Do you believe in "GOD" ,and the "Great" beyond ?
0
GoodDay wrote...
kgods wrote...
Still what the dictionary says... not me. I emphasized this because, even a lack of belief is still technically a belief; an opinion, perspective.I should mention I'm not a theist trying to argue for the other team.
Yes everything said in the dictionary is ALL TRUE
Just like the internet. However, there does need to be SOME basis for definitions.
0
kgods wrote...
Still what the dictionary says... not me. I emphasized this because, even a lack of belief is still technically a belief; an opinion, perspective.I should mention I'm not a theist trying to argue for the other team.
Is a lack of ice cream = ice cream?
Is not collecting stamps a hobby?
0
Is bald a hair colour? I get it. I think it depends a bit on what you classify as "belief" I guess.
0
Do I believe in a God? No, I do not believe in a God because history has recorded the tragic fact that men who believe in a God have gone to war and cut each others throats because they could not agree as to what was to become of them after their throats were cut.
Also Atheists don't fly planes into buildings.
Also Atheists don't fly planes into buildings.
0
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
Do I believe in a God? No, I do not believe in a God because history has recorded the tragic fact that men who believe in a God have gone to war and cut each others throats because they could not agree as to what was to become of them after their throats were cut.Also Atheists don't fly planes into buildings.
They say faith can move mountains, I don't know about that, but I do know what it can do to skyscrapers. Wasn't that a quote after 9/11?
0
The first one is a modified quote from Walter P Stacy. The second part I can't recall where I picked it up from.
0
GOD is just the begining of everything, nothing more. Bible is mythology with historical context and all the religions are copy-paste from old religions with a lot of updates.
GOD for me is the universe, the begining of life, the "new game" of every single thing of the universe. The fate is the weapon who some men since old times use to control the population... is the history of our planet.
What do you think? Anyone is going to go back from death to tell you what happen when you die. Life is long... just enjoy your life!
GOD for me is the universe, the begining of life, the "new game" of every single thing of the universe. The fate is the weapon who some men since old times use to control the population... is the history of our planet.
What do you think? Anyone is going to go back from death to tell you what happen when you die. Life is long... just enjoy your life!
1
MidouCloud wrote...
GOD is just the begining of everything, nothing more. Bible is mythology with historical context and all the religions are copy-paste from old religions with a lot of updates.GOD for me is the universe, the begining of life, the "new game" of every single thing of the universe. The fate is the weapon who some men since old times use to control the population... is the history of our planet.
What do you think? Anyone is going to go back from death to tell you what happen when you die. Life is long... just enjoy your life!
I have nothing against this viewpoint, as it is simply pantheism in a way and doesn't try to tell anyone how to live. Though I do disagree with the last part of your post; life is short! death is long! :D
0
kgods wrote...
[font=Courier New]Though I do disagree with the last part of your post; life is short! death is long! :D [/font]
You win, +1 xD
0
why wouldnt there be a GOD? can anyone convince me?
no one can.
This issue CANNOT be intellectualised. To debate on that is nonsense.
no one can.
This issue CANNOT be intellectualised. To debate on that is nonsense.
0
Kashurashin wrote...
why wouldnt there be a GOD? can anyone convince me? no one can.
Ah yes, the classic argument from ignorance and shifting the burden of proof. Magnifique.
0
Rbz wrote...
Kashurashin wrote...
why wouldnt there be a GOD? can anyone convince me? no one can.
Ah yes, the classic argument from ignorance and shifting the burden of proof. Magnifique.
Lol, classic answers to classic questions my friend.
I mean, doesnt everyone give a shit abt this?
0
I realize we're just a pile of flesh and organs that's able to percept things more complexly than other organisms and that this pile just dissolves when it "dies." I don't understand why that would be a bad thing to say.
However, I wish to believe there's more, like an afterlife, a Nirvana, reincarnation and maybe even something like a god.
Not because I want to believe in something like salvation or because I want people to agree with me, I just think it's cool.
is this stupid y/n
However, I wish to believe there's more, like an afterlife, a Nirvana, reincarnation and maybe even something like a god.
Not because I want to believe in something like salvation or because I want people to agree with me, I just think it's cool.
is this stupid y/n
1
Kashurashin wrote...
Lol, classic answers to classic questions my friend.
I mean, doesnt everyone give a shit abt this?
Rbz is right, but for the sake of debate I will humor you. The argument that god must exist because otherwise life has no purpose already concedes a very self centric view colored with wishful thinking that does not mesh with the concept of faith, of which every religion save atheism borrows extensively.
To admit that you believe god exists because you cannot live with the alternative is to admit you have no true faith in your religion, and on some level, that you don't really even believe at all.
