Yeah Mendel went to the University of Vienna not to become a scientist but a teacher.Even in contemporary society there is still a difference bw faculty of Education and the Faculty of Life sciences.Anyway,he did not even pass the teacher certification test,so officially he did not even qualify to become a teacher not ot talk of a scientist.
Darwin theory was the prevalent one at that time and you need to be a very brave scientist to go against that.Well I have mentioned De Vries as one of those very few.Can u educate me on those many that really attacked Darwin's theory.Morgan proved him right 50 years after but he actaully started out as a Darwinist.You want evidence,,,go to the library

Uche2nna:

Yeah Mendel went to the University of Vienna not to become a scientist but a teacher.Even in contemporary society there is still a difference bw faculty of Education and the Faculty of Life sciences.Anyway,he did not even pass the teacher certification test,so officially he did not even qualify to become a teacher not ot talk of a scientist.

Darwin was a scientist and Mendel wasn't, because. -----?

Darwin theory was the prevalent one at that time and you need to be a very brave scientist to go against that.Well I have mentioned De Vries as one of those very few.Can u educate me on those many that really attacked Darwin's theory.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Reaction for example.

See: http://www.hhmi.org/cgi-bin/askascientist/highlight.pl?kw=&file=answers%2Fgeneral%2Fans_069.html too.

Morgan proved him right 50 years after but he actaully started out as a Darwinist.

And proved Darwin wrong? Don't just make statements without backing them up with evidence. Lying for Jesus isn't an admirable trait you know

You want evidence,,,go to the library

LoLz, I guess that settles it.

Uche2nna:

Yeah Mendel went to the University of Vienna not to become a scientist but a teacher.Even in contemporary society there is still a difference bw faculty of Education and the Faculty of Life sciences.Anyway,he did not even pass the teacher certification test,so officially he did not even qualify to become a teacher not ot talk of a scientist.

He practiced science, more specifically, he used the scientific method to arrive at his theory of inheritence. Ergo, he was a scientist. It's not the degree that makes one a scientist, even Einstein was only working at the Bern patent office when he was at his most productive.

Uche2nna:

Darwin theory was the prevalent one at that time

And it still is, for very good reasons: it has not been falsified, there is no evidence against it and mountains of evidence in it's favor.

Uche2nna:

and you need to be a very brave scientist to go against that.

Anyone bringing evidence against Darwinian natural selection would have a very attentative public in the scientific community. Unfortunately for those scientists, their refutations crumble even under the most superficial reading.

Uche2nna:

Well I have mentioned De Vries as one of those very few.Can u educate me on those many that really attacked Darwin's theory.

I leave this one to KAG, but a google search should help you on your way.

Uche2nna:

Morgan proved him right 50 years after but he actaully started out as a Darwinist.You want evidence,,,go to the library

Assertion does not evidence make.
Why don't [b]you [/b]bring that evidence against the TOE? I guarantee that all of your arguments can easily be refuted and that I will take the effort to do so myself. Do not just talk the talk, but above all, walk the walk.

Like I have said before I do not intend to hold brief for the Almighty.
You complain that I should bring on the evidence when i said you should visit a library but you comfortably advised me on a google search when i asked for some clarification.You guys are really funny.
Anyway, I know I can not prove to you guys the Existence of God just like I can not count the number of hairs on my head.However,just because you do not see the air does not mean it does not exist.THERE IS MORE TO THIS WORLD THAN THE HUMAN EYE CAN DECIPHER. Have a NICE DAY


POST SCRIPT
_{EINSTEIN WAS A WELL KNOWN SCIENTIST IN HIS DAYS.MENDEL WAS ONLY ACCORDED THE FATHER OF GENETICS 10 DECADES AFTER HIS DEATH. I AGREE WITH YOU THAT HE USED SCIENTIFIC METHODS TO GET TO HIS CONCLUSION.IF IT WERE THAT EASY LIKE YOU MAKE IT OUT TO BE,THEN OTHER CONTEMPORARY SCIENTISTS WOULD HAVE MADE THAT DISCOVERY NOT MENDEL IN HIS SMALL GARDEN IN A SMALL ABBOT.}

Uche2nna:

Like I have said before I do not intend to hold brief for the Almighty.

That's fair enough, I don't think anybody has asked you to anyway.

You complain that I should bring on the evidence when i said you should visit a library but you comfortably advised me on a google search when i asked for some clarification.

