Official Religion Thread

[Prada]

Salinity varies from different places in the ocean. Not to mention there is a limit to the amount of salt in the entire world(how much there is)' date=' and the plates have been shifting from the beginning. This would mean the system we have now might not always be how it was. Even following the salt logic the world could be around 62 million years old, which may simply be when this system was in play. By salt logic the ocean water would barely have any salt if it were merely 4000 years old.

[/quote']

 

Actually, Creationists believe that the earth was made with salt water to begin with. Either way, the amount of salt in the ocean is still a verification that the earth isn't 62 million years old.

 

QUESTION: Why is believing in God so ridiculous when you have people making assumptions about other life forms living throughout the galaxy. Space, most of which we haven't been able to study, is huge and would really be ridiculous to assume that there are many other life forms or planets that could support life out there. With these assumptions, would it be ridiculous to assume there is a god, and it would also raise up the question of how THEY came to be. God didn't just create earth, he created space, time, and everything before it. Therefore, if there are other life forms, it would be safe to assume God created them to, wouldn't it?

[Sunshine Jesse]

Nice job ignoring my post gaize :x

QUESTION: Why is believing in God so ridiculous when you have people making assumptions about other life forms living throughout the galaxy. Space' date=' most of which we haven't been able to study, is huge and would really be ridiculous to assume that there are many other life forms or planets that could support life out there.

[/quote']

The universe is so huge that it would be ridiculous to assume that there ISN'T a large amount of planets that could support life.

 

Its not that its ridiculous to believe in a god, its just that we could render its existence obsolete. Lack of evidence, along with an explanation for the beginning of the universe, how it came about, etc, could render the existence of the Abrahamic god absolutely pointless.

 

With these assumptions' date=' would it be ridiculous to assume there is a god, and it would also raise up the question of how THEY came to be. God didn't just create earth, he created space, time, and everything before it. Therefore, if there are other life forms, it would be safe to assume God created them to, wouldn't it?

[/quote']

Sound logic on its own, but then you get into the myriad of other arguments for/against God. A sentient god could've very well created everything.

 

For the record, Im a deist, not an atheist.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Salinity varies from different places in the ocean. Not to mention there is a limit to the amount of salt in the entire world(how much there is)' date=' and the plates have been shifting from the beginning. This would mean the system we have now might not always be how it was. Even following the salt logic the world could be around 62 million years old, which may simply be when this system was in play. By salt logic the ocean water would barely have any salt if it were merely 4000 years old.

[/quote']

 

Actually, Creationists believe that the earth was made with salt water to begin with. Either way, the amount of salt in the ocean is still a verification that the earth isn't 62 million years old.

The salt clock is about as accurate as carbon dating. >_> And even then, the max age under the logic that it's an accurate form of dating is 62 million. And don't just repeat something without even countering my points.

 

QUESTION: Why is believing in God so ridiculous when you have people making assumptions about other life forms living throughout the galaxy. Space, most of which we haven't been able to study, is huge and would really be ridiculous to assume that there are many other life forms or planets that could support life out there.

I didn't lol because I thought you believing in God was ridiculous. You've been the only one calling people idiots and the such. I lol'd because you've been counteracting your own points. The fact that the universe is so huge is a reason to support the idea of life on other planets. Earth was lucky climate wise, and with the amount of planets out there it's safe to assume it has happened to other planets, seeing as there are billions. You labeled the fact that Earth got lucky as a sign of god when you are just now giving the very reason I said which negates such a claim. With so many planets out there, a few are sure to have everything set for hospitable life.

 

With these assumptions, would it be ridiculous to assume there is a god, and it would also raise up the question of how THEY came to be. God didn't just create earth, he created space, time, and everything before it. Therefore, if there are other life forms, it would be safe to assume God created them to, wouldn't it?

If God did exist that would most likely be the case. But extraterrestrial life doesn't exactly correlate with the existence of God.

[Prada]

Salinity varies from different places in the ocean. Not to mention there is a limit to the amount of salt in the entire world(how much there is)' date=' and the plates have been shifting from the beginning. This would mean the system we have now might not always be how it was. Even following the salt logic the world could be around 62 million years old, which may simply be when this system was in play. By salt logic the ocean water would barely have any salt if it were merely 4000 years old.

[/quote']

 

Actually, Creationists believe that the earth was made with salt water to begin with. Either way, the amount of salt in the ocean is still a verification that the earth isn't 62 million years old.

