Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by dapork, Oct 5, 2002.
so you're saying you don't know if god exists. there. you are just like me.
Except that I'm the optimist and you're the pessimist relative to the idea.
/edit: meaning, you say "God doesn't exist until he's proven", I say "God exists until he's disproven"
I stop reading this at page 4 i think. You guys beat around the bush too much. Well anyway i wanted to say that they proven most things in the bible true. Discovery channel for expample. That channel is all about science. They proved everything they looked at in the bible true. Secret tunnels, burial grounds, kings, and whatever else. Cow you would know, a while back you posted something saying all you watch on TV is discovery and such.
declaring something to be true because it hasn't been disproven is absurd
declaring something to be false because it hasn't been proven is only slightly less absurd
yes. but that isn't my position. i declare that i don't know because it hasn't been disproven. this is the far wiser position IMO. it only seems logical.
oh, ok. you are taking the agnostic approach. sorry
i used to take the athiest approach but it doesn't work well in debates. i have found the agnostic position is easier to defend and there fore must be the most correct position. actually, the way i see it, the agnostic position is the only defensable position, period.
I agree that allowing yourself to believe in something only after it has been proven makes sense, and waiting until something is disproved is crazy.
Cow said that logical scientific reasoning was to disprove something before accepting it as "not true." But why is god the exception? Cause I'm sure cow and even haite don't apply that to their every day lives.
Wouldn't that mean a suspect is guilty until proven innocent?
And wouldn't waiting until something is disproved before out ruling it imply that absolutely EVERYTHING possibly exists? Come on, some things just don't make sense. So, according to haite and cow, the likelyhood of an invisible gorilla that I can't feel and that doesn't let out any heat or trace being in my closet masturbating is as likely as god is to exist. I have just as much right (logically) to believe in the gorilla as religious people do in god. Why is it that I would be seen as crazy? God is believed in by so many people, that it appears not to be crazy. God is just a trend, and with all the believers, no one feels that really need to question it. And people who think they're questioning it really aren't.
Also, how did we come up with god if he isn't comprehendable to us? And suppose he is all powerful, he'd only remain that way in his own universe, cause if he entered ours, he'd have to apply to our rules of physics and logic.
And if he isn't all powerful in every single universe, is he still all powerful?
I'm too tired to explain the last two pages again dapork, please read through a few times...
I made you cry. Does that mean I win?
Yes. You win, because everyone else has lost by not agreeing to disagree.
conclusion: there is no god.
my conclusion: we do not know if there is a god.
this is a debate
you guys have managed to convert jaky to agnosticism.
You're concluding that based on the "only accept things to not exist if they're are disproven"... thing. If you go by that, you're also implying that we do not know anything. Why don't we just say "god hasn't been disproven to not exist". That conveniently throws it around .
agnosticism is the only defensable "religion" as it's beliefs are based on proper scientific method. i realized this yesterday.
the dictionary definition isn't what i believe. agnosticism is not defensable.
//edit: rather, that isn't what i think. i don't like that word "believe"
I cry for you...
*sigh* Okay, please let this be the last time I have to say this stuff.
Omg, you don't make sense . How can you say that it's crazy if, as an atheist, modern science is in effect your religion? Logical scientific reasoning is to hold something as the case until it is disproven, all you have to do is come up with one counterexample. If you can't, then it remains postulate. God an exception of what? He has not been disproven, and as He is the only explanation for the "disorder" of the universe then He is the solution. Uh, and what about innocent until proven guilty? The analogy doesn't work since it can be thrown either way, there's no clear resemblence of either side.
No, it wouldn't . The likelihood of a guerilla beating off in your closet is next to nothing since there's no evidence of it. The problematic nature of the universe is suggestive of intervention, otherwise there is no explanation for its disorder (unless science suddenly figures something grand out). God is a little more than a trend, and you insult me just as jake did by saying I don't question my religion.
We come up with God? If we "came up" with God then He wouldn't be God, He'd be a figment of our relatively limited imaginations. Yes, indeed, suppose he is all powerful, can he not bend his creation around him? Break the rules himself? He chose not to break the rules in the persona of Jesus, generally speaking. If he were not all powerful in every universe? That's a moot question, if he's not in one then he's not in any. Our very perception of a universe is one of finity, if he is defined by a finity in one instance then he is defined by all finities.
It is no longer a debate. Now it's just you two debating the exact same thing over and over and over again never getting anywhere because the debate seems to rely on your key foundational beliefs. Things that neither of you guys have any intention in changing, so the debate will never go anywhere.
SOMEBODY CLOSE THIS THREAD!!! it has become nothing but a waste of disk space, this stupid prattleing on about whether the Bible is right or not...
A side note, I can reasonably maintain my atheism but on different grounds: "There may or may not be a god, but since I have no proof of his existence, I will not trouble myself to ponder his existence, much less ponder whether YOUR god is THE god."
Separate names with a comma.