100% humans have called for GOD

It's funny how people feel so strongly GOD doesn't exist until they need to call on him. At your toughest point in life you will call on GOD.Some of us have already did. So please put all of the GOD doesn't exist stuff to rest. Pray for you all there is nothing wrong with being a believer in the most high.No matter what religon you are.Christain,jewish, or islamic.



I used to fell bad for being part of marijuana until I understood that it was placed here by GOD naturaly and my government made me fell that it was wrong. 1 luv and peace to all.

you are part of that 100% crazy

Calling on god in times of desperation is just that, desperation. It's not proof of god, it's proof of human falability under psychological stress.

I yelled out at the flying spagetti monster today when I accidently dropped a hammer on my foot.

So he's real too huh? Hallowed be his name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Calling on god in times of desperation is just that, desperation. It's not proof of god, it's proof of human falability under psychological stress.

---

Its under pressure that we shows our real self...
Why does its so hard to admit we believe in god, even if only in a almost subliminal level? Why does people clings to the reason, as if it were the truest thing in the unverse? Or why does people thinks its a humiliating, lowering thing to believe in a superior being?
I dont know the author of this quote, but its a very known person... dont know if its Einstein, but im sure it was someone as respected as, who said:
"Superficial thinking leads to no God, but deep thinking leads to God."

I am of Jewish descent, and I will always identify with the Jews and be proud of my heritage, but i personally am torn about the whole religion situation.

I believe that God is not one being, as in, God is a different thing to everyone. Before there was God there were many Gods, and i think that everyone has their own idea and belief about the superior being, or godhead you could say, or force of nature or whatever that controls the ways of the world and fate and whatnot.

Or maybe i'm just really high...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polymirize

I yelled out at the flying spagetti monster today when I accidently dropped a hammer on my foot.

So he's real too huh? Hallowed be his name.

---

Don't joke around. When I went over to my girlfriend's house for dinner, in second grade, her parents and two younger brothers were at the dinner table with us, eating spaghetti. While I was eating, and trying to get the last noodle of a mouthful in, the flying spaghetti monster whipped me in the face, leaving a line of sauce from my forehead down to my mouth.

The main point is people still call out for GOD no matter how you word it. Make all the insults you want at somepoint when you can't take it and your loved one is in a life or death situation you will call for GOD. I have seen it over and over again.The biggest athiest always prays. Like you all just in time of fustration or pain you say GOD WHATEVER! it's in our nature to know his power of strength and healing! no matter what, GOD loves you!

you can be an athiest and call out to god in bad situations, it just means you hope there is a merciful god even if you dont believe in one.
:jointsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polymirize

I yelled out at the flying spagetti monster today when I accidently dropped a hammer on my foot.

So he's real too huh? Hallowed be his name.

---

I've prayed to a ham sandwich once because I was very VERY VERY hungry, and i prayed for it to grow to 3 times it's size. Desperate men *will* do anything, even wish and pray for the impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fsunoles

The main point is people still call out for GOD no matter how you word it.

---

I thought the point would have to be that God has evolved beyond his original limitations, and now exists primarily as an expletive.


Are you a big fan of literal translation by any chance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hardcore Newbie

I've prayed to a ham sandwich once because I was very VERY VERY hungry, and i prayed for it to grow to 3 times it's size. Desperate men *will* do anything, even wish and pray for the impossible.

---

Man, knowing you strongly believe in god, I highly respect that you still recognize a fallable argument when you see one, regardless if it agrees with your beliefs. I've heard a few atheistic arguments myself that I've shot down, because if you truly believe you're right, you can know your logic is solid.

Quote:

---

Its under pressure that we shows our real self...

---

Sometimes, but our "real self" is every changing and open to being molded. It's still completely sensible to believe that powerful emotion will override logic when one becomes desperate.

Quote:

---

Why does its so hard to admit we believe in god, even if only in a almost subliminal level?

---

Well for me, the traditionaly seperate conscious entity, the diety "up there" that judges and watches us, is not believable because I've yet to see a logical reason for it.

Quote:

---

Why does people clings to the reason, as if it were the truest thing in the unverse?