You skipped my post, didn't you? Didn't you?

You guys are really funny.

At least we're not the joke.

Anyway, I know I can not prove to you guys the Existence of God just like I can not count the number of hairs on my head.

Nobody is asking you to prove the existence of any God, at least not at the moment. We are (I am) simply asking for evidence for the many claims you've made in this thread. They don't even have anything to do with Gods.

If you don't feel like providing any evidence for your claims, maybe we should just move on to why you think the theory of evolution is wrong, or maybe Big Bang theory?

However,just because you do not see the air does not mean it does not exist.THERE IS MORE TO THIS WORLD THAN THE HUMAN EYE CAN DECIPHER. Have a NICE DAY

The properties of air can be examined, and tested. Empirical evidence for air exists, etc, and yes there's more to the world than the human eye can decipher. Have a good morning.

Uche2nna:

Like I have said before I do not intend to hold brief for the Almighty.
You complain that I should bring on the evidence when i said you should visit a library but you comfortably advised me on a google search when i asked for some clarification.You guys are really funny.

You seem to like ignoring all the arguments I made and focus on me not wanting to follow you in your weak attack on the TOE. Very convenient. If you want to debate something specific, just write it down here, for everyone to read instead of referring people to a library and thinking that substitutes argumentation

Uche2nna:

Anyway, I know I can not prove to you guys the Existence of God just like I can not count the number of hairs on my head.However,just because you do not see the air does not mean it does not exist.

Air can be empirically detected and it's composition and characteristics can be determined. No such thing can be said about God.

Uche2nna:

THERE IS MORE TO THIS WORLD THAN THE HUMAN EYE CAN DECIPHER. Have a NICE DAY

Obviously, but then you want us to leap into the belief in your God-of-the-gaps. Intellectual laziness at it's best.

Uche2nna:

POST SCRIPT
_{EINSTEIN WAS A WELL KNOWN SCIENTIST IN HIS DAYS.MENDEL WAS ONLY ACCORDED THE FATHER OF GENETICS 10 DECADES AFTER HIS DEATH. I AGREE WITH YOU THAT HE USED SCIENTIFIC METHODS TO GET TO HIS CONCLUSION.IF IT WERE THAT EASY LIKE YOU MAKE IT OUT TO BE,THEN OTHER CONTEMPORARY SCIENTISTS WOULD HAVE MADE THAT DISCOVERY NOT MENDEL IN HIS SMALL GARDEN IN A SMALL ABBOT.}

You're joking, right?
1. Einstein was [b]not [/b]a well known scientist when he wrote his Annus Mirabilis papers in 1905.
2. Mendel couldn't know anything about genes. He is the father of [i]hereditary [/i]rather than of genetics.
3. Whether something is easy or not is irrelevant. His conclusions are there for us to study
4. How does the fact that Mendel, as an abbot, has made these discoveries prove anything?
5. What can lead you to the conclusion that other contemporary scientists should have made that discovery instead of Mendel?

There is a God.

Remember, not all that seems rational is right; and not all that seems irrational is wrong.

Charles Darwin came with a very rational approach. But does that make him right?

The Bible came with what seems irrational to most people. But does that make it wrong?

Don't be deceived, don't be fooled. You have a mind of your own. Think. Think deeply. You've done that several times? Well, just do it again, with a genuinely inquiring mind, and you'll come to the realisation of the truth.

God exists.

« #5 on: November 16, 2006, 03:34 PM » 
Believe me guys, I'd love to believe,  I just canna,

Apparantly t' mountains and lakes are all formed from[b] the big bang[/b]

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/universe/b_bang.html

Ya know I've lost family and friends close to me throughout me life and
wish they in some nice place, just don't think they are,

Who knows, maybe I could be convinced otherwise



@ deathadder,

Of course it was the big bang, however, that big bang was God's voice saying 'Let there be light!!!'

Enugu, are you a theistic evolutionist?

At those who say there's no God, read about Antony Flew.

goodguy:

At those who say there's no God, read about Antony Flew.

Flew based his deist position (very different from the God of Christianity, Judaism and Islam) on the modern version of the argument from design, more specifically on the intelligent design critique of darwinian natural selection. Intelligent design though is both morally and scientifically completely bankrupt.
You don't have to believe me, of course, the theist biologist Kenneth Miller exposes intelligent design for what it really is, a hoax, quite effectively.

You can read his arguments against Intelligent Design here or watch a video in which he debunks intelligent design here.

