I've written quite a lot here. Please don't ignore it and recycle your shitty arguments.
QUOTE(Sanshiro @ Dec 28 2006, 07:29 PM) [snapback]1275091[/snapback]
1) Cause and Effect:
We all agree that for every action, be it tiny or huge, there is always a cause, a reason why that action took place. You are here, because your mom gave birth to you. You eat because if you don't you'll die. You play videogames because you want to have fun. If a new machine, which no one in the world has ever seen or heard of before is shown to any person, then we ask him: "who is the first person who will be able to provide details of the mechanism of this unknown object?" After little bit of thinking, he will reply: "the creator of that object." Some may say "the producer" or "the manufacturer." What ever answer the person gives, you name it, the answer will always be either the creator, the producer, the manufacturer or some what of the same meaning, i.e. the person who has made it or created it.
And what caused God...
Sorry, but the argument of cause and effect just proves existence. It does not prove that someone created existence, just that something - ANYTHING, came first. You've narrowed it down to a 328497328457328zillion to one chance that it was "God". It could equally be a toaster.
Just look around you, everything in life is ranked and has something/someone that has the authority above it/him. The father above son, the manager above employees, the president above his nation, the teacher above his students, the Sun above the Milky-Way planets, and etc. This hierarchy system guarantees the existence of life, because without it there to be chaos, war, and doom of mankind. Therefore, there must be a "boss" for this whole universe.
My watch tells the time, my clock tells the time, there are many examples in the observable world of things that tell time, and there have been for many years.
Therefor, the world would be in chaos if the Universe was not a giant clock.
Sorry, your argument is stupid.
We all read in history about prophets like Noah, Abraham, Jesus, David, Jacob, Muhammad, Joseph, and so on. We read about their books that were revealed to them by God, as they claimed. We read about the countless billions people who followed them through all these centuries. These information, where did it came from? You might say: "Someone invented those lies." But how come billions of people are following and believing the same lies? Are all historians since Noah that dumb to keep passing such never-happened events? This is like denying the fact that earth is sphere-shaped by throwing all scientists space photos and theories in the garbage can. The probability of denial against that of acceptance is very weak.
Everyone likes it, so it must be true? Fucksake, everyone thought the world was flat, everyone thought that cigarettes don't harm you, everyone thought that Nazism was a good idea. PROPAGANDA. Poeple want other people to believe it, to control them, to give them false hope, and to have a reason to go on crusades and the like. People themselves want to believe it, because it's a very easy answer.
Comparing it to a scientic theory is fucking scandalous. There is no evidence. It's a conjecture at best.
4) Perfect Universe:(A)
(A) Everything in this world is connected as we all studied and experience in our daily lives. Everything seems to be doing its "assigned" job. The sun shines every morning at a certain time, moves through its arc in the sky, then sets. It has a certain distance from the earth which if increased or decreased a bit we all would burn, as scientists say. There is Day for going to work and doing activities, and there is Night for sleep and rest. Night is dark and calm to help us sleep and rest.
(B)The human body, just look at it. Every bone, muscle, cell, and so on, has a certain job. Why does a pet bury its waste? Who taught it that? Why do animals that live in cold areas have thick fur?
The Universe is not perfect. If the Universe was perfect I would not have a hangover. And joking aside, there would be no genocides or famines if the Universe was perfect. Night is not calm. Any calmness that exists at night, exists because people are asleep. This is the doing of people, not God. It is evolutionarily advantageous to sleep at night, as no large predators hunt at night, and it is safe to lie down. It is unsafe to move around in the dark, as there is a risk, especially back in the day, of wandering into a tar pit. The people who roamed at night quietly went extinct. It makes sense.
It's typically egotistical of you to believe the sun shines just for us. It is not the perfect distance between us and the sun, our orbit changes over thousands of years, meaning temperature changes and mass suffering for those living on the extremes already. Glaciers melt, hurricanes blow, tsunamis and earthquakes and volcanic eruptions kill millions. So much for perfection, bloody hell.(B)
Oh God. Tell me you didn't just say that =/
Whether you believe in it or not, you can't argue that evolution answers these questions perfectly.
Not to mention:
- Not everything has a job. The appendix is useless. It doesn't fit into intelligent design AT ALL. It is an evolutionary throwback though, and may in the past have been able to digest cellulose.
- Same with the tailbone, and most reactions to cold (hair standing on end, for example); they are useless now.
- If you had a dog you would know that pets do not bury their waste.
If I tell an atheist or any person that my cat jumped into my keyboard yesterday and started to write a letter to me with perfect grammar, would he believe it? Of course not, because if he does, he is biologically insane. The same thing is with this universe, if such person doesn't believe this small story of my pet, how come he believes that this whole universe came from nowhere or by chance? I once read somewhere an old story of two philosophers who were discussing the existence of god. They agreed to meet at some place where people can gather and watch. The atheist philosopher arrived first, but the one who believes in god was intentionally late. After hours, he showed up. The atheist asked him: "Where have you been all this time?" He replied: "Well, I didn't find any boat to cross the river so I waited for a while until I saw some floating wood sticks on the river gathered in front of me and arranged themselves rapidly to create this beautiful boat which allowed me to cross the river. So here I am." The atheist philosopher said: "Did you hear that people? This man is insane! How would a boat creates itself without a carpenter?" The believer philosopher said: "Look at you, you don't believe that a small boat was created without a carpenter, yet you believe this whole world has no creator?" The atheist philosopher was stunned in silence, and the debate was over.