---

Some people do, some people don't. Being an atheist doesn't necessarily mean you know there's no god, it means there's no reason to believe in god until there's a logical reason to. It drives me nuts when people say you have to have "faith" not to believe in god. That's just nonsense, under the same logic a person would have to have "faith" not to believe in superman, invisible flying space jellyfish, gremilins at the center of the sun, or anything else you could imagine. I have faith there's no god (in the traditional sense) like I have faith there's no Galactus out there eating planets.

Quote:

---

Or why does people thinks its a humiliating, lowering thing to believe in a superior being?

---

I don't think one should be humiliated to believe in god, that's their choice and from an atheistic perspective, one based on fallable logic. But everybody commits logical fallacies, and many people are conditioned since birth to think that way, you can't fault them for it. I think some people though, are embarrased to believe in god because it seems "crazy" to them to express a belief in something that has no evidence to exist. Fortunately for theists, people stop feeling silly about a belief in invisible beings when enough people believe it to not make them feel alone.

Quote:

---

I dont know the author of this quote, but its a very known person... dont know if its Einstein, but im sure it was someone as respected as, who said:
"Superficial thinking leads to no God, but deep thinking leads to God."

---

I don't know either, but Einstein was a believer in god. However, you can't argue the validity of a belief by making an appeal to authority. Einstein was a respected physicist and mathametician, not a master of philosophy, logic, or theology.

All the best to you:smokin:

Yeah dude....this would be true that we were desperate and calling on god, except some people in the world don't even have emotions. And a lot of times I happen to be one of those people. I could give a fuck-less if someone I was close to died. Lot's of people might call on God because it's sub-conscious, just how I was taught about God and stuff, it's all subconsciously in my memory....your arguement just dosn't work....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hyde roponics

you can be an athiest and call out to god in bad situations, it just means you hope there is a merciful god even if you dont believe in one.
:jointsmile:

---

That is prayer. Prayer is begging for favors from a non-existent deity.

An atheist does not believe in the concept of a god, or gods, and therefore will not pray. I use my brain in "bad situations", and do not rely on superstitious rituals that have no basis in reality or rational thinking. Anybody that prays is not an atheist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat

That is prayer. Prayer is begging for favors from a non-existent deity.

An atheist does not believe in the concept of a god, or gods, and therefore will not pray. I use my brain in "bad situations", and do not rely on superstitious rituals that have no basis in reality or rational thinking. Anybody that prays is not an atheist.

---

Not an atheist for the moment perhapse. You have to keep in mind Breukelen, that while your or me can keep a cool calculating head in dire circumstances, some people become utterly irrational as the seratonin floods their brain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Man, knowing you strongly believe in god, I highly respect that you still recognize a fallable argument when you see one, regardless if it agrees with your beliefs. I've heard a few atheistic arguments myself that I've shot down, because if you truly believe you're right, you can know your logic is solid.

---

Sorry to disappoint, but I'm agnostic :D I usually shoot down both sides of the arguments, if the logic doesn't make sense. I just don't like arguments that people draw conclusions ie: If you did A, then you must think B. People are fallible and make mistakes.

I can't stand when *some* atheists assume that if you believe in evolution, that you can't believe in god, which is a ridiculous conclusion.

Creationists have the upper hand in EVERY discussion. They can claim the unprovable as their belief, merely as a possibility. What I mean is that if I believe in a deity of any sort, I can claim that any set of rules that our universe works upon, that a god could have done it. And guess what? I'd be right. There could be a god that created gravity, the laws of physics, light, heat. I could even make the argument that a god is constantly keeping these rules in check, like he is constantly "pushing us down" in accordance to the laws of gravity, it shouldn't be that hard (rather, effortless) for an all powerful being.

From a purely creationist standpoint, the creationist "wins" the argument EVERY TIME, merely by presenting an idea as a possibility that they subscribe to. The problem comes when a creationist takes an idea of possibilities and presents them as fact, usually through a holy book of sorts. These facts need basis, but the basis is generally in the word alone, whereas science has a way of showings it's truth through experimentation and observation. The best part about science is that when science is wrong, science changes.



Anyways, just for my own knowledge, can I ask where specifically you got the idea that I was a "believer"? A certain post?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Well for me, the traditionaly seperate conscious entity, the diety "up there" that judges and watches us, is not believable because I've yet to see a logical reason for it.