I do not suscribe to majority of Flew's theories and views. I only wanted you guys to concentrate more on why he stopped being an atheist.

goodguy:

There is a God.

Remember, not all that seems rational is right; and not all that seems irrational is wrong.

Charles Darwin came with a very rational approach. But does that make him right?

Righter than most, and righter than the many supernaturally based explanations before and after him.

The Bible came with what seems irrational to most people. But does that make it wrong?

Depends on how you choose to interpret what was written, but yeah.

Don't be deceived, don't be fooled. You have a mind of your own. Think. Think deeply. You've done that several times? Well, just do it again, with a genuinely inquiring mind, and you'll come to the realisation of the truth.

God exists.

No Gods exist. QED.

goodguy:

At those who say there's no God, read about Antony Flew.

At those who say there's a God (particularly the Christian God), read about Joseph McCabe

I could attempt to post a position on this, but those who can comprehend would see right through me, so let me start with a question - its the best place to start! What is [a]God? There! Answers on a postcard please!

I've read through, and can understand how unconvincing all those who say there is a God are. The arguments given here - and lots of better one's, have been used to attempt to convince me too, but they never worked. In fact, nothing makes one who does not believe in the existence of God disbelieve more than the lame attempts of those who would prove that there is a God! The chicken and the egg theory, as proof of God? How lame indeed! And to think one can quote a book about God to prove there is a God! What complete nonsense!

All the same, in an attempt at dishonesty, if you may, "In the beginning, God created heaven and earth"; well, he did, for those who would believe that stuff; and he placed Adam and Eve in the garden he created, saying, "Work! Produce! Eat! But do not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge"! And thats what many do, they obey! For if they do not, they believe they would go to hell, or they might realise that they are naked, and who wouldn't believe in a God who makes me not seem like a mad person, walking down the street with no clothes on? I sure bloody would believe if I were afraid of being called mad, until I think about it somewhat that is, and discover that is exactly what a master would tell a slave, "work, produce, but do not enjoy the benefits of your labour, for its no good for you!!" And we wonder why the people suffer!

In an old Egyptian text, God said to Adam and Eve, "Produce and eat of the tree of good and evil and you shall become like us"! I can't but think of what my dear brother said in the book of John, "Do you not know that ye are Gods?" I suppose, only those who would dare to eat of the fruit of the best tree in the garden would dare to be naked just like the Gods, but that fruit is indeed not for mere mortals like some to eat, hell no! They would rather be slaves, who, after all wants to be the master?

Trying to convince a person who does not believe in the God one believes in is like saying another should believe in that which oneself believes to be so but cannot show to another. So are you really asking that one believe there is a God, or that one believe you? that others should have faith in what you tell them without showing them any evidence at all? Are you really asking others to accept that you know more than they can possibly know? And who are you again? One of those who has eaten of the fruit and become so wise that you would dare to know perhaps; Like one of those who has gone to the heavens and seen the God in his kingdom and come down to tell others to merely believe in the fruit that you ate while you were there, without bringing any back hence allowing them to partake of the eating themself? Let me laugh a little. Sounds like you eating a good meal there, then trying to convince me it tastes good without allowing me to taste any of it myself, to me! Or maybe you haven't really eaten of the fruit at all, but just believe because you were told it tastes good? Interesting! and I suppose you are asking that others take your word on faith?

I find it interesting when some tell others to believe; they do not know any better and dare not seek for fear they may find, yet neither would they allow those who would seek to seek! They sound like daddy and mummy saying, "Child, mind! The fires hot!" Isn't it much better to allow me to put my fingers in the fire and find out for myself? Hell no, I suppose, after all, you are your sisters keeper, or shall I just call you my master, while I'm at it! You love me and have to protect me? Why not let me learn to burn myself, I wonder? Did you just call me "slave"?

Many who would claim that there is a God, would hark back to statements from the book, which would depend on which one they have read. I myself have been made to understand that they were written in the printing press of God all the way up in the Heavens, so why would those who haven't seen, those who are without properly functioning eyes not quote it as if it, the book, were the God? But if I may, let me harp back to my brothers words by quoting, "The Kingdom of God is within you", and unless you want to perform an operation, opening me up, showing my insides to me to prove to me that there is indeed a God living inside his kingdom which is inside of me - Oi! get away from me with that carving knife, please! - I really do not know how you going to prove to me that inside me somewhere is the kingdom of God, his home, where he lives. If I do not know that myself already! Makes one wonder why it is written "seeing they shall not see, hearing they shall not hear", don't it!

