Re: The God of Logic
True, but it cuts both ways. Not seeing God or not believing in God not mean He does not exist.
True, but it cuts both ways. Not seeing God or not believing in God not mean He does not exist.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
god does not exist
- Thread starter kongkek
- Start date
Re: The God of Logic
Of course, I say it with due respect. We are all adults and academics. We all know Santa and the elves don't exist but we don't begrudge our children to believe in them on that one day. At least we can agree, jesus may not have been born on that day...
Of course, I say it with due respect. We are all adults and academics. We all know Santa and the elves don't exist but we don't begrudge our children to believe in them on that one day. At least we can agree, jesus may not have been born on that day...
Re: The God of Logic
Are you saying that as adults (sorry I am not academia) we should no longer believe in God because it is for children, just like Santa and elves?
Yes, the exact birthdate of Jesus may be arguable, but the existence of Jesus is not, though it is highly amusing that some atheists even believe that Jesus never existed.
Are you saying that as adults (sorry I am not academia) we should no longer believe in God because it is for children, just like Santa and elves?
Yes, the exact birthdate of Jesus may be arguable, but the existence of Jesus is not, though it is highly amusing that some atheists even believe that Jesus never existed.
Re: The God of Logic
You see Frodo, I have no problems with people believing in belief. My only question is why, if one does not? You speak of a big picture which doesn’t exist for everyone.
If there is no god (for this example we will assume) – the world still keeps spinning, the market still moves, people go about their everyday lives anyway…what actually is the purpose of praying or having a god. If I told you, I do not need god in my life and in fact many do not, would you believe me?
I previously worked in a Catholic dominated country, every day I see their faith so strong. Now, if you don’t even have $1 a day – I can understand why these people think they need god. Praying for a better tomorrow perhaps. Someone facing the gallows, or worse, death – I can see why they may need a god. But not everyone is like that. There are people who believe, when you die – you just die.
And we link all sort of coincidences to god (more so if science cannot explain). Almost everything Science cannot explains goes to his credit anyway. If one prayed for the lottery and win. It is god. If one prayed for snow and it snowed. It is god. But all these could have just been coincidences. Why must it be the work of god?
I find your approach a little cavalier (not in a rude way), so you’re saying presume I’m right…we just lose time and money, etc. If you ask me…if one lives a lie long enough…it seems like the truth anyway.
People always speak of divinity but how many of us have actually seen real divinity? A man with a terminal disease cured by god because he was locked in prayer for example. A bit far-fetched right, considering what I said above – you don’t have anyone to turn to. Again, just because science can’t prove it yet (it is god). I get worried if a top surgeon says, “your life is in god’s hands” – no, you studied medicine school, you’re an expert. I don’t expect a 100% result but we will live with your assumptions and medical knowledge and wisdom. Not something I can’t see, feel, touch or in any way vouch for his existence.
Centuries ago, people would believe anything. If someone told me I can get a thousand erections brushing my teeth every hour for example – I’d do it. The fact that the good book is written by man, already disqualifies his very existence.
We constantly look to believe in belief but all the signs are clear that god was someone’s make believe. Is it a bad thing? Depends who you ask. But if he didn’t exist for real, that doesn’t make it a bad thing either.
If people want to believe in god, it’s fine. Just don’t leave the tooth fairy and santa hanging…they could be more real than all we imagine.
You see Frodo, I have no problems with people believing in belief. My only question is why, if one does not? You speak of a big picture which doesn’t exist for everyone.
If there is no god (for this example we will assume) – the world still keeps spinning, the market still moves, people go about their everyday lives anyway…what actually is the purpose of praying or having a god. If I told you, I do not need god in my life and in fact many do not, would you believe me?
I previously worked in a Catholic dominated country, every day I see their faith so strong. Now, if you don’t even have $1 a day – I can understand why these people think they need god. Praying for a better tomorrow perhaps. Someone facing the gallows, or worse, death – I can see why they may need a god. But not everyone is like that. There are people who believe, when you die – you just die.
