AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → [necro]How could people believe in god?!

636 96096
Sebi
offline
Sebi
662 posts
Nomad

Do you believe in god?! I dont believe in him!!! Please could you explain me how people could believe in god?!

  • 636 Replies
patriotboy1
offline
patriotboy1
238 posts
Nomad

About the every arguement part HiddenDistance I think you were mistakened when he was mistakened.

You have a good point about the fridge in the milk part.

Ya but EVERYONE KNOWS FOR A FACT THAT THERE IS NO SANTA ect.. because the parents come out and tell the truth.
The person that :created the appearence of God didn't exactly come out and say he made him up or if "GOd didn't make the bible (which I think he did) The arthur didn't come out and say it was all a hoax. But the parent did come out and say Santa ect... was made up (or it was a hoax) And It's a FACT there made up it isn't a fact that "God" is made up or isn't made up.


p.s. well said BigP08

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.


Yet, while I do admit the Universe can exist without God I think It's an extraordinary claim to say he doesn't exist, to me it just doesn't fit.

which you wouldn't have to go outside of if there was proof.


Again the proof is personal, it doesn't extend past myself bigpo most likely has different proof that God exists than I do, so I simply can't prove to you he exist the proof is there it's just not, possible to grasp without a little help.

But someone wrote those stories, so they *must* be true. Don't you see the problem with the bible for someone who isn't already a confirmed believer?


I've already admitted I saw the problem but the bible isn't the gateway into Christianity the acceptance that God exists is then as I said before the bible will begin to make sense.

Yeah... what a bad idea. Go for something that makes sense and not go straight to the ideas that fixate on ghosts, vampires, werewolves, ghouls & gods. Without proof, there is no such thing as "supernatural".


It's really quite terrible actually, it blinds you to the idea that things may not be as they seem. For example I broke my ankle this summer and it's healing much faster than it was expected to, to you this is a marvel of the human body or medicine. To me it proves that there's something out there working for me, yes my body and medicine had a lot to do with it but to me they didn't have EVERYTHING to do with them.

Not by the priests themselves - this far down the line they actually believe in this stuff. It is being revealed as false though because of the lack of any logical, factual, and intellectual support for it.


So you would trust your own logic and intelligence to reveal to you everything that is true?

You don't understand what the word theory means, and how the scientific method works... do you?


Actually I do thanks, and while a theory is an idea that's very far along it's almost impossible to prove the theory of evolution is true because *looks around* yup no time machine.
BigP08
offline
BigP08
1,455 posts
Shepherd

It is being revealed as false though because of the lack of any logical, factual, and intellectual support for it.

You've said yourself that you accept the possibility that you are wrong. But you wouldn't accept the possibility that you are wrong about Santa, the tooth fairy, etc. because you don't just have a bunch of logic and evidence on your side- you KNOW Santa doesn't deliver presents to you. But if we're wrong about God, it was a trick that simply didn't get revealed in its time, and at this point, there's nobody pulling the strings for the entire religion.
If the Pope were to come to me and say God wasn't real... that wouldn't be proof that he didn't exist, it would mean the Pope lost faith. And he couldn't do much more to prove it than any atheist could.
You can discard it in your mind and convince others to listen to your viewpoint, certainly, but God doesn't belong in the same category as Santa.
donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

you cannot prove or not prove the existence of god or whether all scientific theories assumed to be true, are true or not.

proving god is impossible to his nature as god.
as to science you can only assume the truth of a theory or law regarding your knowledge. lost of theories and nature laws were assumed right and proven wrong sometimes even centuries later.

hence we cannot achieve any ultimate proof on this topic.

and i do not understand why you have to choose between god or science/evolution, both theories can be connected really fine without any problem.

patriotboy1
offline
patriotboy1
238 posts
Nomad

THats's a personel opion that God falls into that category.

And samy I think he meant I dont know what theory is (I do btw) You missunderstood me when I said evolution is a theory I meant human evolution is a theory for ex. That humans came from apes is a theory. But oppasable thumbs is evolution. WHich shows that evolution is real.

donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

@patriotboy1: could you make clear to whose threads you adress by quoting them or adressing them directly. it makes the understanding of the whole discussion much easier.
thx.

offtopic:
for i use english as a foreign language, and have realized, that spelling and grammar seems to be quite important in this forum, it would be nice if you guys could give me some feedback on my english, according understanding of the message, grammar and spelling.
any corrections(rather pointing out grammar construction mistakes, than typing mistakes) are welcome.

HiddenDistance
offline
HiddenDistance
1,310 posts
Peasant

because the parents come out and tell the truth.


So the only reason you believe in god is because your parents or some other authority figure hasn't told you otherwise? Try thinking for yourself mate. Ask questions, come to your own conclusions instead of being force-fed millenia old indoctrinated hogwash.

Yet, while I do admit the Universe can exist without God I think It's an extraordinary claim to say he doesn't exist, to me it just doesn't fit.


You say it doesn't fit, but not why. You say the proof is personal - so it obviously doesn't apply in a *real* proof sense, where facts and proof are objective, not subjective. "Not possible to grasp without a little help". Well, I'm not really interested in helping to delude myself into something that has no basis in the truth.

I've already admitted I saw the problem but the bible isn't the gateway into Christianity the acceptance that God exists is then as I said before the bible will begin to make sense.


And again, you cannot accept that god exists unless you *want* that delusion.