---

Well... i dont believe this "the diety "up there" that judges and watches us" also... what i call God is somewhat more abstract... anyway, for me the logical reason why i believe in God (whatever it may be), is just "why not?"
We can not prove or disprove the existence of God by logic or reason, so some people choose to believe, and some choose dont believe. For me, both are logic and reasonable. The only difference is the arguments one uses to justify one's belief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Some people do, some people don't. Being an atheist doesn't necessarily mean you know there's no god, it means there's no reason to believe in god until there's a logical reason to. It drives me nuts when people say you have to have "faith" not to believe in god. That's just nonsense, under the same logic a person would have to have "faith" not to believe in superman, invisible flying space jellyfish, gremilins at the center of the sun, or anything else you could imagine. I have faith there's no god (in the traditional sense) like I have faith there's no Galactus out there eating planets.

---

I think i understand they point. There is not any set of arguments of logic and reason capable of proof, in an undeniable way, that there is NOT superman, or anything else. We (im sure most of people too) just believe there is not, but there is not any fact that can prove us that he doesnt exist. Only arguments, only words. So, we believe in a thing for which we have no concrete proof. Its the meaning of "faith". So, even if irritates you, i must agree with them that is logically valid to say "My faith (or belief) is that there is not superman".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Fortunately for theists, people stop feeling silly about a belief in invisible beings when enough people believe it to not make them feel alone.

---

What we call "real", is simply what two or more people perceive in such alike way that they can agree about the nature of the perception they are having. If you see, lets say, an U.F.O., alone, you may think you were hallucinating. But if anybody else sees it too, both of you will agree that what you saw was "real". Was it really? Imagine how would be to tell your friends and another people who wasnt there that what you did see was "real"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

I don't know either, but Einstein was a believer in god. However, you can't argue the validity of a belief by making an appeal to authority. Einstein was a respected physicist and mathametician, not a master of philosophy, logic, or theology.

---

Youre right... but i didnt mean make any appeal to authority or whatever like this... i only wished to cite a quote that, for me, resumes very well my visions about this kind of discussion. It only a personal opinion. The fact it was said by a "famous" person dont makes it truer or falser... anyway, Einstein was really a believer in God, and thats why i think the quote would be him's.

Peace and weed. :thumbsup::jointsmile:

Quote:

---

Anyways, just for my own knowledge, can I ask where specifically you got the idea that I was a "believer"? A certain post?

---

Hmmmm, sorry man I must have had you mixed up with somebody else, maybe with a similar avatar or name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Well... i dont believe this "the diety "up there" that judges and watches us" also... what i call God is somewhat more abstract... anyway, for me the logical reason why i believe in God (whatever it may be), is just "why not?"
We can not prove or disprove the existence of God by logic or reason, so some people choose to believe, and some choose dont believe. For me, both are logic and reasonable. The only difference is the arguments one uses to justify one's belief.

---

That whole "You can't prove or disprove" argument doesn't make sense to me. It seems like another one of those creationist tactics to put their beliefs on equal grounds. Really, you can't disprove the existence of absolutely anything I can imagine, like say gremlins at the center of the sun, but that doesn't mean they have a 50/50 chance because they can't be proven or disproven.

Quote:

---

I think i understand the point. There is not any set of arguments of logic and reason capable of proof, in an undeniable way, that there is NOT superman, or anything else. We (im sure most of people too) just believe there is not, but there is not any fact that can prove us that he doesnt exist. Only arguments, only words. So, we believe in a thing for which we have no concrete proof. Its the meaning of "faith". So, even if irritates you, i must agree with them that is logically valid to say "My faith (or belief) is that there is not superman".

---

But like I said, if faith in the non-existence of superman is just a matter of faith, what makes god more valid than superman? Psychologically, I'd say because people feel more justified in their belief when millions of others hold to it as well.
You are quite right that almost nothing can be proven, but that's why we have terms like "accepted theory". It's funny when a lot of creationists say "evolution is only a theory", they think it means evolution is only a hypothesis. Medicine, gravity, quantum physics, pharmaceuticals, economics, and marketing are all just theory.

Quote:

---

What we call "real", is simply what two or more people perceive in such alike way that they can agree about the nature of the perception they are having. If you see, lets say, an U.F.O., alone, you may think you were hallucinating. But if anybody else sees it too, both of you will agree that what you saw was "real". Was it really? Imagine how would be to tell your friends and another people who wasnt there that what you did see was "real"...

---

I suppose the point of using several people to validate a consistant piece of evidence, is that the odds of both (or more) of you hallucinating the same phenomena are an astronomically minute possibility.

