1340 replies to this topic

[Rafv Nin IV]

The "Who Made God?" argument is valid because if it is possible that god exists without a creator, then it is possible that the universe exists without a creator, and therefore it is unnecessary to have a god.

[segwayrulz]

Or is it *DUN DUN DAAAH*

[need my speed]

Just restarting this argument...

God doesn't exist. End. There's no proof. For science is proof. Yes, science doesn't explain everything, but that will come. There is so much proof that much of the thigns in the Bible are wrong, that it isn't really worth it to mention it. Rafv Nin IV has a hilarious argument, for most god believers (how are they called? Atheists?) claim that "How else could Earth exists without a god that created it?", of course, there's the Big Bang THEORY, but that is onyl speculation and doesn't needs to be true. But, if everything needs a creator, who created god?

Just look through this whole topic (I've only read the first 8 or so pages), everywhere science wins over religion (to say it so). Because science is based on facts, and religion on asumptions, some clever "I avoid the question by asking questions about how the Earth was created then or something", and of course, the human written bible, containing many things that are wrong.

[Elvenlord]

Heh, I don't think there's anybody left foolish enough to argue here for religion

[Ash]

Heh, I guess it's up to me (and Matias as he's currently typing ) to play devil's advocate (the irony of this statement is not lost on me).

Technically, it is possible to equate the Big Bang to God. The big bang happened, stuff existed. God snapped his non-coporeal fingers, stuff existed.

People have this notion that science and religion are mutually exclusive. They needn't be - they just have different names for things, and different time-scales. Evolutionary theory needn't clash with intelligent design - God might've simply made the original eukaryote and then, from then on, sat and watched just like any good scientist. Similarly, Big Bang theory needn't clash with God theory. It's just that religious zealots refuse to acknowledge the fact that the non-zealots (also known as the rational, which includes, but is not limited to, the irreligious) have an idea of equal or greater credence, and are blissfully ignorant of the fact that the two theories say more or less the same thing, but with slightly different terminology.

[m@tt]

What Ash said.

Believe it or not, need my speed, not all Christians are darwin-hating creationists. Next time think before rushing to type something (half of what you wrote is a mess anyway).

As for science in the Bible, my logic is that surely the God (whom we cannot comprehend, he's not human after all) who created the universe and therefore the laws of physics can do what he wants, i.e. do things that we mere humans can't do. So whilst for humans, walking on water, healing the blind/deaf/paralysed and parting oceans is impossible from a science perspective, would it not (theoretically) be possible for a God to do so?

Edited by m@tt, 29 May 2009 - 03:28 PM.

[need my speed]

No need to get offensive...Where did I say that Christians were Darwin hating creationists? You're right about rushing the post, as I had to go away. Yes, if you believe in god can do everything, I guess science doesn't apply anymore. But there's no proof that god exists. Sure, there's also no proof that god doesn't exist, but there is proof that the Bible is wrong on some accounts. I wonder though, do you guys believe in that god created humans and poof we're here with all our knowledge, or do you still believe that we evolutioned (or something) into what we are now. I've seen people state both so...

[Pasidon]

Errr... Adam and Eve on a medium of agreement as a Broadway musical: Apes who Evolve After a Holy Flood.

[Puppeteer]

Sure, there's also no proof that god doesn't exist, but there is proof that the Bible is wrong on some accounts.

God didn't write the Bible. I'm not religious, also playing the devil's advocate, but disproving the Bible does not disprove the notion of a God. And don't forget, Christianity isn't the only path to God.

or do you still believe that we evolutioned (or something) into what we are now.

I believe 'evolved' was the word you were looking for.

[need my speed]

Yes that was it. Humans did write the bible though, and you can't tell me they experienced all those events in the bible so that they knew it was true. Or, it was one big giant fake story, or they knew what to write due to some other source, god, maybe.

I'm sorry if I'm not really making sense, but I don't know how to explain it other. Sorry.

[m@tt]

I didn't mean to be offensive, it just looked to me, from your post, that you were assuming the stereotype that Christian's don't believe in evolution and don't listen to scientific facts.

As for the Bible writers. In the New Testament, most of it are letters, Luke and Acts are first person accounts, Mark, Matt and John are either first or second person accounts. Not sure about the Old Testament. The first few books were written by Moses afaik. And it's not big fake story, if it's not real it's lots of fake stories because of all the different writers.

[need my speed]

Oh well, doesn't matter.

Well, it doesn't really matter if it's one giant fake story or zillion smaller fake stories...But you must agree that some (much?) of what's written in it has been proved to be fake.

Edited by need my speed, 30 May 2009 - 08:46 AM.

[m@tt]

Has it?

[need my speed]

Yep, Google around, or watch some TV (around a year ago or something, there were on Discovery Channel (?) much things about the bible being wrong. Humans that existed far longer then 50.000 years or whatever the bible says, Dinosaur skeletons and other things found before the world existed according to the bible, proof that humans have evolved from one cell thingies or whatever to what we are now, etc.

[m@tt]

I wasn't talking about that though.

I'm perfectly aware of evolution, and do believe in it.

Creation covers only one chapter, what about the rest?

[mike_]

Actually, some of the Bible has been proven to be true - particularly the Israeli Exodus from Egypt. Somehow, some Egyptian chariots were found in the bottom of the Red Sea...

Just stoking the ashes, folks.

[Vortigern]

I don't see why anyone would claim these things never happened. Some of them, anyway. I can understand people having issues with the flood, for example, because it has been calculated that there is not enough water on the planet for that to be possible. But I don't see why Moses couldn't have crossed the Red Sea on a land bridge in high winds, followed by thousands of Jews and a bunch of Egyptians in chariots. If my slaves were running away, I'd chase them, and if I were a slave I'd know that to go back would probably mean execution, whereas to go forward would mean at least a chance of survival and freedom on the other side. I'd take the walk.

Nice find, Mike.

[m@tt]

Actually... I've heard there's evidence of the flood. But it wasn't global, just in that area. Can't remember what the evidence is though

[need my speed]

Of course some things are true, I guess it's pretty hard to find something that hasn't 1 thing that isn't true. But, how do you guys explain that the bible is wrong on some accounts? It would be cool though if anything like the flood would happen sometimes soon.

Edited by need my speed, 30 May 2009 - 08:17 PM.

[Pasidon]

Only reason Christianity would announce another flood is to get more surfers into religion.