?!?!
et tu F_alk?
that was too much fun.

[Janus]

you are asking CC where i get the idea that god does not exist? like someone else on here posted (im too lazy to look for who) i used to in fact go to church, but one day i woke up (not literally one individual day) and realized the fallacy in believing in god. i rationalized (for myself at least) that there could not logically exist a god. and let me just say, i apologize if i have come off as hostile towards those who believe in god. partially its me having a good time mocking you, and partially its because i sometimes get a little worked up over these things (especially when i know when you idiots are wrong :) ) on that note, has anyone here seen Devil’s Advocate? i think satan (al pacino) gives an interesting description of god (a sadist, among other things). (Janus takes a step back, looks at the world for a moment) given the circumstances, i would say the description, if god is real, would be an accurate portrayal.

[ctm]

@Janus:

you are asking CC where i get the idea that god does not exist? like someone else on here posted (im too lazy to look for who) i used to in fact go to church, but one day i woke up (not literally one individual day) and realized the fallacy in believing in god. i rationalized (for myself at least) that there could not logically exist a god. and let me just say, i apologize if i have come off as hostile towards those who believe in god. partially its me having a good time mocking you, and partially its because i sometimes get a little worked up over these things (especially when i know when you idiots are wrong :) ) on that note, has anyone here seen Devil’s Advocate? i think satan (al pacino) gives an interesting description of god (a sadist, among other things). (Janus takes a step back, looks at the world for a moment) given the circumstances, i would say the description, if god is real, would be an accurate portrayal.

That was me 8) ! (the poster you’re referring to)

I haven’t seen the Devil’s Advocate in awhile, but I did find the quote you mentioned. “Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He’s a prankster. Think about it. He gives man INSTINCTS! He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It’s the goof of all time. Look but don’t touch. Touch, but don’t taste! Taste, don’t swallow. Ahaha! And when you’re jumpin’ from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He’s laughin’ His sick, f*&%'n ass off. He’s a tight-ass! He’s a sadist! He’s an absentee landlord. Worship THAT? NEVER!”

[EmuGod]

@Janus:

First, I would like to apologize. If this thread offends anyone, I am truly sorry. While your belief in God makes you completely wrong, you have a right to wallow in your own ignorance. Second, I have so much to say on the subject, that I am most likely not going to have organized thoughts, and anything I do say will be immensely incomplete. Third, everything I am saying is coming straight from my head. I have no reference material, I am not quoting anything, and I am not being fed lines. Fourth and finally, I will try to pose questions about the very existence of God. I will make efforts not to ask the same, tired questions, (what is the meaning of life, why do bad things happen to good people, etc) I am not trying to win an argument simply by posing rudimentary questions that cannot be cogently answered, and therefore convey a sense of victory upon me, I am posing actual questions I have, which I am curious as to the religious opinion on the subject. If I think the question is not the kind you could realistically answer, I will say so.

How can anyone belief in so foolish a concept as a divine being? The very thought that there could be one omnipotent creature is absurd. Before I challenge the existence though, let me submit two possibilities for the existence of this “God”. First, the Big Bang (prevailing theory about the creation of the Universe) created all that is, and ever was. Our galaxy and everything in it, along with all other cosmic entities. Perhaps “God” is no more than some entity created by the Big Bang, which is greater in some way than we. Either it is much larger, or has superior traits, etc. Surely, to some insect or microorganism, Humans must appear as “gods”, we have the ability to rule their entire lives. Second, “God” is a being more advanced than ourselves in some way, but is then one of a race of “gods” who are the “humans” to an even higher group of “gods”, something like the theory that we are all just part of a much larger universe. These are only two possible theories, and there are many, many more.
The very nature of “god” as it is described seems fundamentally flawed. I doubt highly that anything could just “be”. that is to say, how could there be one omnipotent being that always was, always will be, and that created everything? What created it? or where did it originate from? How could it just exist? and if it created everything, what was there before it created everything? Was it just there? These are some pretty deep questions mind you, I dont expect any real answers, I am simply postulating questions. Mind you, the Big Bang theory postulates a singulartity being present before existence as well, but the idea of energy existing before existence is more agreeable to me than some tangible, omnipotent being.
Religion is where I find the greatest flaws in the belief in a divine being. The plethora of dogmas in existence leave me dumbfounded and sometimes speechless when I really think about them. For example, you have christianity. Within that, there is Catholocism, Orthodox, and Protestant. Under protestant, there are too many denominations to go into. All of these denominations of Christianity all believe in the divinity of Christ, but disagree on the finer points. Some are legitametly different denominations, but others, like Episcopalian to Catholic are basically identical. In cases like these, the difference is more political than over the dogma.
I think almost all of us have heard an argument over religion and the existence of God, where the different religions are brought up, and existence is challenged over differences. Many times, this is counterpointed by a statement something like “God is universal, we believe differently in the same being” or something like that. Now i have a problem with that. That is first of all, too easy. That seems to be oversimplfying things, and is way too conveniant. That would suggest automatically a monotheism. What about polytheistic believers? Does that include them? What about theories of the afterlife? Each religion has its own belief about life (or lackthereof) after death, be it a purgatory-esque existence, heaven, hell, reincarnation, etc. How could it be the same God, if christians believe in Heaven and Hell, and Hindus believe in reincarnation?