And we link all sort of coincidences to god (more so if science cannot explain). Almost everything Science cannot explains goes to his credit anyway. If one prayed for the lottery and win. It is god. If one prayed for snow and it snowed. It is god. But all these could have just been coincidences. Why must it be the work of god?
I find your approach a little cavalier (not in a rude way), so you’re saying presume I’m right…we just lose time and money, etc. If you ask me…if one lives a lie long enough…it seems like the truth anyway.
People always speak of divinity but how many of us have actually seen real divinity? A man with a terminal disease cured by god because he was locked in prayer for example. A bit far-fetched right, considering what I said above – you don’t have anyone to turn to. Again, just because science can’t prove it yet (it is god). I get worried if a top surgeon says, “your life is in god’s hands” – no, you studied medicine school, you’re an expert. I don’t expect a 100% result but we will live with your assumptions and medical knowledge and wisdom. Not something I can’t see, feel, touch or in any way vouch for his existence.
Centuries ago, people would believe anything. If someone told me I can get a thousand erections brushing my teeth every hour for example – I’d do it. The fact that the good book is written by man, already disqualifies his very existence.
We constantly look to believe in belief but all the signs are clear that god was someone’s make believe. Is it a bad thing? Depends who you ask. But if he didn’t exist for real, that doesn’t make it a bad thing either.
If people want to believe in god, it’s fine. Just don’t leave the tooth fairy and santa hanging…they could be more real than all we imagine.
Re: The God of Logic
Your entire reply rest upon the underlying assumption that there is no God. My reply is based on the underlying assumption that God exists. Do you see how our starting assumptions are the lenses through which we look at the world and these influence our conclusions?
Your entire reply rest upon the underlying assumption that there is no God. My reply is based on the underlying assumption that God exists. Do you see how our starting assumptions are the lenses through which we look at the world and these influence our conclusions?
Re: The God of Logic
Frodo, quite frankly - I am disappointed by your reply. When we debate, we all use logic to determine our conclusions. But with your god, we cannot apply logic. Because supposedly, he is above the system.
I cannot justify something I cannot prove. If I believe in something that does not exist, what does that make me?
Frodo, quite frankly - I am disappointed by your reply. When we debate, we all use logic to determine our conclusions. But with your god, we cannot apply logic. Because supposedly, he is above the system.
I cannot justify something I cannot prove. If I believe in something that does not exist, what does that make me?
Re: The God of Logic
The disappointment is mine actually, because you failed to show where I have not applied logic at all. If you can show where I have been irrational that would be most welcome, and please don't just assert that belief in God is irrational, show it. Is God above logic? No. God is not above Himself. True logic, knowledge and wisdom is in God. Jesus is known as the Word, the Logos, from where the word logical comes from. In the Bible God says "Come, let us reason". God does not contradict Himself, and this is a fundamental law of logic. So God is NOT above logic. God did not say in the Bible "For my logic is higher than your logic". It is a misconception of atheists that God is above logic. He is not. It is only because we are finite and limited whereas God knows everything. A parent knows more than the child. But from the child's perspective what the parent does e.g. withholding a candy stick, is irrational, maybe evil! LOL!
Am I asking you to believe in something that does not exist? Not at all. Yet you seem to be very sure that God does not exist. Even Richard Dawkins does not seem that certain! LOL! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...awkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html
The disappointment is mine actually, because you failed to show where I have not applied logic at all. If you can show where I have been irrational that would be most welcome, and please don't just assert that belief in God is irrational, show it. Is God above logic? No. God is not above Himself. True logic, knowledge and wisdom is in God. Jesus is known as the Word, the Logos, from where the word logical comes from. In the Bible God says "Come, let us reason". God does not contradict Himself, and this is a fundamental law of logic. So God is NOT above logic. God did not say in the Bible "For my logic is higher than your logic". It is a misconception of atheists that God is above logic. He is not. It is only because we are finite and limited whereas God knows everything. A parent knows more than the child. But from the child's perspective what the parent does e.g. withholding a candy stick, is irrational, maybe evil! LOL!