Quote:

---

Youre right... but i didnt mean make any appeal to authority or whatever like this... i only wished to cite a quote that, for me, resumes very well my visions about this kind of discussion. It only a personal opinion. The fact it was said by a "famous" person dont makes it truer or falser... anyway, Einstein was really a believer in God, and thats why i think the quote would be him's.

---

Ah, I wasn't sure if you were making an appeal to authority or just quoting something interesting, but OK that's cool.

Quote:

---

Peace and weed. :thumbsup::jointsmile:

---

Peace man, you've provided some good conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Hmmmm, sorry man I must have had you mixed up with somebody else, maybe with a similar avatar or name.

---

:O someone stole my kimbo peppers? It is a great avatar tho, I coudn't blame them if they did :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hardcore Newbie

:O someone stole my kimbo peppers? It is a great avatar tho, I coudn't blame them if they did :P

---

Oh shiznat I never even realized that was Kimbo! That's pretty brutal stuff they do, not something I'd go for personally. Though you do get some guys with real martial skill, and that's always entertaining, comparring one skill against another.

I'm sorry to say this, but that is the most bullshit excuse for god existing.

To prove this theory, it would mean that EVERYONE prays to god when in a situation of need. That is just ridiculous, and I can tell you why.

Before I go on though, I have to apologize for anyone I could offend by this next statement. My brother is mentally handicapped, and I have been around many mentally handicapped people because of this, and I hold an extreme amount of empathy for what they have gone through.

The reason is that, anyone with a severe enough mental disability won't have the mental comprehension to understand god in his simplest form. That means that they can't pray to god since they don't know he even exists.

Now, I don't know about you, but I include the severely mentally handicapped as being human, and that right there disproves your 100% "statistic".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Oh shiznat I never even realized that was Kimbo! That's pretty brutal stuff they do, not something I'd go for personally. Though you do get some guys with real martial skill, and that's always entertaining, comparring one skill against another.

---

:) my avatar took 20 minutes to make, stretching Brian Peppers face to fit over Kimbos :P

Kimbo had his first sanctioned fight this saturday, and he looked pretty good. He's been training with some of the best mixed martial artists in the world and they're all sying great things about the guy and his work ethic :)

I love training for MMA tho, it's a very humbling experience and defines the very essence of sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

That whole "You can't prove or disprove" argument doesn't make sense to me. It seems like another one of those creationist tactics to put their beliefs on equal grounds. Really, you can't disprove the existence of absolutely anything I can imagine, like say gremlins at the center of the sun, but that doesn't mean they have a 50/50 chance because they can't be proven or disproven.

---

Well... i know this argument seems a "dirty tactic", but its logically valid. What we call "common sense", which is what says there is not gremlins in the sun, is not an axiom. Its only common sense. What most people thinks its true, or reasonable. But we cant use it as an argument, if it were not based upon concrete proven facts.
So, im using logic until its last consequences, and doing so i conclude we really can disprove (by logic and reason) anything. Then i ask... without using the common sense... if we have not any proof of the existence or non-existence of gremlins at the center of the sun, why does the probability of the existence should be smaller (or greater) then the probability of non-existence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

But like I said, if faith in the non-existence of superman is just a matter of faith, what makes god more valid than superman? Psychologically, I'd say because people feel more justified in their belief when millions of others hold to it as well.
You are quite right that almost nothing can be proven, but that's why we have terms like "accepted theory". It's funny when a lot of creationists say "evolution is only a theory", they think it means evolution is only a hypothesis. Medicine, gravity, quantum physics, pharmaceuticals, economics, and marketing are all just theory.

---

Yes... logically speaking, the existence of the superman is not more or less valid than the existence of God. Both are matter of belief. Or, lets say, for the believers, the existence of God would be a "very accepted theory", as it explains a lot of things for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

I suppose the point of using several people to validate a consistant piece of evidence, is that the odds of both (or more) of you hallucinating the same phenomena are an astronomically minute possibility.