Not that I am truly admonishing you, because faith itself is very senseless. To say that faith can move mountains is a fallacy. It is not faith that does this, it is people. People without faith 'move mountains' daily, but it is not perceived as remarkable, because people see the reason behind it. When you consider this, you will see that this ability of people seems different when driven by faith only because the motives of those who did it are harder to relate to. This makes the event itself more remarkable, even if it is dwarfed in comparison to the scale of the metaphorical mountains moved by everyone else. Take the example of 9/11, which was undeniably remarkable, but truly amazing, or extraordinary? I don't think so, how and can you look at all the cities of the world, and all the skyscrapers standing there, build by people, and call the fall of only two a point in favor of faith?
And to your classic answers to classic questions, to argue religion is to argue classic arguments. No argument we present here will not have been already presented in the past. But as Rbz stated, the burden of proof has always been on religion, not science, even though it has always been required otherwise by society. All of these classic arguments have been of the perspective that that which has proof and is sustainable must disprove that which does not and is not, which is of course impossible. The biggest change to the classic arguments in our time is the shift of this burden of proof. More people want to know why they should believe in god now, not why they should believe in science: because they can see why they should believe in science.
When you accept that the classical arguments exist only from this perspective, you see that when that perspective is reversed they no longer apply. It is religion that needs new arguments, questions, and answers, not science.
0
One day these GOD will banned the internet by saying for the good of mankind and that time everyone will says.
"FUCK YOU GOD".
"FUCK YOU GOD".
0
StaticChange wrote...
Kashurashin wrote...
Lol, classic answers to classic questions my friend.
I mean, doesnt everyone give a shit abt this?
Rbz is right, but for the sake of debate I will humor you. The argument that god must exist because otherwise life has no purpose already concedes a very self centric view colored with wishful thinking that does not mesh with the concept of faith, of which every religion save atheism borrows extensively.
To admit that you believe god exists because you cannot live with the alternative is to admit you have no true faith in your religion, and on some level, that you don't really even believe at all.
Not that I am truly admonishing you, because faith itself is very senseless. To say that faith can move mountains is a fallacy. It is not faith that does this, it is people. People without faith 'move mountains' daily, but it is not perceived as remarkable, because people see the reason behind it. When you consider this, you will see that this ability of people seems different when driven by faith only because the motives of those who did it are harder to relate to. This makes the event itself more remarkable, even if it is dwarfed in comparison to the scale of the metaphorical mountains moved by everyone else. Take the example of 9/11, which was undeniably remarkable, but truly amazing, or extraordinary? I don't think so, how and can you look at all the cities of the world, and all the skyscrapers standing there, build by people, and call the fall of only two a point in favor of faith?
And to your classic answers to classic questions, to argue religion is to argue classic arguments. No argument we present here will not have been already presented in the past. But as Rbz stated, the burden of proof has always been on religion, not science, even though it has always been required otherwise by society. All of these classic arguments have been of the perspective that that which has proof and is sustainable must disprove that which does not and is not, which is of course impossible. The biggest change to the classic arguments in our time is the shift of this burden of proof. More people want to know why they should believe in god now, not why they should believe in science: because they can see why they should believe in science.
When you accept that the classical arguments exist only from this perspective, you see that when that perspective is reversed they no longer apply. It is religion that needs new arguments, questions, and answers, not science.
I swear to God i'm just going to copy and pasta this into every "DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD" topic that starts up.
-1
Hazah wrote...
StaticChange wrote...
Kashurashin wrote...
Lol, classic answers to classic questions my friend.
I mean, doesnt everyone give a shit abt this?
Rbz is right, but for the sake of debate I will humor you. The argument that god must exist because otherwise life has no purpose already concedes a very self centric view colored with wishful thinking that does not mesh with the concept of faith, of which every religion save atheism borrows extensively.
To admit that you believe god exists because you cannot live with the alternative is to admit you have no true faith in your religion, and on some level, that you don't really even believe at all.
Not that I am truly admonishing you, because faith itself is very senseless. To say that faith can move mountains is a fallacy. It is not faith that does this, it is people. People without faith 'move mountains' daily, but it is not perceived as remarkable, because people see the reason behind it. When you consider this, you will see that this ability of people seems different when driven by faith only because the motives of those who did it are harder to relate to. This makes the event itself more remarkable, even if it is dwarfed in comparison to the scale of the metaphorical mountains moved by everyone else. Take the example of 9/11, which was undeniably remarkable, but truly amazing, or extraordinary? I don't think so, how and can you look at all the cities of the world, and all the skyscrapers standing there, build by people, and call the fall of only two a point in favor of faith?
And to your classic answers to classic questions, to argue religion is to argue classic arguments. No argument we present here will not have been already presented in the past. But as Rbz stated, the burden of proof has always been on religion, not science, even though it has always been required otherwise by society. All of these classic arguments have been of the perspective that that which has proof and is sustainable must disprove that which does not and is not, which is of course impossible. The biggest change to the classic arguments in our time is the shift of this burden of proof. More people want to know why they should believe in god now, not why they should believe in science: because they can see why they should believe in science.