I tell you the truth, if there is indeed a God, he created not only you who believes - no! - He created also they who do not know there is God. And since he done what he done without asking you or I, he must have his reasons, I say. As I used to say, if there is a God, and he created me, then he better come down from where he is and prove to me that he exists. All I can now say is, when he did decide to bother, all I could say was, "I didn't know you existed Lord"! But I guess I'm the lucky one, that he is some kind God, I would be burning in hell otherwise!

Still, the beginning is to know what it is that you talk of! Answers on a postcard please! What is God? Thats where one really ought to begin.

Laugh my ass off

Interesting read buda atum.

Uche2nna:

Laugh my ass off

Are you gonna bring up the Big Bang theory like you promised? Also, I really would like to know why you think the theory of evolution is falsified or dead.

Ok No need arguing with you guys.U win I lose

Uche2nna:

Ok No need arguing with you guys.U win I lose

I don't look at discussions in that light. IMO, nobody wins or loses (that's not quite true, but it's true enough for this particular post), all we (people) should get is a good discussion at worse (it doesn't always go that way though;I remember some of the nuts I've debated or conversed with), and a lot of reciprocal learning (or something) at best.

Well I think that no matter wat I say u guys are gonna come up with a _{'more rational argument'}. That is allright cos I think it is always hard defending wat u do not see.An d that is why HE is GOD and we are just humans.We can not just formulate a physical equation and expect HIM to fit into that Equation.HE is spirit,defying all the laws of time and space u can think of.That is Y we can not rationalize HIM with our humanly brain cos HE is way far INTELLECTUAL than the human brain.I know I might be going a little spiritual now, this is cos I can afford it.I have experienced HIS power and that is y I know that HE EXISTS and that to me is more important than anything we men can come up with. We(Men) say that it took some million years for our earth to evolve. That is on a human time scale which is very different from God's time scale.HE said that it took HIM 6 days.Who am I gonna believe? Man or God.I think I will take my chances with God.Moreover there is nothing to lose in believing that HE exists,right?

I am still thinking about the Big Bang theory.I will get back to u later with that

Uche2nna:

Well I think that no matter what I say u guys are going to come up with a _{'more rational argument'}. That is allright because I think it is always hard defending what u do not see.

But if there's, by your estimation, a more rational argument, shouldn't the rational be encouraged and if possible be held more favorably?

An d that is why HE is GOD and we are just humans.We can not just formulate a physical equation and expect HIM to fit into that Equation.HE is spirit,defying all the laws of time and space u can think of.That is Y we can not rationalize HIM with our humanly brain because HE is way far INTELLECTUAL than the human brain.I know I might be going a little spiritual now, this is because I can afford it.

Some would argue that those traits are an argument against her existence. Her ability to not only change unreasonably when faced with counterarguments to her existence, but to also possess characteristics that are synonymous with non-existence show, at least to me, the workings of humans trying to protect an idea.

I have experienced HIS power and that is y I know that HE EXISTS and that to me is more important than anything we men can come up with.

That is fair enough. Would it bother you to know that many people with different Gods have felt the same thing you have, and also have the same conviction you have?

We(Men) say that it took some million years for our earth to evolve.

Billions.

That is on a human time scale which is very different from God's time scale.HE said that it took HIM 6 days.Who am I going to believe? Man or God.I think I will take my chances with God.Moreover there is nothing to lose in believing that HE exists,right?

Well, the Bible God never actually said it took her six days, that's your interpretation of the Genesis account. Incidentally, many Christians and Jews don't think the six days was literal.

Also, I don't know if there's nothing to lose in believing the Bible God exists, as it depends sometimes on individuals, and at other times it depends on how choices and morality are influenced by that belief.

I am still thinking about the Big Bang theory.I will get back to u later with that

No problem.

[center]Glad you enjoyed it.
[/center]

buda atum,

are you agnostic? You sound like one who is.

goodguy:

buda atum,

are you agnostic? You sound like one who is.

No, I am not agnostic, goodguy.
I know there is God, for me.

My brother, i've argued this topic somewhere on Nairaland before and can't go over it.

I WAS ONCE AN ATHEIST after experiencing "burnout" going to church 14 times a week!

I stumbled across Pascal's wager, and I concluded it was rational enough.