---

In this case, the millions of people who says they have felt the presence of God, or witnessed acts which only could be explained by assuming the existence of God, could be enough proof of the existence of God. If the probability of two people hallucinate the same thing is very small, how about the possibility of millions of people hallucinate the same thing? If you agree that when two people agree about some perception then this perception is real, then you must agree that God is real.
I think i got you... :p

You see... if we apply logic until its last consequences, possibly nothing remains... i think everything is questionable, so we can keep questioning until we reach the axioms. As the axioms can not be proven, they must be believed. Thats why i think reason and logic are just ways to try justify our beliefs. Cause reason itself cant prove or disprove anything without the help of the axioms, or assumptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Peace man, you've provided some good conversation.

---

You too... its always nice to discuss with someone with different views... :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Well... i know this argument seems a "dirty tactic", but its logically valid.

---

except that, for obviously logical reasons, the burden of proof always resides on the side of the positive claim.

I don't have to prove that the toothfairy doesn't exist. You have to prove that she does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polymirize

except that, for obviously logical reasons, the burden of proof always resides on the side of the positive claim.

I don't have to prove that the toothfairy doesn't exist. You have to prove that she does.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

In this case, the millions of people who says they have felt the presence of God, or witnessed acts which only could be explained by assuming the existence of God, could be enough proof of the existence of God. If the probability of two people hallucinate the same thing is very small, how about the possibility of millions of people hallucinate the same thing? If you agree that when two people agree about some perception then this perception is real, then you must agree that God is real.

---

Does it is a good enough proof?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Well... i know this argument seems a "dirty tactic", but its logically valid. What we call "common sense", which is what says there is not gremlins in the sun, is not an axiom. Its only common sense. What most people thinks its true, or reasonable. But we cant use it as an argument, if it were not based upon concrete proven facts.
So, im using logic until its last consequences, and doing so i conclude we really can disprove (by logic and reason) anything. Then i ask... without using the common sense... if we have not any proof of the existence or non-existence of gremlins at the center of the sun, why does the probability of the existence should be smaller (or greater) then the probability of non-existence?

---

For the simple reason that in respect to all imaginary things, consistantly unseen by human beings, we do not give credence to something which never had evidence for its existence in the first place.

Quote:

---

Yes... logically speaking, the existence of the superman is not more or less valid than the existence of God. Both are matter of belief. Or, lets say, for the believers, the existence of God would be a "very accepted theory", as it explains a lot of things for them.

---

Of course it explains a lot of things, people form a primitive era saw a complex universe with so many things unexplainable. So they said, "well lets explain everything! There's an invisible diety up in the sky that created the universe and all the rules therein", and with that simple assumption everything fits into that hypothesis.

Quote:

---

In this case, the millions of people who says they have felt the presence of God, or witnessed acts which only could be explained by assuming the existence of God, could be enough proof of the existence of God. If the probability of two people hallucinate the same thing is very small, how about the possibility of millions of people hallucinate the same thing?If you agree that when two people agree about some perception then this perception is real, then you must agree that God is real.

---

Ah, but millions of people aren't having the same hallucination, they are having the same delusion. Big difference. And when those millions are conditioned from birth to believe in the delusion, and have those beliefs reinfoced by their community, the odds of them having the same delusion are 100% likely.

Besides, most people in Europe believed in Zeus, Poseidon, Oden, does their unified and long-standing belief validate the blacksmith and king of the gods? What about the indians believing in Ghanesh, or the Japanese believing for thousands of years that every rock has a soul. The Egyptians and Ra, the Native Americans and the deification of nature.

Quote:

---

I think i got you... :p

---

Not quite ;)

Quote:

---

You see... if we apply logic until its last consequences, possibly nothing remains... i think everything is questionable, so we can keep questioning until we reach the axioms. As the axioms can not be proven, they must be believed. Thats why i think reason and logic are just ways to try justify our beliefs. Cause reason itself cant prove or disprove anything without the help of the axioms, or assumptions.

---

I've heard this before, the claim that all theory, evidence, and beliefs must be based on interpreting everything to match up with your presupposition. This is possibly the biggest logical theist fallacy, as anything and everything works when you interpret everything to match up with what you already assume. An objective and logical researcher looks for consistant relationships, and consistantly observable results, then devises a theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Of course it explains a lot of things, people form a primitive era saw a complex universe with so many things unexplainable. So they said, "well lets explain everything! There's an invisible diety up in the sky that created the universe and all the rules therein", and with that simple assumption everything fits into that hypothesis.