Another classic idiotic argument. If you think about it properly
, you'd realise that there a few huge, gaping, unavoidable differences between the two. Firstly
. A man stranded on one side of a river needs a boat, a boat is the optimum thing for a man attempting to cross a river. The odds of a boat forming without a carpenter are miniscule. Critically though, the laws of physics are also against him. The second law of thermodynamics, which creationists love
and apply incorrectly any time they have the chance dictates that:"Matter in a closed system tends towards chaos"
Meaning that in a closed system such as a river, things fall apart and will not build up. In a boundless Universe however, things may bind together given the correct enthalpy.Secondly
, the Universe is not a useful thing, all things considered. Its materialisation could not be coinsidered lucky nor coincidental, as it is not a useful thing. The buildup of life, whether you consider it useful or not, was not a thing that was required to the precursor, but a series of reactions that gave itself replication, and by those means longevity. It is NOT the same as a boat.Thirdly
and finally, what you consider to be beautiful or useful is not, by definition, either of these things. What exists is all your eyes have ever seen. Beautiful things are only beautiful in relation to other things you have seen. Therefor this argument is null and void.
To conclude, was a person, who denies the existence of god, created from nothing? Did this person create himself? Did he create this world? Just think of it. People say "Oh my God!". I've found that proving the existence of god needs simple thinking and use of common sense and intuition. I think it's already a built-in feature in our innate selves when we were born. Ask children, and see their answers. It's only when we try to depend entirely on our intellects or raw senses that a clash occurs. Not all that we perceive by our five senses is only true. If I told a medieval guy about cell phones, airplanes, Playstations, iPods... etc, he would definitely say I am crazy, and probably would kill me. Why? Because he used his senses only as a support. I'm just trying to say we cannot depend entirely on our senses or intellects, sometimes. The intellect has "no personality" as Einstein said.
This is really the stupidest argument of the bunch, so excuse me for editting out the rambling.1)
I also say "Well fuck me!". It does not mean I want instant sex. With the person I say it to. Which could be my brother.2)
When did I ever say I created the world? Fucking hell, talk about putting words in someone's mouth. And by the way, I don't want to have rough sex with a fictional underground torture chamber either ("Fucking hell")3)
Well I'd like to see some of the common sense, I've seen a lot of the intuition.4)
Children also think, until they are told otherwise, that the sun orbits the Earth. It instinctively makes sense. When we begin to depend on our intellects, we seek out the knowledge, we find out we were wrong. Children are not to be relied on to tell me how to think. It's fucking obvious to anyone with common sense
that children are not as wise as adults. Any argument that relies on children's mental superiority for its crux is a flawed one.5)
The medievil guy would kill you because of his senses? WRONG. He'd kill you because technology is ungodly, ironically.6)
I do not get told by my senses that God doesn't exist. My senses are for processing chemical messages from the world. Completely irrelevant.
Believing in the existence of god doesn't mean opposing science, because studying science makes me more aware of how this world is engineered and perfectly designed to its smallest bits. Only a false religion, belief, or weak knowledge of science would deny the existence of god, and as the famous philosopher Francis Bacon said: "A little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God." Therefore, If you deny god, you're denying false models of god, but not God.
Except all the bits that don't fit, ignore those.
From what I read and experience, I firmly believe that God does exist. I believe there is only one God, not two, not three. I believe Jesus was a prophet of God, but NOT a god himself, neither a son of God. I believe the only God has perfect qualities and attributes unlike human beings. I believe He is above. I believe there were prophets sent by God. The concept of Paradise and Hell seems logical. There does exist a "Judgment Day."
Why not a flying spaghetti monster? It's equally logical.
QUOTE(Sanshiro @ Dec 28 2006, 08:10 PM) [snapback]1275099[/snapback]
So we came from nowhere? This is illogical.
QUOTE(Bag Of Puppies @ Dec 28 2006, 10:48 PM) [snapback]1275096[/snapback]
the earth was created from a couple of big rocks that clumped together and all organisms including humans where created trough evolution.
And who did that? Don't tell me by chance, cause I'm not gonna believe you.
Chemicals are attracted to other chemicals, gravitational pulls attract more chemicals, sufficient gravitational pull forces objects into a basically round shape. Laws of physics, thanks very much.
QUOTE(Austin (Paraphrased) @ Dec 29 2006, 07:49 AM) [snapback]1275497[/snapback]
What about ghosts lol?
Ghosts, on top of the fact that they could just, "not exist", although that's a difficult concept, there is a scientific
I've posted it a million times, so if you're really interested either search or wiki it, but here's the condensed version:
Einstein, relativity, time is not linear, times cross instantaneously, apparitions of past may appear.
QUOTE(Austin @ Dec 29 2006, 06:01 PM) [snapback]1275618[/snapback]
Einstein was a deist.. that means he beloved in god. He is quoted as saying so.
On the perfection point.. that's not what I was talking about.
That is a beautiful animal. Everything about it makes me think intelligent design.
Also some of the atheist kids have got it in to their heads "God" was created by Christians.. the belief in god is far older than the Christian faith just so you know.
Deism is belief in a first cause for the effect that is the universe. This is not necessarily "God", but is called God for convenience. It could be an algorithm, a yellow hat, a toaster filled with dogshit, a Westlife CD, a worn-out cigarillo...any of these things as much as it could be a Christian-like God. And please don't drag Einstein into this. He's on record saying that he disliked being used as a figurehead to prove blindly religious people are smart - or right.
You've never seen anything which doesn't exist. How do you know what exists is more beautiful?
It's not a hard question, if you are aware that everything is relative.BULLETZ:
QUOTE(BULLETZ144 @ Dec 29 2006, 10:34 PM) [snapback]1275752[/snapback]
i find it funny how psycho right off the bat goes "who created God!!!! and don't tell me he was always there!!!" when hes stated time and time again he believes the earth has simply always been here....
ARE YOU ACTUALLY KIDDING?
When has anyone ever said that!?[Edit]
By the way, the burden of proof is still on you guys. In case you forgot.