Make no mistake, i'm a little lower than Math's Major guys, so if you understand the mathematical implications you'll agree with me that upon all the objections and loopholes, it's better to believe that there is a true God and read his laws in the Holy books.

Warning: do not worship God because it's a better wager, worship him in truth and in spirit, your life is the holy book other's will refer to.

Read up Pascal's wager, God or no God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

or

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#4

and why the surprise that so many people don't believe in God, it's a sign of the end times.

The love for God will grow cold, many fake prophets and leaders, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENTIFIC discoveries (like the big bang and other stuffs) will MULTIPLY - what's happening today that the Bible has not warned us of? And why is it that most Atheists have their roots from Christianity?

Nas and Pac are Moslems and it's great to know they believe in God.


Signin out!
(Faithful Pac Follower)

I gat shot 5 times but i'm still breathing
Living proof there's a God if you need a reason

- Tupac, Letter to my unborn Child.

Interpretation of Pascal's Wager:

A satirical story, quite enjoyable, that arrives at the conclusion that only a fool would take Pascal's wager.


A truly astounding example of the power of philosophy that shows Pascal to be off 180°, or one can in a well constructed satirical dialogue arrive at the same place.

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John:
"Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary:
Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me:
"Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John:
"If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me:
"What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John:
"Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me:
"That doesn't make any sense. Why, "

Mary:
"Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

Me:
"Well maybe, if it's legit, but, "

John:
"Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me:
"Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"

Mary:
"Oh yes, all the time, "

Me:
"And has He given you a million dollars?"

John:
"Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me:
"So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary:
"You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."

Me:
"Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John:
"My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me:
"Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John:
"Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me:
"So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary:
"Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me:
"What's that got to do with Hank?"

John:
"Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me:
"I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John:
"But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me:
"Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him, "

Mary:
"No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me:
"Then how do you kiss His ass?"

John:
"Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."

Me:
"Who's Karl?"

Mary:
"A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me:
"And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"

John:
"Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."







From the desk of Karl

Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
Use alcohol in moderation.
Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
Eat right.
Hank dictated this list Himself.
The moon is made of green cheese.
Everything Hank says is right.
Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
Don't use alcohol.
Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.
















Me:
"This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary:
"Hank didn't have any paper."

Me:
"I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John:
"Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me:
"I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary:
"Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me:
"I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"

Mary:
"It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me:
"How do you figure that?"

Mary:
"Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me:
"Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John:
"No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me:
"But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."

John:
"There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me:
"Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock, "

Mary:
"But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."

Me:
"I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."

John:
"Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me:
"We do?"

Mary:
"Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me:
"You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John:
"Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me:
"But, oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary:
She blushes.

John:
"Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me:
"What if I don't have a bun?"

John:
"No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me:
"No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary:
She looks positively stricken.

John:
He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me:
"So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary:
Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John:
"That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that, "

Me:
"It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary:
She faints.

John:
He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

Why you should not believe in God(and other atheistic resources online): http://skeptically.org/againstreligion/id2.html

Please take your time to read this whether or not you believe in God. It's worth the time. This should either strengthen your belief in what you believe or discredit it, either way.

Christino:

Interpretation of Pascal's Wager:

A satirical story, quite enjoyable, that arrives at the conclusion that only a fool would take Pascal's wager.


A truly astounding example of the power of philosophy that shows Pascal to be off 180°, or one can in a well constructed satirical dialogue arrive at the same place.

Any one want to go kiss Hank's ass for a million?

There must be some takers

Seriously though, one must come to the conclusion that there must be something in this God very many people insist exists mustn't there? They all can't be lying, not so many people over so long a time - they can't all be deluding themselfs? I'm not in the fashion of delusion myself, and I must say, I have come to the conclusion there must be a God, at least for those who believe there is one. So, Who is God? (I did say it was a good place to start!)

