Do you Believe In God

[TheHig]

I said, Look at it my way, in the same mould Godcubed said it the other way. It isnt a hard concept, in my mind he exists, Hence why my Way.


EDIT: Sound doesnt work on my laptop, So cant view them, but there be some scientist trying to discredit religion, Like there hasnt been enough of them

there satire videos, they do discredit religion but they are interesting

 

[GodCubed]

The invisible and the non-existant look very much alike.

Mate, if you want to make a cogent argument, using atheistic buzzwords and philosophical sayings isn't going to get you very far. If you want to use them as a base for a cogent argument, fine. If not, they're pretty much useless.

Oh and P.S: Not true. The Invisible Man and the Loch Ness Monster don't look alike, do they?

 

[madman558]

Look at it my way: He exists, He is my lord, He is the one i love, and i try to show respect to non Beileves, then someone, who you thought better off, called him a ****.

"he exists"... if so... why do so many families lose members to cancer? aids? terminal illnesses? besides who is to say its a he... maybe its a she (hence why i am calling "god" it...)

why are there so many disasters? pakistan for example... why did so many die during the floods why are so many still suffering today? dont come out with the "god loves all and has a plan" its complete nonsense... why are so many homeless? why are so many people disabled (including mentally and physically)? answer them questions with legitimate answers and then i will be quiet

do not come out with "gos has a plan" because that is all a load of tosh...

 

[Joel`]

"he exists"... if so... why do so many families lose members to cancer? aids? terminal illnesses? besides who is to say its a he... maybe its a she (hence why i am calling "god" it...)

why are there so many disasters? pakistan for example... why did so many die during the floods why are so many still suffering today? dont come out with the "god loves all and has a plan" its complete nonsense... why are so many homeless? why are so many people disabled? answer them questions with legitimate answers and then i will be quiet

But to explain the extraordinary requires an extraordinary explanation.

 

[Chaz Sexington]

The Dragon In My Garage

by Carl Sagan
"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"

Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle -- but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You'd wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then, why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility. Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative -- merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved."

Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons -- to say nothing about invisible ones -- you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon.

Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages -- but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all.

Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such "evidence" -- no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it -- is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.

Edit: Sagan is awesome.

 

[madman558]

But to explain the extraordinary requires an extraordinary explanation.

i see it as an extroadinary fairy tale yes... but thats not a legit answer

 

[Dermilson]

Mate, if you want to make a cogent argument, using atheistic buzzwords and philosophical sayings isn't going to get you very far. If you want to use them as a base for a cogent argument, fine. If not, they're pretty much useless.

Oh and P.S: Not true. The Invisible Man and the Loch Ness Monster don't look alike, do they?

Im not trying to make a cogent argument and im not trying to get anywhere. This is a debate not an argument and how I express my opinion, whether in the style of philisophical quotes or lengthy passages of text shouldnt matter.

P.s Yes they do look the same, nothingness looks the same.

 

[madman558]

Im not trying to make a cogent argument and im not trying to get anywhere. This is a debate not an argument and how I express my opinion, whether in the style of philisophical quotes or lengthy passages of text shouldnt matter.

P.s Yes they do look the same, nothingness looks the same.

if i was to say i believed in the loachness monster, would you say to me that its a man... not a fish type thing? and then would you also say that the invisible man is not a fish type thing? instead of a human?

 

[GodCubed]

Im not trying to make a cogent argument and im not trying to get anywhere. This is a debate not an argument and how I express my opinion, whether in the style of philisophical quotes or lengthy passages of text shouldnt matter.

P.s Yes they do look the same, nothingness looks the same.

So if you're not trying to form a cogent argument (which is basically synonymous to debate), why should you expect anyone to lend credence to what you say? How you express your opinion in a debate is vital. If I came in here and said "LOL GOD SUX LOL" I wouldn't expect anyone to listen to me (note that I am not saying you did that, and it is just an example).

And no, they don't. The Loch Ness Monster is said to be a big dragonlike creature. The invisible man is, well, invisible and cannot be seen. Neither exist, yet they "look" different. Unless if I were to say "Loch Ness Monster" to you, and you thought of absolutely nothing at all?

 

[Dermilson]

if i was to say i believed in the loachness monster, would you say to me that its a man... not a fish type thing? and then would you also say that the invisible man is not a fish type thing? instead of a human?

They can be anything u want them to be as there is no proof in there existance. What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

 

[Joel`]

They can be anything u want them to be as there is no proof in there existance. What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

But there's an infinite amount of possibilities that the invisible man could look like and that the loch ness monster could look like. Due to the nature of infinity, it suggests they do not look the same.

 

[madman558]

They can be anything u want them to be as there is no proof in there existance. What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

good answer lol

 

[Mikey burnsey]

any one who belives in anyfink written in the bible are a absolute complete joke and are living a lie.

How rude are you, people have choices and take comfort in what ever religion they belong to or not, to call anyone a complete joke and living a lie is totally unacceptable,You do not understand the comfort religion can give a person, please be careful when posting comments.
And so everyone knows I am a Catholic en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church - But not a practising Catholic this means I do not go to church weekly.

 

[Dermilson]

But there's an infinite amount of possibilities that the invisible man could look like and that the loch ness monster could look like. Due to the nature of infinity, it suggests they do not look the same.

That is rubbish. They can look the same if you want them to, or they can look different if u want them to. they dont exist!!!! The nature of infinity doesnt come into it.

Can we get back on topic of 'GOD' rather than the loch ness Giraffe and the invisible woman.

 

[Marko8]

Yes.

 

[madman558]

That is rubbish. They can look the same if you want them to, or they can look different if u want them to. they dont exist!!!! The nature of infinity doesnt come into it.

Can we get back on topic of 'GOD' rather than the loch ness Giraffe and the invisible woman.

while i agree that they look how ever a person percieves them to be.. "they dont exist!!!!" is a false statement... much like GOD you may not believe in the monster, but i may therefore he would exist to me (im atheist)... infact in Yr 8 in english i did a story based on the monster lol... but back to the point, you cannot state that they do not exist as a matter of fact, they may not to you... but to me they may

/off topic

 

[Joel`]

That is rubbish. They can look the same if you want them to, or they can look different if u want them to. they dont exist!!!! The nature of infinity doesnt come into it.

Can we get back on topic of 'GOD' rather than the loch ness Giraffe and the invisible woman.

The key is "If you want them to" you never stated that in your original argument.

"The god excuse, the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." George Carlin <333

 

[tripedius]

I so hope that religious people, just before they die 'see' that there is nothing there. There is no after life. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes, which is about the only thing that is true in the bible. In the end we're nothing more than wormfood. Only difference is I'm not hampered by ' Gods rules' or should I say the rules people made up as if it was coming from some kind of god.

These days we have a name for people like Jezus, there called mentaly insane.

Or is it?

 

[madman558]

I so hope that religious people, just before they die 'see' that there is nothing there. There is no after life. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes, which is about the only thing that is true in the bible. In the end we're nothing more than wormfood. Only difference is I'm not hampered by ' Gods rules' or should I say the rules people made up as if it was coming from some kind of god.

These days we have a name for people like Jezus, there called mentaly insane.

Or is it?

why do you hope that they see nothing there? why do you want to take away their chance to meet their "lord" (as i stated i am athiest... and personally dont care what happens to myself when i die)

 

[Marko8]

I read first few pages in this thread and many of there stated: "prove me how all this happened", prove this, prove that...
Question is: Do you believe in God?
- yes, I believe. You must believe. Just believe. This is point of everything
So simple...