Am I asking you to believe in something that does not exist? Not at all. Yet you seem to be very sure that God does not exist. Even Richard Dawkins does not seem that certain! LOL! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...awkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html
Re: The God of Logic
Frodo, if you think so. That is your free will. I am here to show those who don't believe belief. As someone said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Thanks for sharing that article. This was my favourite comment.
If he really existed as you claim, whether we believe in him or not - is free will. But to believe something that cannot be proven, sometimes in life you get sent to the looney bin (no offence).
Wishing you a Prosperous Lunar New Year.
Frodo, if you think so. That is your free will. I am here to show those who don't believe belief. As someone said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Thanks for sharing that article. This was my favourite comment.
If he really existed as you claim, whether we believe in him or not - is free will. But to believe something that cannot be proven, sometimes in life you get sent to the looney bin (no offence).
Wishing you a Prosperous Lunar New Year.
Re: The God of Logic
He has to believe and insist the bible is the absolute, inerrant truth because there is no turning back from this fuckdo.
Again, he is very cunning. He showed you an article and said " Even Richard Dawkins does not seem that certain!" There are many facts exchanged by the bishop and Dawkin he had suppressed and of course he wouldn't want you to know. These delusional nuts do not read their bible from first page to last page, only pick what are favorable.
"Prof Dawkins acknowledged that he was less than 100 per cent certain of his conviction that there is no creator."
“I think the probability of a supernatural creator existing is very very low,he added. "
"The Archbishop also said that he believed that human beings had evolved from non-human ancestors but were nevertheless “in the image of God”.
"He also said that the explanation for the creation of the world in the Book of Genesis could not be taken literally. "
“The writers of the Bible, inspired as I believe they were, they were nonetheless not inspired to do 21st Century physics,” he said."
Even very powerful and influential theists like the bishop and Pop are jumping to the evolution bandwagon instead of holding tight to their story books. Only dumbfucks like ignorant and nobody fuckdo are living in self denial and use an out-dated story book to knock at modern science. I am always laughing reading his posts.
He has to believe and insist the bible is the absolute, inerrant truth because there is no turning back from this fuckdo.
Again, he is very cunning. He showed you an article and said " Even Richard Dawkins does not seem that certain!" There are many facts exchanged by the bishop and Dawkin he had suppressed and of course he wouldn't want you to know. These delusional nuts do not read their bible from first page to last page, only pick what are favorable.
"Prof Dawkins acknowledged that he was less than 100 per cent certain of his conviction that there is no creator."
“I think the probability of a supernatural creator existing is very very low,he added. "
"The Archbishop also said that he believed that human beings had evolved from non-human ancestors but were nevertheless “in the image of God”.
"He also said that the explanation for the creation of the world in the Book of Genesis could not be taken literally. "
“The writers of the Bible, inspired as I believe they were, they were nonetheless not inspired to do 21st Century physics,” he said."
Even very powerful and influential theists like the bishop and Pop are jumping to the evolution bandwagon instead of holding tight to their story books. Only dumbfucks like ignorant and nobody fuckdo are living in self denial and use an out-dated story book to knock at modern science. I am always laughing reading his posts.
Last edited:
Re: The God of Logic
You still have not shown where I have failed to use logic. I suppose it is just an empty accusation from you then.
There are a lot of things we believe in that cannot be proven. If you are honest with yourself you will also see that you are not exempted. Having said that, it really depends on what you mean by "proven". Some people will say the evidence for God is so strong that it is "proven". Others demand that God speak to them loudly or appear to them then will consider as "proven". Still others say God must be proven by science then considered proven. What's your?
You still have not shown where I have failed to use logic. I suppose it is just an empty accusation from you then.
There are a lot of things we believe in that cannot be proven. If you are honest with yourself you will also see that you are not exempted. Having said that, it really depends on what you mean by "proven". Some people will say the evidence for God is so strong that it is "proven". Others demand that God speak to them loudly or appear to them then will consider as "proven". Still others say God must be proven by science then considered proven. What's your?