Many believe in the God they have been told about. If I was say, from Saudi Arabia, or if my parents were Muslims, and had taught me about the God they believed in, I would be a Muslim if I had believed what they told me about their God. I would be a Hindu if I grew up in India, perhaps, or a Muslim, or maybe one of the minority of Christians that exists in India. If I was born in China, I may have the belief in myself - that I could accomplish anything I wanted if I put my heart to it, and if say from Japan, I might believe in Shinto. If I was born in Nigeria long before foreign religions came along, I would most likely be an Orisa worshiper. I'm not saying where one is born dictates what one accepts to believe about God, or that one's parents or surrounding dictate what one would hold as true; what I'm saying is that we usually adopt the belief in God from what we are exposed to; some do expand theirselfs by exposing themself to more Gods, and some do expose themselfs so much that they see far beyond what they are told - some even disbelieving it all in its entirety, still, we are products of what we consume, and in the case of religion, we only can believe what we know,

I like the God of the Bible, I also like Allah in the Quran, but I am more exposed to Jehova - one of the many names used for him in the Judaic Bible - than I am to Allah from the Quran. I like Jehova because the book that refers to him is a very intelligent book which holds different levels of eye openings; I call it the book of The Eye, my favorite expression is that made by the blind man in front of the Pharisees whom Jesus gave sight to - "He took some sand, spat on it, and rubbed it in my eye, and I could see!", thats what the book does for me, it opens my eye, an makes me see.

I think, I am an atheist. I do not personally believe there is a God as many would claim one should. I know however that there is something that I do call God, and there is something very many others call "God" too. We all manage to package something into an entity that we refer to when we mention the word "God". But I am unable to do that, package my God into a specific characteristic, or permanency. . I remember the commandment of God, "Thou shalt make no image of me"; I think the Bible manages to package God into an image, nothing to do with a real God. In that, the Muslims, in my opinion, have a greater God, they manage to not limit the nature of the God they are meant to believe in - however, I must say, they themselfs have managed to misinterpret the true nature of God, on the whole, if one were to look at whats going on in the world today. God will save us all, I guess.

God said, "Of all the fruit in the Garden may you eat. But of this tree, the fruit of Good and Evil, you shall eat not. For on the day that thou eat thereof, ye shalt surely die", and ever since, human beings around the world have decided they shall not eat. Many stick there heads so far up Hank's ass for a million, they are unwilling to consider why they stink! Many want unearned rewards so much, they are willing to debase themself by refusing to comprehend what they are doing. Is it not true that "ye must die to be born again?", Why fear ye death, I ask, then! But thats not what many think they are doing; many would not accept they are afraid to die!

I find that when a human being gets to the point in their journey through life, where they can not go along alone, they find God. Many have decided there isn't no God, and they will say so emphatically, but to these I would ask they consider, "So why are you expending so much energy disproving something you believe does not exist to those who believe it does? If there weren't a God, please tell me the wisdom of your telling those who believe there is one that there isn't one? Are you not really trying to find out if there is a God, yourself? Maybe you don't know - I have been told that some might not - but the mere fact that you are on here arguing about it, having done much research, is that not sufficient proof that something exists that is referred to as God? Do you really believe that that which you spend so much energy on is a figment of one's imagination? I ask you to consider, are you imagining things; it sounds larky to me.

I find 'Christians' to be dishonest and outright lazy! I wonder if they ever consider that a God who is the I Am That I Am, can ever be packaged into laws and precepts. If a thing can be whatever it wants to be, who is to say it is how like this or like that? In a sense, it makes one admire the attitude of an agnostic, they at least are not emphatically saying, "this is how it is", though, according to the Christian, that is the sin of disbelief; they would ask that a person believe in that which one's eye has not comprehended - kind of like the fairy at the bottom syndrome; "Look buda, there is a fairy at the bottom of the garden!", "I can't see it", "O! just believe it is there!" "Why?" Because, if you don't you will go to hell! Indeed, that may work for the person who's mind one wished to control! And I dare say, quite a lot of what does pass for a belief in God is about relinquishing one's control to another being or entity; it would seem no one wants to take responsibility anymore, "so lets all say, God done it"! not that I'm saying he didn't do it or anything, in a way, God did done it, after all, he did create one in his own image to create just like he did. But to then think that he created everyone in the same image in which he created everyone else is lemminglike conformity - anyone with a brain would look a bit deeper.

"I am the Lord thy God! Thou shalt not worship anyone but me!" Why, one should reduce oneself to the worship of another God then beffudles me. Why anyone would chose to worship the image of someone else's God, beats me hands down, though I can see the laziness that permits it. After all, if one could make the effort to go to one's God directly, not looking in a book, but where God is supposed to live - inside one, one would find oneself. But the idea that one creates one's own God is not what we would have the world know! Just imagine, everyone saying, "I am God!", we can't have that type of chaos - even though, out of that comes the orderly separation of the land from the sea, the dark from the light, and the stupid from the outright intelligent, and so on! Indeed as was said, when they came to ask Jesus if he were the messiah, "Tell John what you see; the lame walk, the blind see, and the deaf get back their hearing", is the gospel not preached for those who are poor? I guess Hank has the eradication of the type of poverty many would have in mind.

