-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
difficulty of the first year math exams (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter freaking_out
- Start date
KeypadSDM
B4nn3d
You're not addressing the point og this argument. That God by necessity has to exist.
I believe in God, but there's no proof that he MUST exist.
Um by keypad....arguing about whether a god exists and whether there was someone who created the creator is pointless and will get u in a lot of trouble. Just let them be, have ur own opinions, voice them but do not question other people's beliefs and they won't question urs....dun make chaos out of nothing
KeypadSDM
B4nn3d
Ok, here's a little logic: Belief is not Proof. Please, if you're going to say something about what I said, at least make it related to what I said.
Jeez, I'm saying you can't prove God exists, and you're telling me that I have to respect that other people have their own BELIEFS? Did you even READ what I wrote when you quoted me? I BELIEVE IN GOD.
Idiocy annoys me.
If u believe that he exists then he does....no need to prove....u cannot prove the supernatural....although I myself believes there is a god...but u do not need proof to believe...and by antagonising people...by telling them to prove that god exists is not a good idea...
Why would God exist just because he believes he exists? I could out of complete idiocy believe somehow that the Earth was genuinely flat, when in actuality it's obviously not. Like padKey already stated, belief is not proof.
I only came into this debate because it was mentioned by someone a few pages ago that God must exist as a consequence of common sense that everything has a creator, and that creator somehow must be God; implying that God by necessity must exist. But like already elaborated, it's unreasonable and legitimately stupid to try and justify that he must exist.
Trying to justify something as a necessity when the evidence for it doesn't exist only achieves a waste of time.
Last edited:
KeypadSDM
B4nn3d
Oh you're one of them. Get out of the science board. No one likes a dolt.
KeypadSDM
B4nn3d
Ok, and this one? You moron. Do you have any idea how many humans have 'wasted' their lives on this idea of: I have a hypothesis, lets try to prove it true or false. It's called the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.
KeypadSDM
B4nn3d
If you bothered reading, I'm saying we CAN'T prove it exists. The only reason it causes trouble is because of small minded people with silly little biased thoughts of what "should be" because we "all know" God doesn't need proof, he's just there.
Sigh
Yes I know we can't prove it....but arguing about it to some certain groups can cause a lot of trouble...i.e.
1) try the EU
2) try catholic and Christian Church ministers
this is because some illogical small minded people as u say...cannot take this kind of response..and all they do is go into a strong defence..and major chaos occurs..I know..I've tried
That wouldn't get us into trouble, but only exploit their argumentative weaknesses. When something cannot be proven due to the inexistence of the irrefutable evidence, the argument is 100% concrete for you. Hence no matter what they throw at you, it can be deduced down to irrelevance because they will never be able to bypass or corrupt this point. So in the end, they falter and crumble under their own arguments. Conclusively the only way they can ever shut us up in finality is to produce something irrefutable, such as physical proof. But they can't, and because they can't, they can't get us into trouble because we're arguing on fundamental reasoning and logic which can't be ignored.
Why would the European Union care?
Why would the European Union care?
NONONONO the evangelical union...not european union....it doesn't matta.....belief is not proof is the best thing I've heard of so far...but yeah..its just arguments like this...tend to annoy people who are interested or have a faith....
Exactly, it annoys them but they can't get me into 'trouble', because they don't have the argumentative means to.
Have I ever told you I believe in God? I actually do, so as you can see I'm not one of those skeptics who simply dismiss without reason.
sam04u
Comrades, Comrades!
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,867
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
anyone from any religion that was made less that 10 years ago would agree that this sort of argument is a sin "haroum"
however you look at it.
you have to agree that their is a celestial force, a creator.
big bang theory?? nigga please
if it was possible what is the probability of it happening? 1/10x10^1000??
why doesnt it happen again??
x>>x
xy>>xy
if nothing comes in nothing comes out
nothing cant make something
their is a god.
questioning if their is one is stupid,insane,pointless its common sense...
why? he made us?
how? he made us?
those are worthwhile questions
however you look at it.
you have to agree that their is a celestial force, a creator.
big bang theory?? nigga please
if it was possible what is the probability of it happening? 1/10x10^1000??
why doesnt it happen again??
x>>x
xy>>xy
if nothing comes in nothing comes out
nothing cant make something
their is a god.
questioning if their is one is stupid,insane,pointless its common sense...
why? he made us?
how? he made us?
those are worthwhile questions
What the hell are you talking about? How does the proposition of there being a creator irrefutably imply that that creator must be God? Why is questioning such a concept stupid, pointless, insane or non-common sensical? It looks like you haven't even read the thread. Proclaiming your sisters have better arguments will only give you a slap back in the face.sam04u said:
Prove that God must exist. You can't, so drop it.