Does God exist? (17 Viewers)

[BlackDragon]

exactly.
but XaittyO seems to think otherwise.
seriously though, (XaittyO) have the intellectual honesty and the intellectual integrity to realize and admit that your argument is invalid.

Just a point here. The religious framework is designed around the existence of god, and therefore cannot encompass any attempt to disprove god. Where as the scientific framework is not designed to disprove the existence of god, within which there is no proof of his existence.

 

[Name_Taken]

Just a point here. The religious framework is designed around the existence of god, and therefore cannot encompass any attempt to disprove god. Where as the scientific framework is not designed to disprove the existence of god, within which there is no proof of his existence.

Science is just the investigation of the observable.

God is "by default" not observable, and therefore, the rules which govern scientific method can't be used to identify the "properties" of said God or to prove or disprove His existence.

 

[BlackDragon]

Yes but arguing that god can't be disproved through religion is moot.

 

[Iron]

Look, we cant prove Him and you cant disprove Him, ok? This results in a free choice that has nothing to do with our familiarity with science. You can accept and apply scientific method to understand the physical world and still hold that all matter was created by God - these views do not have to conflict; in fact they form a complimentary search for Truth which have at their core a love, resulting in the harnessing of our knowledge for good and not evil.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Alright. We can't prove or disprove god. So why are we still letting god and the bible dictate our laws (or some of it)?

 

[theism]

Alright. We can't prove or disprove god. So why are we still letting god and the bible dictate our laws (or some of it)?

natural law.
it's like that guy dr newdown or something thats suing to get God removed from law making

 

[BlackDragon]

Alright. We can't prove or disprove god. So why are we still letting god and the bible dictate our laws (or some of it)?

I think its mainly socio-historical forces that have ingrained certain prejudices and perspectives into our laws and institutions. These don't have to be religious, they can be attitudes against women as well, or anything. The world in terms of our institutions and social norms have been constructed from a male perspective largely.

 

[proletariat]

All higher beings (god, krsna, etc.) are not bound by human constraints. Accepting this, we cannot prove them to exist or to not exist within our frame of existance.

 

[theism]

All higher beings (god, krsna, etc.) are not bound by human constraints. Accepting this, we cannot prove them to exist or to not exist within our frame of existance.

hehe agnostic here.

you can't prove it no, but there is certainly notable evidence that supports the existence of God

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

hehe agnostic here.

you can't prove it no, but there is certainly notable evidence that supports the existence of God

Oh no there isn't. And don't say there is because there isn't!

 

[zaxmacks]

hehe agnostic here.

you can't prove it no, but there is certainly notable evidence that supports the existence of God

Evidence does away with faith, which is the basis of Christianity.

 

[theism]

Tough Questions: How can you prove God exists?

obviously that bloke is alot more intelligent then i am, so forward your questions to him

 

[Riet]

Tough Questions: How can you prove God exists?

obviously that bloke is alot more intelligent then i am, so forward your questions to him

the second post resoundingly destroys every single one of his assertions.

 

[theism]

the second post resoundingly destroys every single one of his assertions.

there were responses for the other post but they got deleted for some reason hmm..

 

[Name_Taken]

Oh no there isn't. And don't say there is because there isn't!

There is none that would disprove the notion of God, despite what the Church of Richard Dawkins would like you to believe.

In fact there is not even any evidence that would even raise doubt at the validity of the existence of a God.

 

[Riet]

Occam's Razor

 

[theism]

God not waving hello at us, let alone saving us from global food crisis is one piece of 'evidence', right?

sorry, that's not Gods fault.


ecologically, the world can sustain a population 30x what it is now..


but no, we use 1000kg of grain, to produce 1kg of beef, as well as
45 424.9 liters of water to produce one pound (600ish grams) of beef.

to fuel our vast demands for energy, we clear rainforests to produce corn for biodiesel.

where there are fertile lands which can grow potatoes, wheat, rice, etc, we use to grow cotton, tobacco, coffee, tea ... cash crops.

pfft.
nice points of reasoning..

 

[bio_nut]

sorry, that's not Gods fault.


ecologically, the world can sustain a population 30x what it is now..


but no, we use 1000kg of grain, to produce 1kg of beef, as well as
45 424.9 liters of water to produce one pound (600ish grams) of beef.

to fuel our vast demands for energy, we clear rainforests to produce corn for biodiesel.

where there are fertile lands which can grow potatoes, wheat, rice, etc, we use to grow cotton, tobacco.. cash crops.

pfft.

We could only temporarily sustain that number, actually. We have long since passed the population point at which the earth has a chance to recover, 30 x would just accelarate this process. We are killing our planet.

And as if everyone in the western world would be willing to turn vegetarian. Just isn't going to happen.

And most of the rainforest is actually being cleared to produce palm oil, a major component of foods and cosmetics.

 

[mirakon]

Occam's Razor

Hmmm... I suppose however that logic and science, under which Occam's Razor is applied are limited within known space-time and hence have no relevance beyond space-time when the Universe was created.

 

[theism]

We could only temporarily sustain that number, actually. We have long since passed the population point at which the earth has a chance to recover, 30 x would just accelarate this process. We are killing our planet.

And as if everyone in the western world would be willing to turn vegetarian. Just isn't going to happen.

And most of the rainforest is actually being cleared to produce palm oil, a major component of foods and cosmetics.

no, if we all slaughtered the live stock, ate it, and turned vegetarian we would be able to sustain a world population 30x.. there was a very good thesis on the topic.

well duh.

and i didn't say anything about 'most of the rainforest'.
bio-diesel and particularly soy-bean plantations is happening in brazil as we speak.

iirc palm oil is mostly in the asian subtropics.. ie. malaysia, indonesia.

so bottom line is,
the 'world food crisis' is really the result of the greediness of humans