---

Well... our explanations today are more ingenious, more mathematical, and yet explains nothing. For example, in the old days they could say a rock falls because its the Will of God that rocks fall. It doesnt explain much. Well, and today? We say that the Earth have mass, and it makes the space-time around it become curved, so the directest way for the rock in the space-time is to follow a falling path, so it falls. But we dont know why does matter curves the space, or why does the matter must follow the directest way in the space-time. So, we just change the place of the unknown things. Why does matter curves space, or matter follows the directest path? I know why... because thats the Will of God. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

Ah, but millions of people aren't having the same hallucination, they are having the same delusion. Big difference. And when those millions are conditioned from birth to believe in the delusion, and have those beliefs reinfoced by their community, the odds of them having the same delusion are 100% likely.

Besides, most people in Europe believed in Zeus, Poseidon, Oden, does their unified and long-standing belief validate the blacksmith and king of the gods? What about the indians believing in Ghanesh, or the Japanese believing for thousands of years that every rock has a soul. The Egyptians and Ra, the Native Americans and the deification of nature.

---

Well... i believe every people, from different cultures, can percieve the existence of some "superior being", or "energy", or whatever, that they identify as being one (or some) deities. The nature of this deities will vary with the people, for example, the japaneses, mystical by nature, will find "God" everywhere (even rocks). Yet the greeks, human-directed as they were, will find "God" in the acts of men, so their gods are so "human".
For me, there is "something" great, "out there", that we humans can percieve, each one in its own way, that i call "God". Another people can call it another names, but im sure we are talking about much the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reaper666

It is not. General acceptance does not justify proof, the only way to prove that God is real is to observe God and confirm it's nature to be true to what religion teaches. I don't think this will ever happen. We can't say that God does not exist, but we can say that there is absolutely no proof of it's existence so far, it is purely conceptual.

---

Ok... what you would say its a proper observation of God? How much people claim they feel the presence of God? Only because a thing was not observed into a scientific laboratory under controlled conditions does not mean this thing does not exist...

100%? i guess i'm not human so, i was brought up athiest, and i refuse to even say god i do say oh your god sometimes tho haha

I didn't read the thread, but if you say god put the marijuana here for you to smoke and you don't feel bad because of it. Why should I feel bad for not believing in god and all that mess? Because according to you, he already knew I wasn't going to believe him and I have no worries. Blah blah blah show me proof.

This is ill all religons talked about people just like you all who down the power of GOD. It's crazy how all the great books are a timeline of the world.Everything that is being said on this forum is what the almighty said would happen in the last days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reaper666

That's why I said that we can't say it doesn't exist, did I say it doesn't exist? I just said there is no proof of it's existence. Would you not agree that God is conceptual? I'd like to hear why not, if not :)

---

Well... in this case, i agree with you. We really have not any concrete, factual proof of His existence, so, yes, i must admit that, in strictly logical terms, God is conceptual.
Yet for me, personally, i would call God a "well accepted theory" (gandalf's words), as for me it explains things which the actual science and knowledge dont.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fsunoles

It's crazy how all the great books are a timeline of the world.Everything that is being said on this forum is what the almighty said would happen in the last days.

---

"Oh... it makes me wonder... " it scares me... cause i believe its true... and so, the end is near...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reaper666

I'm sure there have been skeptics since the earliest days of religion. Why is it wrong to question your religion? What gives any religion the power to say that they are right (with not proof) and I am wrong? I hope you can at least understand the perspective of a skeptic because if you blindly follow something without question that has not been proven then you give up the one thing that allowed humans to rise out of the jungles and even establish a religion, curiosity, free will and the desire to learn the truth. I mean it's ok to follow a religion, it's none of my business, but haven't you ever questioned the validity of it?

---

Man... i must agree with you in this point too... im a believer, but i always have a scientist's mind (as im one), so i always questioned my religious beliefs... and the most surprising thing... i was born and raised Christian, then i kinda left it a bit, learned some things about buddism, occultism, shamanism, and surprisingly this religions brought me back to the christianism... i became amazed that religions so different could have so much in common... for me, personally, thats the evidence of the existence of something "greater" "outside there", what i call God.

I personally believe that there is no "god" and that you don't go to "heaven" or "hell", etc. We're in a world full of chemical reactions baby. Keep in mind all of the crazy things that religion and its people have brought. Religion has brought upon war of all things, wow god must have used reverse psychology.

