Topic: Does God Exist?
started by: editor
Posted by editor on Jun. 02 2002,02:18
If you say no, can you prove it?and if you say "yes" well?
Posted by demonk on Jun. 02 2002,03:41
I don't know. Best I can give you.
Posted by kuru on Jun. 02 2002,03:53
In the absence of sufficient evidence to prove the existence of god, much like the absence of sufficient evidence to prove the existence of unicorns, I have concluded that god does not exist.If evidence ever arises to conclusively prove that the entity known as 'god' does, in fact, exist, I am prepared to change my position. Until such time, the hypothesis that there is a god remains a hypothesis.
There is no god until it can be proven that there is a god.
Posted by Beastie Dr on Jun. 02 2002,04:04
People who say yes should have to prove it too, editor.
Posted by demonk on Jun. 02 2002,04:14
It was implied in his message.
Posted by ic0n0 on Jun. 02 2002,04:25
| Quote (kuru @ 01 June 2002,13:53) |
| In the absence of sufficient evidence to prove the existence of god, much like the absence of sufficient evidence to prove the existence of unicorns, I have concluded that god does not exist. If evidence ever arises to conclusively prove that the entity known as 'god' does, in fact, exist, I am prepared to change my position. Until such time, the hypothesis that there is a god remains a hypothesis. There is no god until it can be proven that there is a god. |
My thoughts exactly.
Posted by Bozeman on Jun. 02 2002,05:13
Wow, no one yet has gotten all indignant, like "You agnostics are terrible! Of course there's a god and you're all going to hell for posting such horrible blasphemies!"Mabey there's hope for detnet. Or mabey this thread will become another flamewar.
Me? I agree with the agnostics. It takes just as much faith to be an atheist as a person with religion. I don't think there's a god, but there could be. Well spoken kuru.
Posted by CatKnight on Jun. 02 2002,06:19
[ranting about choice of words]Kuru you have reached a < fallacious > conclusion. You can't "conclude" that god doesn't exist, just because he hasn't been proven to exist, you can only assume or hypothesize[/rant]As for the question at hand, I really don't know and can't say either way.
Posted by Wiley on Jun. 02 2002,06:52
I know God is real ....how else can you explain lesbians?
Posted by damien_s_lucifer on Jun. 02 2002,07:15
I don't think there's a God in the Jewish/Christian/Islamic sense. I don't believe in the supernatural, period. I don't have to - the natural world is weird enough.I'm also quite sure that we don't know nearly as much about things as we think we do... which prevents me from being a materialist / atheist.
So let's hear it for agnosticism! Hooray!
Posted by Cyrino on Jun. 02 2002,09:18
This reminds me of that Simpson's episode where Homer gets the crayon removed from his head and later on is trying to find a mistake on his tax return and ended up proving there was no god. This made Ned none too happy. 
Oh ya, and power to the Atheist movement!... and stuff.
Posted by DuSTman on Jun. 02 2002,09:28
This is just the thing about the concept of a god: You can NEVER prove such a thing exists, and you can NEVER prove that such a thing doesn't exist, because the scope of the concept of a "god" is larger than the universe that we can run tests on...
Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 02 2002,14:58
| Quote (editor @ 01 June 2002,21:18) |
| If you say no, can you prove it? and if you say "yes" well? |
Define "God" and then we may have something to work with.
Im sticking with what i believe.
There is a higher power and i have no clue what it is. I really dont think its a being as much as the universe is a living thing asking the same question we do.
Why am i here?
Posted by PersonGuy on Jun. 02 2002,19:05
| Quote (Wiley @ 01 June 2002,14:52) |
| I know God is real ....how else can you explain lesbians? |
I must have seen 30 lesbian couples on Broadway in Seattle yesterday. Belive me... there's no god.
Posted by Wiley on Jun. 02 2002,19:21
| Quote (PersonGuy @ 02 June 2002,11:05) | ||
I must have seen 30 lesbian couples on Broadway in Seattle yesterday. Belive me... there's no god. |
I'm talking about glamed out lipstick lesbians ...the kind you find in Vegas at after parties for heavy-weight title fights ...or maybe at the Playboy mansion hanging with Heff.
Wait a second ...I just realized that Heff=God ...oh shit ...I found god.
Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 02 2002,21:33
One of the definitions of god is the ability to make INTELIGENT life. Since most of Heff's creations need someone to remind them to keep breathing they do not qualify.
Posted by kuru on Jun. 02 2002,22:40
breathe in.........breathe out..........breathe in.........breathe out.......
Posted by Wiley on Jun. 03 2002,04:02
| Quote (Wolfguard @ 02 June 2002,13:33) |
| One of the definitions of god is the ability to make INTELIGENT life. Since most of Heff's creations need someone to remind them to keep breathing they do not qualify. |
Beautiful women who are dumb and naked ...further proof of the existance of god.
