Does God exist? (1 Viewer)

[c_james]

I think once again you're misguided, my little dim-witted buddy.

I used scientific theory to prove my belief about a 'God' a 'Deity' if you would like. If you would like to disprove it then go ahead, but as of now it is to my understanding that the first law of our universe which was energy was created by a supernatural entity. (disprove me).

You haven't used any 'scientific theory'. You've used nonsense and pseudo-scientific jargon. Like I said, if I thought there was something to refute, I would've done it a fair while ago. But because it's pretty clear you don't pay much attention to anything that isn't written in a 1300-year-old book, I'll spell out for you what an 8-year-old could deduce.

What you're basically saying is that because science can't provide complete answers about what happened billions of years ago, religion must be correct. But this is flawed. The mere fact that science doesn't provide all the answers doesn't preclude the fact that it provides a far more convincing version of events than your religion, which is filled with superstition and, for lack of a better word, crap. Even if science doesn't provide all the answers, you still have to contend with the fact that there is no possible way of knowing whether the religion you follow is correct. Fuck, you might as well worship the sun, like Carlin says. You can see it. It provides you with direct benefits like food and the conditions necessary for life. It never asks you for money, which is more than I can say for the Catholic Church, perhaps one of the most corrupt organisations in history. The worst it does is give people melanoma. I'll take that over your brand of religious fundamentalism any day.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Why does It matter who made god? This topic asks if god exists, I argue that It does. Besides, this argument is getting way to tiring, it's been funny for me too. (Especially when the 7-day christian showed up to ruin it all. )

Why does this 'God' / Prime mover have to be a conscious being? Imo it's just a convenient guess you've made based on nothing that fits in with your pre-concieved religious beliefs. I am open to the idea that some sort of 'power' that to us may appear supernatural could have started the universe, but at the same time I think chances are it could also be a naturalistic explanation we've yet to concieve (or maybe even similar to those we have).

 

[sam04u]

There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened

I agree with you on that, the idea behind the 'dissapearing and replaced with something else' is a logic which states behind every question is 2 questions. Anyone heard of the man in the cave? The more you know the less you know? Yeah....

I could try and explain how the universe was created, but never why..... (that's the real question though...)

 

[sam04u]

Why does this 'God' / Prime mover have to be a conscious being? Imo it's just a convenient guess you've made based on nothing that fits in with your pre-concieved religious beliefs. I am open to the idea that some sort of 'power' that to us may appear supernatural could have started the universe, but at the same time I think chances are it could also be a naturalistic explanation we've yet to concieve (or maybe even similar to those we have).

I never said it had to be conscious, according to my theory it just needed to have the power to create the first laws without actually being apart of the universe it created it in. (It's more convenient to assume that it was intentional) but wouldn't necessarily have to be. I also, explored the possibility of the first law being.... meh... it's impossible... because of the lawless universe it would be impossible. It's getting late but I hope you all feel comfortable sleeping tonight knowing that it may be your last night. You may never have consciousness again Sometimes we humans take vanity for granted. (Lol)

 

[littlewing69]

Why does It matter who made god? This topic asks if god exists, I argue that It does. Besides, this argument is getting way to tiring, it's been funny for me too. (Especially when the 7-day christian showed up to ruin it all. )

Sam: There has to be a god! The first thing in the universe = God!

Littlewing: What came before God?

Sam: Irrelevant!

You can't justify god as the prime mover if he's not ... prime...

 

[sam04u]

You ever done ass to mouth?

Yeah, I kissed your wife on the face just yesterday.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

(It's more convenient to assume that it was intentional) but wouldn't necessarily have to be

Maybe convenient for you.

I never said it had to be conscious, according to my theory it just needed to have the power to create the first laws without actually being apart of the universe it created it in.

So essentially in the end all you've proven is that something created the universe that we can not yet explain (a supernatural thing is something we can't explain). Grats.