This is what I think happened. A long time ago after the earth became inhabitable and evolution made some changes, we were here. After much trial and error our brains developed more and at some point someone or group decided that we need a set of rules that everone will follow no matter what. What better way than to have them follow the rules than to tell them that they're not just jeopardizing their time here on earth but for the rest of eternity, "oh noooooooo". People were more stupid then than they are now, so of course people not only listened but began practicing and preeching these ways. How do you keep people from realizing it's a sham? Easy, you tell them that if they don't believe then they will be punished. If they request proof they'll be punished, etc. "You know you have to have faith". I can see other reasons why religious beliefs began, probably because so many diseases and problems early on that in order to provide people with a sense of well being, religion was introduced. Pray away all your worries as god will take care of you. No need to be afraid of dying, you'll go to heaven and see all the other dead people and you'll get to meet god. :hippy:

Take a look at all of the different religions that are out there, I bet you can't name them all. Southpark did a great skit one time where everyone was being punished because so many people had picked the wrong religion, when the right one was some strange religion not widely practiced.

God is up there with Santa Claus in my opinion. We live in a scientific world and none of that shit makes any practical sense so I don't understand why people continue to follow this shit. What pisses me off is that some politicians aren't "catholic enough" or "religious enough" and I think if that's true we need them in office, not people who rely on "faith"? It's ridiculous and very upsetting.

Here's the thing, I don't go around telling people that they shouldn't believe in god (unless of course we're discussing it which is very rare for me) nor do I speak of how I personally don't think one exists. This is because people get upset, etc. and frankly I don't care if you're dumb enough to believe in Santa or your fairy god mother. What pisses me off is when I hear people complaining about their busy life because they have to go to church, or worse when people at work are talking about what god will or won't do, and it's like shut the @#!* up. If I wanted my head to be filled with mumbo jumbo bull shit I would join a @#!*ing cult or maybe even a church.

Even worse, there are "rules" that make it so that we can't discriminate against people's religious beliefs. Why the hell not? I know if I'm hiring for a position and there's someone who thinks logically like me and knows there aint no god I'm going to hire that person over the person who prays to god for god to make everything alright.

Ok I feel much better after getting that off my chest. Thanks for listening.

^^^^ I foresee soon you will get some heated responses...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

^^^^ I foresee soon you will get some heated responses...

---

Behold the creator is among us!!:hippy:

Calling on God is what God wants you to do, so that it may begin to guide you. If you never verbally asked for help then God cannot touch you or affect you at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Does it is a good enough proof?

---

If five people see a mirage of water in the desert, can they drink from it then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Well... our explanations today are more ingenious, more mathematical, and yet explains nothing. For example, in the old days they could say a rock falls because its the Will of God that rocks fall. It doesnt explain much. Well, and today? We say that the Earth have mass, and it makes the space-time around it become curved, so the directest way for the rock in the space-time is to follow a falling path, so it falls. But we dont know why does matter curves the space, or why does the matter must follow the directest way in the space-time. So, we just change the place of the unknown things. Why does matter curves space, or matter follows the directest path? I know why... because thats the Will of God. :p

---

I'm too stoned to remember all the details, but if you study quantum string theory there are very good explanations for this. Yes, they are all theoretical, but not hypothetical. While we cannot measure the subatomic reactions that we believe control the fabric of reality, we can measure them by their effect. This effect can be retroactively measured in a way that explains how energy would have to move to create these effects.

Matter itself creates a curvature in spacetime, because it is only a more solidified form of the very fabric that makes spacetime. As I've purported before, the lines between "something" and "nothing" are not so distinct as many may think.

Thus far we have seen no evidence, no measurable effects, that would point back to a conscious entity that created and controls the universe.

Quote:

---

For me, there is "something" great, "out there", that we humans can percieve, each one in its own way, that i call "God". Another people can call it another names, but im sure we are talking about much the same thing.

---

I actually agree with you 100% on this. That's all that gets me, really, is that people think the greatest and ultimate mechanisms of the universe have to be called "God" to have any significance of meaning. I believe that we create what we define as meaning, and understanding the most powerful and elusive aspects of the universe has incredible meaning to me. It has the potential to finally explain the essence of the conscious mind, the human nature we posess and the potential for conscious beings. "God" is traditionally this conscious being, this single fellow with individual thoughts that controls everything, creates everything, and judges us. It oversimplifies to real questions we need to ask.