Thats all for now, I will post more later

I’m a Jew, it’s from my religion that Xianity and Islam developed. The existence of G-d is rational and is based on mathematical probability. The more complex something becomes and the more original that thing is, the less likely it is to have formed from random chance. For example, if I told you that a perfect Shakespearian sonnet was re-written by rain drops that fell on a typewriter and by animals running over that typewriter, would you believe me? You’d have to be pretty dense to believe some story like that, because the sonnet is just too complex and too original for it to have come from something so random. So, what about the universe? It is even more complex than a sonnet and even more original. Can you honestly say to yourself that it came from a series of random events that if one of them would not have occurred, the whole thing would not have happened? The more likely situation is that these events that created the universe were forced to happen. The probability of all the events occurring just the way the scientists describe until the modern day are so low that mathematically it is considered impossible. I’ll post more on the subject later.

[cystic crypt]

cute EG,
but i’d submit that Islam did not develop from Judaism anymore than Judaism developed from Islam (Ishmael was the older brother . . . ). W.R.T. Christianity - Jesus said “salvation comes from the Jews” . . . so you may have a point there :)

[EmuGod]

@cystic:

cute EG,
but i’d submit that Islam did not develop from Judaism anymore than Judaism developed from Islam (Ishmael was the older brother . . . ). W.R.T. Christianity - Jesus said “salvation comes from the Jews” . . . so you may have a point there :)

Actually, Jews had been living in Arabia since biblical times. Mohammed was a trader and learned about monotheism through his dealings with Jews in Palestine and Syria. He presented his new religion to the Jews of Medina and other villages because he thought Islam had enough in common with Judaism that they would accept it. Whe nthe Jews refused to accept Islam, he started a war and kicked all the Jews out of Arabia. At one point he invaded a Jewish village, killed all the men and took the women and children as slaves. Structurally Islam and Judaism have much more in common than Judaism and Xianity, and no one can deny that Xianity is somewhat based on Judaism.

[Guest]

excellent points emugod, but god is not the only explanation for what “forced” the creation of the universe. also, i will again pose this question. if the universe is so big and complex that god had to have created it, where exactly did god come from? i think that even on the offchance god does exist, it is fallcy to believe it created the universe. if god does exist, i would think that instead, it had been created by the universe, or with the universe.

[Janus]

sorry, that last post was me, forgot to log in

[Guest]

@EmuGod:

The existence of G-d is rational and is based on mathematical probability. The more complex something becomes and the more original that thing is, the less likely it is to have formed from random chance. For example, if I told you that a perfect Shakespearian sonnet was re-written by rain drops that fell on a typewriter and by animals running over that typewriter, would you believe me? … So, what about the universe? It is even more complex than a sonnet and even more original. Can you honestly say to yourself that it came from a series of random events that if one of them would not have occurred, the whole thing would not have happened? The more likely situation is that these events that created the universe were forced to happen. The probability of all the events occurring just the way the scientists describe until the modern day are so low that mathematically it is considered impossible. I’ll post more on the subject later.

I guess you miss one point here.

You assume all things have the same probability (like the typewriter example). But, they have not. If you put, say Hydrogen and Oxygen close to each other, then you have a finite chance that they will merge. If they merge, this rapidly increases the chance for other reactions of that type to happen. On the other hand, once merged the chance for them to split is much lower, and once one splits that doesnn’t have any influence at all on the others.

Some processes in nature happen more often than others, this is something you didn’t take into account for your mathematical/statistical argument…
Something very simple: There is a finite chance in every moment of your life that you die. Actually, this chance is highly dependant from your surroundings and also increasing with time. But, on the other hand, once your are dead, the chance for you to become alive again is extremely close to zero, such close that we can take it as zero.

See what i mean when i say your argument is flawed?