By claiming that is 'proof' for the existance of 'God' imo is to take the meaning of God quite far from what i'd say is the commonly accepted definition of what most monotheistic Gods are... i.e. omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being. It at the very least is quite different to the description most of your fellow muslims would give me for God. I am glad that you can think a little differently about your religion and you honestly seem like the sort of guy that hungers for truth, I hope you're just honest with yourself with your findings - The 'God' you've shown today is far away from the God of the Koran.

 

[c_james]

I never said it had to be conscious, according to my theory it just needed to have the power to create the first laws without actually being apart of the universe it created it in. (It's more convenient to assume that it was intentional) but wouldn't necessarily have to be. I also, explored the possibility of the first law being.... meh... it's impossible... because of the lawless universe it would be impossible. It's getting late but I hope you all feel comfortable sleeping tonight knowing that it may be your last night. You may never have consciousness again Sometimes we humans take vanity for granted. (Lol)

I propose you add the expletive 'shit' between 'knows' and 'all' in your custom title.

 

[c_james]

Yeah, I kissed your wife on the face just yesterday.

Damn, she might be stoned to death for adultery now. Oh well. God wills it, I suppose.

 

[sam04u]

Re: NTB
And, technically that's what god is you imbecile a super natural thing which we cannot explain which 'Created the universe', fits perfectly with my beliefs.

Re: c_james
Judging a religion based on it's extremes is about as stupid as judging the quality of every packet of m and m's based on one which was discoloured. It's stupid beyond doubt. Thanks for proving to me that you're an imbecile you may no longer speak. (By suggesting Islam supports stoning of women. )

Re: LittleWing
We were discussing the creation of our universe and I suggested that God created our universe. Does that make sense to you? Wouldn't it be irrelevant who created god when we're discussing the creation of the Universe?

Perhaps, when we start discussing who/what god is (which is what it seems we're stirring to) we must first acknowledge it exists, and then question it. Otherwise we would be completely abolishing the progress we've made in theoreticising that a 'super-natural entity exists which created the universe'.

Re: Nolanistic
You're racist and you're also an idiot, what makes you think you're on the same intellectual level as me to be discussing matters which far surpedes you intellectual level?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

And, technically that's what god is you imbecile a super natural thing which we cannot explain which 'Created the universe', fits perfectly with my beliefs.

Everyone accepts that something which we cannot explain began the universe.

 

[sam04u]

uhh... and that's what god is.

 

[c_james]

Re: c_james
Judging a religion based on it's extremes is about as stupid as judging the quality of every packet of m and m's based on one which was discoloured. It's stupid beyond doubt. Thanks for proving to me that you're an imbecile you may no longer speak. (By suggesting Islam supports stoning of women. )

No, it's actually not stupid at all, because the extreme in question has manifested directly from the belief. A religion is only as meritorious as its capacity for interpretation, especially if it allows interpretations as heinous as those widely accepted in Saudi Arabia and other parts of the Middle-East.

You still haven't answered my original question. Does Allah approve of you slandering people in this thread by calling them 'fucking fags', 'imbeciles', as well as suggesting that you've gotten down and dirty with their spouses? Hmm? Or does your God deem it okay to do such things if it's against "those damned non-believers"?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Why not say so then? If you simply want to claim God is the 'x' that began the universe and nothing more beyond that... well... ok?

 

[sam04u]

No, it's actually not stupid at all, because the extreme in question has manifested directly from the belief. A religion is only as meritorious as its capacity for interpretation, especially if it allows interpretations as heinous as those widely accepted in Saudi Arabia and other parts of the Middle-East.

You still haven't answered my original question. Does Allah approve of you slandering people in this thread by calling them 'fucking fags', 'imbeciles', as well as suggesting that you've gotten down and dirty with their spouses? Hmm? Or does your God deem it okay to do such things if it's against "those damned non-believers"?

So, I could equally suggest that atheists (imbeciles such as nolanistic who misrepresent the ideas) claim that those who do not follow their beliefs would put their mouths onto the asses of other people because atheists enjoy the act and would think that those who oppose them secretly fantasise about it. Bla Bla Bla...(do you see where I'm getting at?)