When you accept that the classical arguments exist only from this perspective, you see that when that perspective is reversed they no longer apply. It is religion that needs new arguments, questions, and answers, not science.
I swear to SATAN i'm just going to copy and pasta this into every "DO YOU HATE GOD" topic that starts up.
0
First I would like to say that I believe in something, what that God or Goddess is I don't know. Also in the case of the after life I would like to believe that the energy that is our consciousness goes out and gives itself over to the living things of the world.
This part is what is going to piss people off. I don't know if this makes any sense to anyone other than me, but what about Einstein's law of conservation of mass. No matter or energy may be created or destroyed, but if matter and energy can't be created how did everything come into being. You may state the big bang theory as the opposition to that, but that would involve something all ready existing, and being compressed to the point of explosion. I believe that the matter needed for the big bang had to be created by that same God or Goddess.
In that same breath it means that the laws of science where made and than the mater created and pushed in the right direction. This all works in my mind because I believe that someone had to think up all the laws of science for us to find them and for everything to work. You need the software to go along with the hardware.
A little shove along creation here and there and you get earth and humans.
I hope I didn't piss to many of you off or that you think I'm crazy. This is just my personal opinion, and there is no scientific proof just my ramblings.
This part is what is going to piss people off. I don't know if this makes any sense to anyone other than me, but what about Einstein's law of conservation of mass. No matter or energy may be created or destroyed, but if matter and energy can't be created how did everything come into being. You may state the big bang theory as the opposition to that, but that would involve something all ready existing, and being compressed to the point of explosion. I believe that the matter needed for the big bang had to be created by that same God or Goddess.
In that same breath it means that the laws of science where made and than the mater created and pushed in the right direction. This all works in my mind because I believe that someone had to think up all the laws of science for us to find them and for everything to work. You need the software to go along with the hardware.
A little shove along creation here and there and you get earth and humans.
I hope I didn't piss to many of you off or that you think I'm crazy. This is just my personal opinion, and there is no scientific proof just my ramblings.
0
Hypnovier wrote...
First I would like to say that I believe in something, what that satan or evil is I don't know. Also in the case of the after life I would like to believe that the energy that is our consciousness goes out and gives itself over to the living things of the world.
This part is what is going to piss people off. I don't know if this makes any sense to anyone other than me, but what about Einstein's law of conservation of mass. No matter or energy may be created or destroyed, but if matter and energy can't be created how did everything come into being. You may state the big bang theory as the opposition to that, but that would involve something all ready existing, and being compressed to the point of explosion. I believe that the matter needed for the big bang had to be created by that same God or Goddess.
In that same breath it means that the laws of science where made and than the mater created and pushed in the right direction. This all works in my mind because I believe that someone had to think up all the laws of science for us to find them and for everything to work. You need the software to go along with the hardware.
A little shove along creation here and there and you get earth and humans.
I hope I didn't piss to many of you off or that you think I'm crazy. This is just my personal opinion, and there is no scientific proof just my ramblings.
This part is what is going to piss people off. I don't know if this makes any sense to anyone other than me, but what about Einstein's law of conservation of mass. No matter or energy may be created or destroyed, but if matter and energy can't be created how did everything come into being. You may state the big bang theory as the opposition to that, but that would involve something all ready existing, and being compressed to the point of explosion. I believe that the matter needed for the big bang had to be created by that same God or Goddess.
In that same breath it means that the laws of science where made and than the mater created and pushed in the right direction. This all works in my mind because I believe that someone had to think up all the laws of science for us to find them and for everything to work. You need the software to go along with the hardware.
A little shove along creation here and there and you get earth and humans.
I hope I didn't piss to many of you off or that you think I'm crazy. This is just my personal opinion, and there is no scientific proof just my ramblings.
yeah right.
0
I believe in god, the existence of the world beyond death, and the karma. Although for some people this statement (and my existence + leeching in FAKKU) contradicts my own belief.
By the way, as much as i able to fathom...you can do EVERYTHING in the word as long as it doesn't put others in harm and or creating disturbance in our current society. Therefore, viewing hentai at FAKKU as long as i did not do any damage or distribute it to minors its pretty kosher/good/halal for me.
Anyway, i believe that god exist and every religion is right.
I hope i did not offend anybody with this post :-)
By the way, as much as i able to fathom...you can do EVERYTHING in the word as long as it doesn't put others in harm and or creating disturbance in our current society. Therefore, viewing hentai at FAKKU as long as i did not do any damage or distribute it to minors its pretty kosher/good/halal for me.
Anyway, i believe that god exist and every religion is right.
I hope i did not offend anybody with this post :-)