The salt clock is about as accurate as carbon dating. >_> And even then, the max age under the logic that it's an accurate form of dating is 62 million. And don't just repeat something without even countering my points. 1. I didn't repeat anything. 2. I never said the salt clock is more accurate than carbon dating. 3. I doubt that the max age under this clock would be 62 million years. Oh well. ;P

 

QUESTION: Why is believing in God so ridiculous when you have people making assumptions about other life forms living throughout the galaxy. Space, most of which we haven't been able to study, is huge and would really be ridiculous to assume that there are many other life forms or planets that could support life out there.

I didn't lol because I thought you believing in God was ridiculous. You've been the only one calling people idiots and the such. I didn't call anyone in the thread idiots directly, but some of scientists who assume that the earth was millions of years old, yes, I call them idiots. My apologies if you believe that.

 

I lol'd because you've been counteracting your own points. My point is that all we're doing is assuming. I find it ridiculous why people criticize others for assuming things, when all they do is assume as well.

 

The fact that the universe is so huge is a reason to support the idea of life on other planets. So? The fact that the universe is huge supports nothing. There is no solid proof of life on other planets. Only one planet in our entire solar system, which is huge on it's own, supports life. I really wouldn't assume that there is life on other planets right now.

 

Earth was lucky climate wise I find that in particular total BS, but whatever. ;P

 

, and with the amount of planets out there it's safe to assume it has happened to other planets, seeing as there are billions. Yet the many we have observed have no life support.

 

You labeled the fact that Earth got lucky as a sign of god when you are just now giving the very reason I said which negates such a claim. Luck is not real. Obviously, nothing was just....there. Earth was created somehow, and I doubt it was just luck.

 

With so many planets out there, a few are sure to have everything set for hospitable life. We don't really know that. We have no solid proof.

 

With these assumptions, would it be ridiculous to assume there is a god, and it would also raise up the question of how THEY came to be. God didn't just create earth, he created space, time, and everything before it. Therefore, if there are other life forms, it would be safe to assume God created them to, wouldn't it?

If God did exist that would most likely be the case. But extraterrestrial life doesn't exactly correlate with the existence of God. Actually, I thought it was an interesting fact to add. I used as an example. Nothing more.

[Lemniscate]

Okay, raiN, I'm sorry, but your points have essentially been invalidated.

 

One thing I am seeing in this debate is a focus on God vs. Science. That's really very stupid, there is nothing in the Bible that conflicts with the idea that the earth is indeed how old science says it is, beyond that, there is no conflict in the Bible with the Big Bang. It says that God first created the firmament, and the action of creating the firmament could very well be the Big Bang. A more pressing and fitting question I would ask is, based on a moralistic view of God, is the existence of a God necessary? Whether or not He exist at all, is it necessary for the human race that there is a belief in an all powerful deity that rules the universe?

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Yeah, since we can pretty much agree on rain's points being invalid, I guess I'll skip trying to explain the logic behind the assumptions made with intelligent life elsewhere and just talk with you about the necessity of a God, Frission.

 

And a Pope came up with the idea of a Big Bang in the first place, for the record. The two ideas being unable to coexist is stupid.

[Lemniscate]

That's exactly my point, but some ill-informed atheists, in an attempt to make themselves higher up in society, have created a non-existent conflict. It's really quite stupid. I'm glad we agree on that so we can move to better things.

 

Now, what happens without a God. People look for a God for several reasons:

- People don't like the weight of full responsibility for all things that happen to them, by believing in a God, people allow their troubles to be at least partially given over to some power with more might then themselves.

- The existence of God allows people to find solace where none would come. If there was no God, people would have nothing to hope for. People constantly look for a logical way to find peace in any time, and if the only thing they have that they can find peace in is themselves, than anyone not incredibly self-assured becomes fearful.

 

Thus, society relies upon the existence of God, by clearing people of fears and allowing them to move forward and onward with their lives.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Yeah, in those ways having faith in a god can really help you. Some people follow the logic of living in the moment and have managed to get by without believing in god though. While that isn't an exercise that helps everyone, I cite Color of Water to show just how much of an impact gods can have on people. Many religions have been turned into means of manipulating people and causing hate, but that's not the fault of religion as a whole. For whatever reason someone believes in something, as long as they respect others they should be respected themselves.

[Lemniscate]

I'm finding we tend to agree on things. I am wondering if I should gracefully bow out of this conversation for a little while...