Re: The God of Logic
DIVA really pathetic. I am talking about Dawkins and you talk about the bishop.
Since DIVA thinks that "powerful" theists are jumping to evolution wagon, how come DIVA don't jump to theist wagon? LOL!
He has to believe and insist the bible is the absolute, inerrant truth because there is no turning back from this fuckdo.
Again, he is very cunning. He showed you an article and said " Even Richard Dawkins does not seem that certain!" There are many facts exchanged by the bishop and Dawkin he had suppressed and of course he wouldn't want you to know. These delusional nuts do not read their bible from first page to last page, only pick what are favorable.
"Prof Dawkins acknowledged that he was less than 100 per cent certain of his conviction that there is no creator."
“I think the probability of a supernatural creator existing is very very low,he added. "
"The Archbishop also said that he believed that human beings had evolved from non-human ancestors but were nevertheless “in the image of God”.
"He also said that the explanation for the creation of the world in the Book of Genesis could not be taken literally. "
“The writers of the Bible, inspired as I believe they were, they were nonetheless not inspired to do 21st Century physics,” he said."
Even very powerful and influential theists like the bishop and Pop are jumping to the evolution bandwagon instead of holding tight to their story books. Only dumbfucks like ignorant and nobody fuckdo are living in self denial and use an out-dated story book to knock at modern science. I am always laughing reading his posts.
DIVA really pathetic. I am talking about Dawkins and you talk about the bishop.
Since DIVA thinks that "powerful" theists are jumping to evolution wagon, how come DIVA don't jump to theist wagon? LOL!
Re: The God of Logic
Frodo. I don't believe in something that does not exist. I already have made my points. I am sad, other people like me do not have the strength to acknowledge as such. If you think it is harmless believing in something like that. No one stops you. I believe in helping people with the truth.
My agenda is to prove science has been right all this well. Science and god (if he is real) could co exist. But I rather believe in what I can see, feel and touch. Blind faith is too much for me. Vague signs is too much for me. Is it so difficult to prove something that exists since this something claims to be infinite and creator.
I also do not believe in souls, ghosts, apparitions. Do not take this personally Frodo. You want to waste your time and money till you enter the kingdom. Fine. I'm more practical.
Frodo. I don't believe in something that does not exist. I already have made my points. I am sad, other people like me do not have the strength to acknowledge as such. If you think it is harmless believing in something like that. No one stops you. I believe in helping people with the truth.
My agenda is to prove science has been right all this well. Science and god (if he is real) could co exist. But I rather believe in what I can see, feel and touch. Blind faith is too much for me. Vague signs is too much for me. Is it so difficult to prove something that exists since this something claims to be infinite and creator.
I also do not believe in souls, ghosts, apparitions. Do not take this personally Frodo. You want to waste your time and money till you enter the kingdom. Fine. I'm more practical.
Re: The God of Logic
You beg the question, how do you know God does not exist?
You believe there is such a thing as truth? How do you explain the existence of truth and error from the atheist's view?
What are you going to use to prove that science has been right????
Of course God and science can co-exist. The early scientists were believers, they were studying God's world. They cannot observe God with their senses, but they could observe the world God made with their senses. For them, it is obvious that there is a God and the whole world did not just made itself like what you would believe as an atheist.
As an atheist, how do you prove to yourself that naturalism is true?
Don't worry, I don't take things personally. I am also a practical person, I won't waste time over non-existent things or beliefs.:p
You beg the question, how do you know God does not exist?
You believe there is such a thing as truth? How do you explain the existence of truth and error from the atheist's view?
What are you going to use to prove that science has been right????
Of course God and science can co-exist. The early scientists were believers, they were studying God's world. They cannot observe God with their senses, but they could observe the world God made with their senses. For them, it is obvious that there is a God and the whole world did not just made itself like what you would believe as an atheist.
As an atheist, how do you prove to yourself that naturalism is true?
Don't worry, I don't take things personally. I am also a practical person, I won't waste time over non-existent things or beliefs.:p
Similar threads