Why do you ask what 'Allah' approves of? Did you know Allah is Arabic for God? I've also mentioned I'm not the most religious candidate and that I would never actually sleep with another mans wife. (Because It is Immoral and can break their family up). I think I've explained that my religion promotes good-deeds and good will and also to help the needy and care for those less fortunate. It also asks that for a month in every year, we feel as the less fortunate do and sustain from food and water from dusk till dawn. (Every year It helps me to feel how fortunate I am, and as a result I donate an ammount of money which I can to those who are less fortunate).

There are many other things whcih my religion 'approves of' but none of the misrepresentations of the minorities which you suggested. (answer my question on atheists based on the group of you... if you can)

 

[littlewing69]

Why not say so then? If you simply want to claim God is the 'x' that began the universe and nothing more beyond that... well... ok?

Indeed. It's a credible claim. It just has no evidence..nor is it philosophically compelling.

 

[sam04u]

Why not say so then? If you simply want to claim God is the 'x' that began the universe and nothing more beyond that... well... ok?

I think you've misinterpreted what I was saying, I was just proving that 'God' does exist, which opens the possibility for religion. (Ice Cream! Shhhh!!)
Instead of suggesting that no god exists and that therefore religion is false.

 

[sam04u]

Indeed. It's a credible claim. It just has no evidence..nor is it philosophically compelling.

Do you have a more plausible explanation other then exclaiming that if there is 'little evidence' then it must not exist? Your entire Idea about religion is based on a theory whether you like it or not. (The Big Bang Theory), which was produced from another theory (Doppler Effect) which was later proven. Unless you can disprove theory, I can theoretically prove that god exists. (In theory).

 

[c_james]

So, I could equally suggest that atheists (imbeciles such as nolanistic who misrepresent the ideas) claim that those who do not follow their beliefs would put their mouths onto the asses of other people because atheists enjoy the act and would think that those who oppose them secretly fantasise about it. Bla Bla Bla...(do you see where I'm getting at?)

No, you couldn't "equally" suggest that, because atheists don't have a written code and institutionalised doctrine to follow. Atheists don't run non-secular governments, for obvious reasons, like that of Saudi Arabia.

Further, there's no "misrepresentation of ideas" if a sizeable portion of Muslims believe in these so-called "misrepsentations". Enough of them believe in what you call "misrepresentations" to form governments which don't only tolerate, but actively sanction honour killings, dismemberment for theft, and stonings.

Why do you ask what 'Allah' approves of? Did you know Allah is Arabic for God? I've also mentioned I'm not the most religious candidate and that I would never actually sleep with another mans wife. (Because It is Immoral and can break their family up). I think I've explained that my religion promotes good-deeds and good will and also to help the needy and care for those less fortunate. It also asks that for a month in every year, we feel as the less fortunate do and sustain from food and water from dusk till dawn. (Every year It helps me to feel how fortunate I am, and as a result I donate an ammount of money which I can to those who are less fortunate).

There are many other things whcih my religion 'approves of' but none of the misrepresentations of the minorities which you suggested. (answer my question on atheists based on the group of you... if you can)

I ask what he approves of to prove you're a hypocrite, much like all god-fearing religious types who superficially do "good deeds", but who, in most respects, really don't live up to the hype.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

What I mean is... We're fairly positive that the universe came into existance somehow. That somehow, sam calls 'god'... other people just call it 'something'.

I think you've misinterpreted what I was saying, I was just proving that 'God' does exist, which opens the possibility for religion. (Ice Cream! Shhhh!!)
Instead of suggesting that no god exists and that therefore religion is false.

Err no, what you've proven is that there was 'something' that brought the universe into existance. You call this God. That is it, it doesn't open the possibility for religions any more than what the current possibilities for them are.

Unless you can disprove theory, I can theoretically prove that god exists. (In theory).

Well of course, if you want to turn God into the 'something' that began the universe (and that's all) ... fine.