I think I will, I will probably post intermittent comments, but for now, it seems I have said all that can be said.

 

I will just leave you with this:

The existence of a God is a moral imperative. It has to happen, without it, there is no explanation for morals, there is no explanation for the sentience of the human race, there is no explanation for things such as why a being cannot be brought back from death. Thus far, all forms of science have failed to find what gives life its spark, what makes the different is between a living body, and a dead body. Without a God, so many things in the universe go unanswered. Thus, God is more than a flight of fancy, but a being whose very existence is required, a being that absolutely must exist, for without His existence, the universe holds no true binding solution.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

There are theist and atheist answers to some of those questions, and in this case they both have some very valid points. These questions are in fact the very reason I'm agnostic.

 

:S

[Dark]

I've read through this thread (all 26 pages), and it reminds me of how I miss HORUS so much. D:

 

I'll try making this post on topic, even though I'm saddened inside.

 

So... Einstein was an atheist. Discuss.

[OMGAKITTY]

I've read through this thread (all 26 pages)' date=' and it reminds me of how I miss HORUS so much. D:

 

I'll try making this post on topic, even though I'm saddened inside.

 

So... Einstein was an atheist. Discuss.

[/quote']

 

Newton was a Christian. So what? If you want to play the "name famous people who are X religion" then I'm pretty sure Christianity will win.

[Dark]

That's because the majority of people are non-atheists, and I believe 1/3 of those people are Christian. And I just brought up a random atheist fact, I didn't mean to start a topic.

 

But, I guess we could keep this going.

 

Wasn't Washington an atheist?

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I've read through this thread (all 26 pages)' date=' and it reminds me of how I miss HORUS so much. D:

 

I'll try making this post on topic, even though I'm saddened inside.

 

So... Einstein was an atheist. Discuss.

[/quote']

 

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic' date=' but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.

[/quote']

 

I want to know God's thoughts...the rest are details.

 

Not that it matters, Einstein was a tool.

[Dark]

You aren't doing it right. You have to name a famous non-atheist (theist).

[OMGAKITTY]

Gutenberg was Christian.

[Dark]

Benjamin Franklin was atheist.

[Kenny Bohner]

Salinity varies from different places in the ocean. Not to mention there is a limit to the amount of salt in the entire world(how much there is)' date=' and the plates have been shifting from the beginning. This would mean the system we have now might not always be how it was. Even following the salt logic the world could be around 62 million years old, which may simply be when this system was in play. By salt logic the ocean water would barely have any salt if it were merely 4000 years old.

[/quote']

 

Actually, Creationists believe that the earth was made with salt water to begin with. Either way, the amount of salt in the ocean is still a verification that the earth isn't 62 million years old.

The salt clock is about as accurate as carbon dating. >_> And even then, the max age under the logic that it's an accurate form of dating is 62 million. And don't just repeat something without even countering my points. 1. I didn't repeat anything. 2. I never said the salt clock is more accurate than carbon dating. 3. I doubt that the max age under this clock would be 62 million years. Oh well. ;P 1. You did, too... 2. Then, why do we continue this? Christian "scholars" argue the effectiveness of radio-carbon dating, so why compare your method to it? Didn't you just condradict yourself? 3. Why? You didn't really support yourself, you just stated an opinion... this is a debate

 

QUESTION: Why is believing in God so ridiculous when you have people making assumptions about other life forms living throughout the galaxy. Space, most of which we haven't been able to study, is huge and would really be ridiculous to assume that there are many other life forms or planets that could support life out there.

I didn't lol because I thought you believing in God was ridiculous. You've been the only one calling people idiots and the such. I didn't call anyone in the thread idiots directly, but some of scientists who assume that the earth was millions of years old, yes, I call them idiots. My apologies if you believe that. Why do you call them idiots? Because they support their claims with evidence as opposed to blind faith and grabs at straws (i.e. that the world's salt concentration is proof of the Earth's ridiculously young age?)

 

I lol'd because you've been counteracting your own points. My point is that all we're doing is assuming. I find it ridiculous why people criticize others for assuming things, when all they do is assume as well. Well, see, there's a difference. You (Christians) assume based on a book written by mortal men, in hopes that it was inspired by an invisible guy who lives in the clouds and created the Earth with nothing but his own breath, as he made us out of clay four thousand years ago. We assume based on hard evidence and logic. So, tell me, when one person supports his arguement with facts and the other with "Because God is right He wrote the Bible He's real it's true educated scientists are know-nothing morons", how do you justify saying that you're right?