"You shall surely die!" - if you take of the fruit of good and evil and eat thereof; you will be naked too. You will realise that all that which you have built around you as being so is not exactly so perhaps, unless you have remembered to use a lamp. Even then, you would look again because you dared to consider that perhaps you never looked well enough when you looked first time. You will see because your eyes will open, you will not be able to accept illogical reasoning as evidence for what is not there; you will not be able to subjugate your God given reasoning to the will of belief; beliefs, you merely read about in a book - a book many spend so much time indoctrinating themself into and end up merely believing, never deigning to know outright; spewing words they have little or no comprehension, or even a figment thereof; claiming they do not know in the same sentence they bid that others accept their 'knowing', never accepting that one may dare to seek to know - even though the book says one should know one's God!

There is a God for those who believe there is one. Everyone's God is in the image they themselfs alone can comprehend. Peoples Gods are of attributes and character as they believe their Gods have, and no one can convince another otherwise. If I didn't know that my God is whatever he decides to be, I too might tell you about him, but I'd be telling till the cows come home, and you would still stick to your very own image of God. Your God is what is revealed to you, and my God is that which is revealed to me, and each of us has different strenghts of seeing, and even each one's God may be of different brightness. Maybe those who do not know there is a God have bad eyes, or maybe their God is not shinning brightly enough for them to see it. I tell you, they sure are better off that way than to convince themself they see the God that other's are try to tell them is there - it is sure kind of like saying, "ok, I see the fairy", when you don't, really! And whatever your God may not be, he sure is not a lying toe rag, whatever image he may be in? All I can hope for is that no one takes their God out of a cornflakes box! Make sure your God is the best God on the block!

and for those of you who never found no God in your cornflakes? Maybe just go out and buy another pack, like you normally would; you don't, you might find God!

buda atum:

I find that when a human being gets to the point in their journey through life, where they can not go along alone, they find God. Many have decided there isn't no God, and they will say so emphatically, but to these I would ask they consider, "So why are you expending so much energy disproving something you believe does not exist to those who believe it does? If there weren't a God, please tell me the wisdom of your telling those who believe there is one that there isn't one? Are you not really trying to find out if there is a God, yourself? Maybe you don't know - I have been told that some might not - but the mere fact that you are on here arguing about it, having done much research, is that not sufficient proof that something exists that is referred to as God? Do you really believe that that which you spend so much energy on is a figment of one's imagination? I ask you to consider, are you imagining things; it sounds larky to me.

The reason I don't believe in God is simply because there is absolutely no evidence pointing in the direction of the existence of a god.
I tend to argue about the existence of Gods for a couple of reasons. What really catches my interest is the fact that many intelligent people, quite a lot of whom are far more intelligent than I am, believe in God, even though it flies in the face of rationality, both on empirical as on epistemological grounds. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to align on the one hand belief in a deity and on the other hand apply rational considerations to most other aspects of life. Religious apologetics isn't really rational, but only a weak form rationalisation; the question those apologetics should ask themselves is not whether or not their religious dogma can be aligned with the findings of modern science, but rather whether or not their interpretation of the facts is the most probable and reasonable among all possible explanations for the same facts. Ockham's razor should be rigorously applied to all possible explanations of the facts.

As the evidence is lacking, the only basis for god-belief is faith, which, by it's very essence, i.e. belief without evidence or in spite of contrary evidence, sets itself apart from reason. You cannot arrive at truth without basing yourself on rationality, because without rationality, truth itself becomes a concept without meaning. Once you accept that way of thinking as respectable, you effectively open the floodgates to all kinds of religiously motivated lunacy, as the essence of that lunacy cannot be questioned. Faith does not deserve respect because it fosters uncritical, unquestioning obedience to dogma.

The main reason why I argue against theistic beliefs is that the attitude of belief without evidence can - and regularly does - have some very nasty and undesirable side-effects. It is a mode of thinking that prevents honest inquiry and dissociates beliefs from their consequences, especially for those not agreeing with a specific religious worldview. The terrorists flying those planes in the WTC on 9-11 truly and honestly believed they were doing God's will. Even the moderately religious demand respect for faith, thereby creating a fertile breeding ground for the religious fanatics and lunatics.

only a fool would say there is no God

You just said it.