• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

If God Were Proven To Be True.........

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is that lion-headed god holding a laser pistol in its top left hand?

images
 
I was going to respond directly to the points raised, but it appears that the OP just wants someone to justify his baseless beliefs.
I don't think you are interested in truth,; only in getting your own opinion affirmed.

Based on past behaviour I'm not convinced he's interested in either of those things and is instead more interested in poking a hornets nest but we'll see if he posts in this thread again or not.
 
I don't even like to pull the SCIENCE/ATHEISM card on stuff like this. I just think people need to study other religions besides Christianity and realize how brainwashed it is to believe only the recent religious tradition imposed on European culture by the Roman elite.
I suspect that religion can be something of a reflection of human psychology and the mentalities of cultures as they were advancing, which is more fascinating than just the idea there's some entity or entities that feel like leaving crap around and telling people how to live their lives.
 
Im not here to argue what others believe at all. Its ok to disagree with me 100%. Im cool with it. I was just basing what I said on what Ive seen.
When each of us who are not willing to give anything a chance talk. It gets nowhere.
 
I'm not sure if you're intoxicated or just sleep deprived, but your post is a little incoherent.

As for this part:

1. The Universe and Science What about it?
2. The Written Word (The Bible) There have been many religious texts, most of which contradict each other.
3. The Morality of Mankind I don't believe there is any objective moral code among humans.
4. The Person of Jesus Christ (God in Man) There have been many accounts of "God made man", which again tend to contradict each other's teachings.
5. Personal Experience through Faith Most of my experiences have directly contradicted the existence of the (Abrahamic) God.

I don't wish to imply that there can be no "God" (especially since the term is so vague), but it's obvious why many are skeptical.
 
Im not here to argue what others believe at all. Its ok to disagree with me 100%. Im cool with it. I was just basing what I said on what Ive seen.
When each of us who are not willing to give anything a chance talk. It gets nowhere.
You people have had 2000 years of talking, the rest of us are pretty over it.
 
every person who reads this has to make that decision to

Believe or Not Believe

1. The Universe and Science
2. The Written Word (The Bible)
3. The Morality of Mankind
4. The Person of Jesus Christ (God in Man)
5. Personal Experience through Faith (which cannot be measured, weighed, studied by Science)

The Bible which is known to be God's word to man.

1. You can't choose what you believe.
2. There is nothing in the universe and science that is evidence for the existence of God.
3.T There's no reason to think that The Bible is the word of God. In fact, there are a lot of good reasons to think that The Bible is not the word of God.
4. There's no reason to think that the morality of mankind is evidence for the existence of God.
5. There is no reason to think that Jesus was "God in Man".
6. Personal experience through faith is just a psychological phenomenon that can be explained through brain chemistry, and is not evidence of the existence of God.
 
Do we not have an entire thread dedicated specifically to atheism vs theism?
 
I suspect that religion can be something of a reflection of human psychology and the mentalities of cultures as they were advancing, which is more fascinating than just the idea there's some entity or entities that feel like leaving crap around and telling people how to live their lives.

Religions definitely fit the shape of human social structure at the time.

A lot more religions than we think were probably intentionally disseminated by the powers-that-be, in order to justify their rule.

Fun Fact: The very first religion we know of (the earliest written down upon tablets that we can find), was about the male god Tiamat seizing power from a group of more equal male and female gods. This was in a Mesopotamian society where a tyrant had recently seized control from a more egalitarian community of sovereign rulers. He was one of the first kings.

The first religion was literally state mind control.
 
I don't have a god in this fight but "evidence" isn't what religious people go on, it's faith.

That is true, but they often claim to have evidence that, for some reason, they can not share.

Also, when speaking to children or the credulous, they will distort facts to 'support' their claims.
 
Your side has no evidence. None. You literally bring nothing to the table.

Thats exactly what I meant by the thread. If you see it as no evidence and I say it is. Then by your terms what is it exactly if I say "the universe, the Bible, Jesus etc is evidence"

What is it in your terms exactly other than evidence?
 
I would have a hard time believing the creator of the universe would come come down and "prove" itself to us. What possible reason or concern could our belief in it matter.

It would be like me trying to convince the shit I took this morning that I made it and it should worship me.
 
Thats exactly what I meant by the thread. If you see it as no evidence and I say it is. Then by your terms what is it exactly if I say "the universe, the Bible, Jesus etc is evidence"

What is it in your terms exactly other than evidence?

"the universe, the Bible, Jesus etc is evidence" is a factually and grammatically incorrect sentence.

Jesus etc is however a pretty good song.

Nothing I just wrote is evidence, except perhaps for being evidence of a basic grasp of the english language and a passing familiarity with Wilco.
 
There's a reason that the universe and the bible aren't accepted as evidence. It's not like they are being rejected for the sake of it.

Thats my question. I really am seeking an answer.

If they are not evidence and they exist and are a physical part of the universe. What sort of evidence or term do you call it?
 