It's really quite terrible actually, it blinds you to the idea that things may not be as they seem. For example I broke my ankle this summer and it's healing much faster than it was expected to, to you this is a marvel of the human body or medicine. To me it proves that there's something out there working for me, yes my body and medicine had a lot to do with it but to me they didn't have EVERYTHING to do with them.


If you think I'm blind because I'm not believing in things that aren't real... I don't even know what to say to that. It's just so... unfathomable a comment I'm totally blown away.

So you would trust your own logic and intelligence to reveal to you everything that is true?


Not everything, and certainly not right away. I'm not even going to live long enough to find out the really cool stuff about the universe; kind of too bad.

Actually I do thanks, and while a theory is an idea that's very far along it's almost impossible to prove the theory of evolution is true because *looks around* yup no time machine.


That was mostly directed at patriotboy, but I'll respond. You don't need a time machine to continue to build evidence for evolution. I think you're also confusing it with abiogenesis. Scientists are working on this too. Taking inanimate proteins and poking & prodding them with various external stimulii in attempts to create life in a laboratory. Evolution is a theory concerning the development of life after the initial formation.. and it's pretty rock solid by now. It's.. nearly 150 years old? I don't remember the date, but it's coming along now.

Besides, if there are parts of evolution that turn out to be not as accurate as others, they will be changed & appended as we learn new things - scientists don't stick to something that's wrong despite all evidence to the contrary - unlike religious dogma & holy books.

God doesn't belong in the same category as Santa.


It's just as much a fairy tale as any of the others to me. There is as much proof for santa or the tooth fairy as there is for god, which is to say *none* at this time.

you cannot prove or not prove the existence of god or whether all scientific theories assumed to be true, are true or not.


Three words. Burden of proof. Atheists don't need to achieve 'ultimate proof'. We're fine sitting in the spot where our would-be opponents have none to support their claims.. and it's sort of a win by default.


Well gents; I'll be back later. I need to try for some sleep again; not working out today.
patriotboy1
offline
patriotboy1
238 posts
Nomad

Ok I will try to do that sorry for the inconvienence
and your spelling so far is good.

I've got a question why does everyone put @ in front of my name?

donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

Three words. Burden of proof. Atheists don't need to achieve 'ultimate proof'. We're fine sitting in the spot where our would-be opponents have none to support their claims.. and it's sort of a win by default


yeah but you cannot prove science as right.
and the burden of proof leaves the question unanswered.
you are just sitting and waiting in a status quo. and for most atheists call themselves man of reason and often science, they should strive to gain more knowledge to be able to explain the world completly.
so as long as the question of gods existence is not cleared you cannot rest, because you could be proven wrong.
Somers
offline
Somers
1,532 posts
Nomad

I've got a question why does everyone put @ in front of my name?


Their addressing you
BigP08
offline
BigP08
1,455 posts
Shepherd

It's just as much a fairy tale as any of the others to me. There is as much proof for santa or the tooth fairy as there is for god, which is to say *none* at this time.

Maybe for you, so I guess you can categorize it that way. But also we need to look at proof that it is false. There's no proof of religion's existence or non-existence, even if there is a side with more evidence. But with Santa Clause, there is proof of his non-existence.

See you later, Distance. Sleep tight
donpiet
offline
donpiet
755 posts
Peasant

@patriotboy1: thanks for the feedback

patriotboy1
offline
patriotboy1
238 posts
Nomad

/So the only reason you believe in god is because your parents or some other aurthority figure hasn't told you otherwise.

Not true I have all the proof I need to believe in god I have for ex. THe bible, Jesus Christ, Miracles some would be argue that like HiddenDistance or scientist but it's proof enough for me.

HiddenDistance when you said it didn't apple in a real sense (the proof). Some people would think it's proof some dont.

/And again you cant accept that God exists unless you want that delusion.

It isn't a delusion if you have the proof.

[quote]If you think Im blind because I dont believe in things that aren't real.

Personel opion if your talking about god.

[quote]It's just as much of a fairy tale to me.

(God and Santa are the same type of fairy tale to HiddenDistance)

You know thats a lie because Santa has been proven wrong and God hasn't.
patriotboy1
offline
patriotboy1
238 posts
Nomad

I know I shouldn't double post but I'm just gonna say this
I'm not a good quoter

FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

yeah but you cannot prove science as right.


Let's get this straight. 'Science' is not a power seeking body striving to exert its monopoly on knowledge on the rest of mankind. It is merely a method used to try to understand new things.

and the burden of proof leaves the question unanswered.
you are just sitting and waiting in a status quo.


It seems you still don't quite understand what the term 'burden of proof' actually means. Theists claim the existence of God(s). It is not up to atheists to disprove these claims, but up to theists to prove them. In any case, proving a negative, like proving that God(s) do not exist is impossible, and this standard does not just apply to the theism vs atheism debate.

and for most atheists call themselves man of reason and often science, they should strive to gain more knowledge to be able to explain the world completly.
so as long as the question of gods existence is not cleared you cannot rest, because you could be proven wrong.


So by your own standard, it is the duty of theists to strive to prove the existence of God(s). If so, you should re-examine your definition of belief.

As for what atheists should do, I don't really see why one would devote their lives to disproving God (leaving alone the fact this is impossible), as generally speaking atheists believe that without evidence, there is no cause to believe in it. Since there is no evidence of the existence of a God at all, it is safe to assume that there isn't one.
Showing 421-435 of 636