And I must once again say, quantum theory and evolutionary theories has some solid explanations for how simplicity turned into such incredible complexity. "God" would suggest that something even more complex than all that exists, was necessary for the complexity of all that exists. You see the problem here, no? We don't allow a complex universe to exist without a creator, yet we allow this conscious creator to exist in and of its own accord. It doesn't make a bit of sense.

Isn't prayer against the will of God? ;)

Surely asking an all-knowing deity to change its mind - (praying for something to happen) is akin to Satanism?

^^ Now that might get a few heated replies :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

I'm too stoned to remember all the details, but if you study quantum string theory there are very good explanations for this. Yes, they are all theoretical, but not hypothetical. While we cannot measure the subatomic reactions that we believe control the fabric of reality, we can measure them by their effect. This effect can be retroactively measured in a way that explains how energy would have to move to create these effects.

Matter itself creates a curvature in spacetime, because it is only a more solidified form of the very fabric that makes spacetime. As I've purported before, the lines between "something" and "nothing" are not so distinct as many may think.

---

Anyway... my point is, no matter how deep is the explanation, it always lies upon concepts and axioms.
Using the example of the gravity: the Newton's formulation of gravity states simply "supposing that mass atracts mass, the force between then is given by ...".
Then Einstein updates it: "supposing that mass curves the space-time and so, then ..."
This string theory can state anything (i didnt studied it long enough so i dont know what it states), but anything it may state always will start as "supposing that (some concept) behaves like (some another concept), or is like (some another concept), or whatever... "
My point is every theory, always will be based upon a set of axioms, a set of assumptions that are supposed to be true, but not explained. Newton didnt explained why mass atracted mass. Einstein didnt explained why mass curves space-time. I dont know what the strings theory says, so i cant say what it does not explain. But im sure you can get my point with the examples i give.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

I actually agree with you 100% on this. That's all that gets me, really, is that people think the greatest and ultimate mechanisms of the universe have to be called "God" to have any significance of meaning. I believe that we create what we define as meaning, and understanding the most powerful and elusive aspects of the universe has incredible meaning to me. It has the potential to finally explain the essence of the conscious mind, the human nature we posess and the potential for conscious beings. "God" is traditionally this conscious being, this single fellow with individual thoughts that controls everything, creates everything, and judges us. It oversimplifies to real questions we need to ask.

---

Well... i call it "God" because "God" is the concept which fits better in my undertanding about this... but im sure another people would call it another names. Anyway, what are, for you, the real questions we need to ask?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

And I must once again say, quantum theory and evolutionary theories has some solid explanations for how simplicity turned into such incredible complexity. "God" would suggest that something even more complex than all that exists, was necessary for the complexity of all that exists. You see the problem here, no? We don't allow a complex universe to exist without a creator, yet we allow this conscious creator to exist in and of its own accord. It doesn't make a bit of sense.

---

Ok... we are reaching the deepest levels of the problem... our descriptions of the world, are made accordingly with our views about the world. If we think everything must have a beggining and a end, then we will believe that the universe HAD to be created once. Some of us will say it was created by God. Another will say it started with the Big-Bang. Anyway, both will seek theories for explain how was the beggining of the universe, because both believe everything must have a beggining.
But, if someone thinks that nothing must have a beggining, that things can exist since always and forever, then it will seek theories of how it could be. And surely it will find too... Ive read a book where S.Hawking states that there is some cosmological theories which does not require a big-bang at the start of the universe. They states the universe had not a beggining, it was here since always.
So, what i mean is we describe the world as we think it is. Then, we seeks in the world proofs which validate our description. When we find this proofs, we think our description is true. When its only a bunch of facts that agree with our preconceptions about the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delta9 UK

Isn't prayer against the will of God? ;)

Surely asking an all-knowing deity to change its mind - (praying for something to happen) is akin to Satanism?

^^ Now that might get a few heated replies :)

---

Well... i think you are blaspheming heavily and thus will burn forever in hell... :p
Anyway, I dont think praying is asking for God to change His mind... A wise prayer will pray like Jesus did: "If it may bee, let this cuppe of death passe from mee; if not, thy will bee done, and not mine (Matthew 26.39, 42)"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polymirize

If five people see a mirage of water in the desert, can they drink from it then?

---

Good point... it will take me a while until i can find a good answer for it...