Posted by editor on Jun. 03 2002,04:34
Didn't Playboy once or twice do centerfolds on girls with PHDs?(devil's advocate)
Posted by hannibal on Jun. 03 2002,08:08
dont think there is a God as the catholics or whatever would describe it but i do believe there is something greater than ourselves which set the universe into motion and will one day collapase and do it again...
Posted by caseman984 on Jun. 03 2002,14:53
Ahh, God.. my favorite subject. I have loned beleived strongly in the exsistance of God, because I am God.. and so are you. At least thats just what I think. Science is starting toback me up on this as well. Pick up the latest issue of Discover magazine. One of the headlines on the cover is "Does the Universe Exsist if We Don't Observe It?" Inside there is a story concerning a scientist (Wheeler I belive) who is asking the age-old question of "how come exsistance?" One of my best arguments for the exsistance of a higher power is the perfection of how everything leading up to the creation of life on this planet happened. There has to be a method to this, some sort of power controlling it all in order for such perfect circumstances to come about and create sentinat life.But I digress. The ideas touched upon in this article furthur support my old theory that we each create the world around us with our thoughts, words, and actions. Take the idea of a cat and uranium in a sealed box. The cat is inside of a sealed container with food, water, a geiger counter and a small sample of uranium. The geiger counter is hooked up to vial of poison. If a particle from the uranium hits the geiger counter, then the poison will be injected into the cats food and the cat will die. Now, what happens if you leave this closed condition alone for an extended period of time? The fate of the cat is dependant on a paricle. Quantum theory states that the cat is not dead until you observe it. By observeing the cat you set off a reverse chain of events. If you choose to view the cat as dead, then the past is created in such a way as to have the particle be freed and hit the counter. Whereas if you choose to view the cat as living it creates a past in whic the particle did not hit the counter and the cat lived on. A strange idea, yes.. but it is easily comprehended once you abandon your linear ideas of the concept of time.
Yea, now that I've confused you all with my strange rantings, let me get back to the matter at hand: God. First off, let me make the usual arguments against Fundamentalist Christain religons. I don't think you should ever automatically accept any one thing as your beleif system as soon as it is handed to you. Go out and shop around, look at other religions. Consider agnostic beliefs... consider the ideas of I Ching, Tao, Buddism
... Whatever gives you happiness in life.. thats how you "should" be. Oh and the Bible is crap 
originally, it was probably a good book, but it has been too re-written and revised and handed down over the millenia to be of any use to the human race today. The ideas are outdated. If you want a modern-day religous text, look at books like < Conversations With God > and < A Course in Miracles > I have always thought, however, that the only real truth is the one inside you.You'll have to forgive me, as I said, God is my favorite subject. I consider myself a bit of a philospher. A philospher with bad selling and poor grammer, but one nevertheless. If you get a chance to look through the detonate forum archives (do they still exsist?) you'll see alot more of my thoughts on the whole matter. Right now I'm burned out and bell's about to ring.. so.. argue with me, please.
edit: added hyperlinks
Posted by editor on Jun. 03 2002,14:59
Isn't that Schrodinger's cat?CK?
Posted by TheTaxMan on Jun. 03 2002,15:46
Yes, editor.Even though it goes against the theory that "You should believe in God, because if he doesn't exist it won't matter and if he does you'll have eternity to think about your decision," I choose to ignore the possibility of a diety. There's no evidence that's substantial, and I don't see the reasoning behind it anyhow. It seems contradictory to only believe in a diety to get to the afterlife, which is the only reason I would. I can live a moral, secular life just as easily as one with a church or faith.
Posted by Wiley on Jun. 03 2002,15:55
| Quote (caseman984 @ 03 June 2002,06:53) |
| Take the idea of a cat and uranium in a sealed box. The cat is inside of a sealed container with food, water, a geiger counter and a small sample of uranium. The geiger counter is hooked up to vial of poison. If a particle from the uranium hits the geiger counter, then the poison will be injected into the cats food and the cat will die. Now, what happens if you leave this closed condition alone for an extended period of time? The fate of the cat is dependant on a paricle. Quantum theory states that the cat is not dead until you observe it. By observeing the cat you set off a reverse chain of events. If you choose to view the cat as dead, then the past is created in such a way as to have the particle be freed and hit the counter. Whereas if you choose to view the cat as living it creates a past in whic the particle did not hit the counter and the cat lived on. A strange idea, yes.. but it is easily comprehended once you abandon your linear ideas of the concept of time. |
Isn't that like "If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around will is still make a sound?"
Posted by Wolfguard on Jun. 03 2002,16:11
The tree makes a vibration that we call sound.The birds have another name for it.
so no, the tree does not make a sound.
And the egg came first since the chicken as we know it is the result of cross breeding a Pea hen and some kind of phesant.