 

The fact that the universe is so huge is a reason to support the idea of life on other planets. So? The fact that the universe is huge supports nothing. There is no solid proof of life on other planets. Only one planet in our entire solar system, which is huge on it's own, supports life. I really wouldn't assume that there is life on other planets right now. No, there's no solid proof, I'll give you that. But, I for one think it to be supremely arrogant to assume that this planet is the only one which has the possiblity to support life, amongst the trillions upon trillions upon trillions of planets in exsistance defies all logic; even if, in your opinion, scientists are moronic, this even takes common sense from the equation.

 

Earth was lucky climate wise I find that in particular total BS, but whatever. ;P Not even gonna humor that with a comment

 

, and with the amount of planets out there it's safe to assume it has happened to other planets, seeing as there are billions. Yet the many we have observed have no life support. Pal, we can't even begin to see the most minute fraction of planets in the universe... while we're the only one in our solar system, who's to say there's not life in other galaxies? The most powerful telescope imaginable couldn't see that far!

 

You labeled the fact that Earth got lucky as a sign of god when you are just now giving the very reason I said which negates such a claim. Luck is not real. Obviously, nothing was just....there. Earth was created somehow, and I doubt it was just luck. Well, where did God come from, then? Ah-ha! And everything is just luck. If one little tiny thing went differently in early life on Earth, like when we hadn't progressed passed the single-celled stage yet, things could be totally different, things you can't even begin to comprehend!

 

With so many planets out there, a few are sure to have everything set for hospitable life. We don't really know that. We have no solid proof. No, but that's close akin to saying that we don't know for sure that the sun will come up tomorrow, but I don't see anyone selling all Earthly things and praying for mercy, do you?

 

With these assumptions, would it be ridiculous to assume there is a god, and it would also raise up the question of how THEY came to be. God didn't just create earth, he created space, time, and everything before it. Therefore, if there are other life forms, it would be safe to assume God created them to, wouldn't it?

If God did exist that would most likely be the case. But extraterrestrial life doesn't exactly correlate with the existence of God. Actually, I thought it was an interesting fact to add. I used as an example. Nothing more. If, in theory, there was a God, then yes. But, dude, there's not, so stop being a fuckin' child.

[Ezio]

Hey, slightly unrelated to the current topic/debate but I'd just like to state the The Pope does not deny evolution, or have a problem with it.

[Juuzou]

i found a lolchristian prayer, take a look:

 

With all your heart

You must Trust the lord

and not your own judgement

Always let him lead you

and he will clear the pond

for us to follow.

 

what are some people thinking?

[Dark]

i found a lolchristian prayer' date=' take a look:

 

With all your heart

[b']You must Trust the lord

and not your own judgement[/b]

Always let him lead you

and he will clear the pond

for us to follow.

 

what are some people thinking?

 

Imagine this: I somehow edited The Bible and made it a recurring thing to say that jumping off a bridge frees all of your sins. But I left most of the material untouched.

 

How many people do you think would die by drowning and/or bridge deaths? Take a moment to ponder on that.

 

EDIT: The Pope does not deny evolution

 

Why doesn't it rub off on some of the dumbass Christians in my school?

 

And OMGAKITTY, I said "some", and you don't go to my school, so stfu.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

I've read through this thread (all 26 pages)' date=' and it reminds me of how I miss HORUS so much. D:

 

I'll try making this post on topic, even though I'm saddened inside.

 

So... Einstein was an atheist. Discuss.

[/quote']

 

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic' date=' but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.

[/quote']

 

I want to know God's thoughts...the rest are details.

 

Not that it matters' date=' Einstein was a tool.

[/quote']

I find it hard to believe that God would simply roll dice.

[Jericho]

 

There is nothing wrong with the basic teachings of Christianity. Just the modern interpretation and execution upon that interpretation.

[OMGAKITTY]

 

There is nothing wrong with the basic teachings of Christianity. Just the modern interpretation and execution upon that interpretation.

 

+1

[rustyowl]

I don't know why these things are always framed as a big dumb cage match. God vs Science.

It's all relative.

 

Science Point of View:

God does not exist because you cannot prove it. We win.

 

Religion Point of View:

God exists because you cannot prove it. We win.

 

Fundamentally, you are using the same arguement against eachother.

 

Rather than having me scroll through 27 pages of comments, enlighten me with more to your agruement, because so far this is all each side has offered.