I'm all for mystic experience but it's impossible to experience God, and by that I mean God the supreme being. You can have a sensed presence experience, or an experience of boundlessness, etc, but it's a huge and unexamined leap to go from that to assuming that your experience is pointing to God, that is just a meaning that we're bringing to it. It's undisciplined and it's poor mysticism. You have to treat mysticism like handling snakes, if you're not able to put in the care to grab it the right way you'll be bitten, in which case it's best to not bother attempting it. We have to see our experiences for what they are, there's no kind of experience that has 'God' in the blueprint.

But who knows, maybe there are beings with vast powers beyond our comprehension that we could call 'gods', but it seems pointless to worship them unless they're the absolute. However the absolute is beyond our experience and therefore means nothing to us.
 
Thats exactly what I meant by the thread. If you see it as no evidence and I say it is. Then by your terms what is it exactly if I say "the universe, the Bible, Jesus etc is evidence"

What is it in your terms exactly other than evidence?
Do you misunderstand the term "evidence"? Something that is tangible and can be empirically proven, or that very least come close to proving a fact?
How exactly does the bible prove anything?
 
I'm all for mystic experience but it's impossible to experience God, and by that I mean God the supreme being. You can have a sensed presence experience, or an experience of boundlessness, etc, but it's a huge and unexamined leap to go from that to assuming that your experience is pointing to God, that is just a meaning that we're bringing to it, it's undisciplined and it's poor mysticism. You have to treat mysticism like handling snakes, if you're not able to put in the care to grab it the right way you'll be bitten, in which case it's best to not bother attempting it.

But who knows, maybe there are beings with vast powers beyond our comprehension that we could call 'gods', but it seems pointless to worship them unless they're the absolute. However the absolute is beyond our experience and therefore means nothing to us.

I'd be surprised if even a tiny fraction of theists really understood it in that sense. Most of them are just passing on the rulebooks they were indoctrinated with.
 
I'm all for mystic experience but it's impossible to experience God, and by that I mean God the supreme being. You can have a sensed presence experience, or an experience of boundlessness, etc, but it's a huge and unexamined leap to go from that to assuming that your experience is pointing to God, that is just a meaning that we're bringing to it, it's undisciplined and it's poor mysticism. You have to treat mysticism like handling snakes, if you're not able to put in the care to grab it the right way you'll be bitten, in which case it's best to not bother attempting it.

But who knows, maybe there are beings with vast powers beyond our comprehension that we could call 'gods', but it seems pointless to worship them unless they're the absolute. However the absolute is beyond our experience and therefore means nothing to us.

So you're an agnostic who likes to get high?
 
"the universe, the Bible, Jesus etc is evidence" is a factually and grammatically incorrect sentence.

Jesus etc is however a pretty good song.

Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Bible is evidence and you say it is not.

The Bible is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to God even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of God.
 
Thats my question. I really am seeking an answer.

If they are not evidence and they exist and are a physical part of the universe. What sort of evidence or term do you call it?
If you really are seeking an answer, ask yourself: why are other religious texts not evidence that those gods exist?
 
Shame the rest of her didn't make it!

*rimshot

*booed off stage

Lol! I'll set em up, you knock em down.

Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Batman comic is evidence and you say it is not.

The Batman comic is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to Batman even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of Batman.
 
Please provide us with Noah's Ark, the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail, or something that's actual evidence rather than the bible which is basically hearsay.


Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Bible is evidence and you say it is not.

The Bible is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to God even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of God.

Really dude? Really? Just no, stop it.
 
Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Bible is evidence and you say it is not.

The Bible is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to God even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of God.

FFS, what is it evidence of?

If I find a potato on the ground, by your rules, we can call it evidence.

OK, what is it evidence of and how did you come to that conclusion?
 
Hmmmmmm Im lost.

Those are all physical based objects, entities, constructs.

Are you saying that I need an evidence that is not that?

How is The Bible a physical object, besides the fact that it's (sometimes) printed on paper? The Bible is a collection of stories. Stories aren't physical objects. Evidence need to be empirically verifiable.
 
Do you misunderstand the term "evidence"? Something that is tangible and can be empirically proven, or that very least come close to proving a fact?
How exactly does the bible prove anything?

Im trying to understand this.

If someone in court presents an object as evidence. The judge does not say to the court. That this object is not evidence just because he says so. It is still evidence regardless of what the judge says right?
 
Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Bible is evidence and you say it is not.

The Bible is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to God even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of God.

batman comics are evidence of batman, batman must therefore exist for reals dude. because batman comics are physical based objects, part of the universe and they're related to the subject matter of batman.


awww fuck, I was beaten to that punch :l

Im trying to understand this.

If someone in court presents an object as evidence. The judge does not say to the court. That this object is not evidence just because he says so. It is still evidence regardless of what the judge says right?

Okay, it seems like you don't understand how courts work either.
 
Seriously what is it that you call it? If I say The Bible is evidence and you say it is not.

The Bible is a physical based object, part of the universe and you do not accept it as evidence. Or disagree that is evidence.

What is it? If its not evidence to God even though it clearly is related to the subject matter of God.

Are you serious? Read that aloud and tell me that makes sense. Ahhhhh!! How do you even exist as a person, your posts are giving me s headache.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom