Religion:The stupidest thing invented by mankind?

[Raziaar]

Guys. When will you learn that it doesn't have any effect on me what you say about my religion.

I'm used to people insulting and lambasting it. But it's not going to change things for me. I'm not going to give in and give up just because others are trying to antagonize me to do so.

And just because I believe in this religion, doesn't mean i'm liable to go out and believe every other wild and fantastical thing I hear of. Rediculous to even suspect that.

Quit trying to paint me as a psycho just because i'm religious. Because i'm not a psycho or deranged.

 

[Absinthe]

You willfully cling to a delusion. Personally, I'm not trying to convert you. I'm just trying to understand this wonderful little brain fart.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I am not trying to paint you as a psycho.

Like I said, I am only wanting to know more about god for the sake of a meaningful discussion about him.
If we are to discuss the benefits and drawbacks of god, I will need to know more about him.

Otherwise, you are forcing me to be ignorant of your religion. If I cannot understand your terms, we cannot have a meaningful discussion.
Meaningless discussion is the source of outbursts such as Absinthe's here.

That is the point of this forum, is it not?
There are rules against spam messages.

If you are not a psycho, and you answer honestly, then you have no cause for concern. Ignore other people for the time being (besides me, of course).


God exists for a specific purpose.

I am asking you questions about that purpose.
I am not drawing conclusions or criticising.

 

[Raziaar]

You willfully cling to a delusion. Personally, I'm not trying to convert you. I'm just trying to understand this wonderful little brain fart.

Yes, I willfully adhere to something you consider a delusion. It's not a delusion to me, so I'm perfectly content sticking with it. Why waste your breath?

God exists to you for a specific purpose.
I am asking you questions about that purpose.
I am not drawing conclusions or criticising.

Well except your point isn't just to gather information. You've already shown that in this thread. There's many things about my religion that I believe in, but I haven't discussed them here because I try to keep my religion to myself, so as not to infringe upon people like you .

 

[Black_Wolf]

jeez, just leave him be.
"Whatever floats your boat"
If Razziaar wants to belive in God,so be it,as long as he doesnt go around preaching I dont see why you guys are teasing him.

 

[Raeven0]

It's not a delusion to me

Is reality subjective?

Do I have a thermometer on my desk? Maybe I do... or maybe it's only a thermometer to me! Perhaps my thermometer is something completely different for everyone else. Maybe Mecha looks at my thermometer and sees, I don't know, bread. So is there a thermometer on my desk, or is there bread on my desk? Either? Both? Is it a breadmometer?

Can anyone here prove that I do not have a breadmometer on my desk? I'm waiting!

This is fun.

I feel like setting up the Church of the Phantom Breadmometer now. Such a pity that I'm a bit late, but I suppose the Church of the Phantom Breadmometer spawned from a different purpose entirely.

 

[Raziaar]

If your only intent is to mock and tease people... you'd have more fun at a church, against people who will give you a better reaction. Go play there.

 

[Raeven0]

If your only intent is to mock and tease people... you'd have more fun at a church, against people who will give you a better reaction. Go play there.

The first line was the only one I intended you to pay any mind.

Is reality subjective?

 

[Absinthe]

Yes, I willfully adhere to something you consider a delusion. It's not a delusion to me, so I'm perfectly content sticking with it. Why waste your breath?

If it's real in any sense whatsoever, you should be able to provide a rationale behind it. You have repeatedly sidestepped any such attempt. Why?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"There's many things about my religion that I believe in, but I haven't discussed them here because I try to keep my religion to myself, so as not to infringe upon people like you."

That is the problem you are having.

Since you are keeping tolerant people such as myself in the dark about god, we can never understand god.

I may be an Atheist, and a very vocal one at that, but I have still taken the time to accept your god as plausible for the sake of meaningful discussion.
Believe me, you may say whatever you wish to me and I will not balk at this point.
Normally, I grow tired when people refuse to agree to the terms that define logical discussion.
In this case, I agree to your terms, whatever they may be.

Cloaking yourself in secrecy only fuels negative comparisons to other christians.
When you refuse to provide a difference between yourself and Fred Phelps, the inevitable assumption is that there is no difference.

Education is the only cure for prejudice.

Meaningful discussion is the only source of education.*

I have made the first step by agreeing to your terms, so could you please answer the questions so that we may engage in a meaningful discussion instead of a meaningless one?


*(Personal experience is also a source, but it does not apply to this situation because I cannot experience god.)

 

[Raziaar]

The first line was the only one I intended you to pay any mind.

Is reality subjective?

The stuff we're talking about is inherently intangible. We're not talking about reality here in our world where things are defined by the laws and properties of physics. We're talking about the being(s) that created those laws and properties.

That is the problem you are having.

Since you are keeping tolerant people such as myself in the dark about god, we can never understand god.

I may be an Atheist, and a very vocal one at that, but I have still taken the time to accept your god as plausible for the sake of meaningful discussion.
Believe me, you may say whatever you wish to me and I will not balk at this point.
Normally, I grow tired when people refuse to agree to the terms that define logical discussion.
In this case, I agree to your terms, whatever they may be.

Cloaking yourself in secrecy only fuels negative comparisons to other christians.
When you refuse to provide a difference between yourself and Fred Phelps, the inevitable assumption is that there is no difference.

By withdrawing from our meaningful conversation, but demanding recognition as a faith, you protest too much.

So could you please answer the questions so that we may engage in a meaningful conversation instead of a meaningless one?

Keeping you in the dark about god? I have no desire to teach you about god. Why? Because it's not really something I believe can best be learned by instruction. Also, because you have repeatedly stated that god is a fake and you have absolutely no desire with anything in relation.

And as far as the rest of what you said... Why don't people understand the concept of intangibility? Not everything in existence has to be tangible for it to exist. The world doesn't revolve around us. Things we don't know about can still exist, or they cannot. We just don't know. We can only believe, or theorize.

As far as discussing more about religion... I have no desire to. I have already stated this. I have already stated that I do not have much that I wish to add to the discussion, since I don't much care for being teased about my religion. But you have kept goading me into discussion that I already stated I have little desire to fully participate in. And why I haven't just stopped posting? Well for one i'm a forum addict... and two, there's always the whole claim of "Well he just stopped posting obviously because he couldn't take the heat." Which is rediculous.

And what are you going on about Fred Phelps? *HOW* are you comparing me to Fred Phelps? Clearly you can see that I am nothing like him, so don't assume there is no difference between me and him. The things you can tell that define me apart from him is the fact that I have OPENLY SPOKEN AGAINST HIM ON THESE FORUMS. Okay? I don't like the guy, he's scum. But why don't you see that I think that?

I don't demand recognition as a faith. I just want to be left alone. I don't want my religion to be in the limelight, when I don't myself put it there. I'm not wearing my religion on the outside, so I don't expect people to tease me as if I did.

 

[Raeven0]

The stuff we're talking about is inherently intangible. We're not talking about reality here in our world where things are defined by the laws and properties of physics. We're talking about the being(s) that created those laws and properties.

Hmm.

So we're talking about things that are beyond the bounds of reality. We're talking about things that are...

Not real?

Unless there's a third state of reality that I'm not aware of. Reality, unreality, and superreality. And if we are to posit the existence of superreality, what properties do superreal things possess?

 

[Raziaar]

*(Personal experience is also a source, but it does not apply to this situation because I cannot experience god.)

I had forgotten to respond to this one. There are some things that have happened in my life that didn't make any logical sense, which helped to reinforce my faith.

One that stands clear to me, is the really bizarre scenario that happened up in Canada. I was driving with my uncle through Canada to reach alaska... and we had taken one road that we planned to travel. But it was incredibly lonely and in the winter season, so there were no gas stations around. We had realized this only too late, since we read the map wrong on where the nearest town would be. We were over a hundred miles away from any town at that point which would have gas, and were frightened because the fuel gauge thing was getting really low. My uncle knew that vehicle like the back of his hand. It's the vehicle he was driving for many many years, and he pretty much got it to a science when it would start chugging and stop when it's run out of gas. On our way trying to trek back the way we had come, to the last town we visited, it had long since gotten to that point and we still managed to make it. To the point that it would have been bone dry, the thing still ran... which didn't make any sense because it's not like it would be a case of the meter being wrong, or unfamiliarity with the car.

Some people would chalk that up to a really bizarre happening, while i like to think of it more as a guiding hand. It's not something I expect, but it's something I hope for. To not have our vehicle stop when the gas guage said it was supposed to be well out, preventing us from being stranged dozens, even a hundred miles from the closest gas town, or really hospitible place at all, since we were taking such a deserted backroad in the latest months of the year.

Hmm.

So we're talking about things that are beyond the bounds of reality. We're talking about things that are...

Not real?

Unless there's a third state of reality that I'm not aware of. Reality, unreality, and superreality. And if we are to posit the existence of superreality, what properties do superreal things possess?

There's alot of things that we humans are not aware of. Our inability to prove the non-existence of things doesn't magically make those things not exist. I don't know for an exact scientific proof that the things I believe in exist. I don't claim to. But I also know they cannot be disproven to an exact scientific proof or even anywhere close, either.

People in scientific communities talk about Multiverses, parallel universes and stuff, extra dimensions. Obviously these are things that are completely intangible to our current reality, and the things we can perceive. Yet people eat it up. How is this any different than the belief of an intangible, ultimate being?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"Who said I claim to follow them?"

I was assuming, given your arguments, that you were a christian who uses a bible, and who does not believe he will go to hell.

If that was correct, then you must have believed that you were following the laws which will keep you out of hell, whatever those may be.

Otherwise, what as the point of engaging in this discussion?

So many atheists and "not religiously affiliated" people are trying to get me to support Bahaiism or Taoism and argue in favor of the bible.
To what end? You have no intention of becoming christian or Bahai or Buddist.
These are meaningless exercises in time-wasting.
If you support these faiths, then join them. Then bother me with how valid they are.
The fact that you do not follow at least one of them is a tacit proof of their invalidity.

"Never answered my question about divine intervention."

Like I said, biblical law is no different from secular law.
In this case, there is much legal precedent.

First off, god is the highest judge.

Second of all, god calls himself merciful.

Third, there are many occasions where god has personally excused people from crimes, including capital crimes, proving that he is indeed merciful:
Numbers 14:17, as an example, is just one such occasion.
God will forgive people if they serve him through acts like sacrifices, or even if they just make sensible arguments (by biblical standards) like Moses does to get forgiveness before Numbers 14:17.

Since Jesus is a second-level judge, he is subject to the same ability to overrule human judges, as he does to save the adulterous woman.
(Men are third-level judges.)


"What religion? I belong to none."

Then you are prime candidate to join Christian Atheism!

All you need to do is say you follow the laws of god, and then do absolutely nothing.

 

[Absinthe]

There's alot of things that we humans are not aware of. Our inability to prove the non-existence of things doesn't magically make those things not exist. I don't know for an exact scientific proof that the things I believe in exist. I don't claim to. But I also know they cannot be disproven to an exact scientific proof or even anywhere close, either.

No, it doesn't mean they don't exist. It does mean, however, that we have no good reason for believing in them.

I could have an elephant in the room next to me. I currently don't have any evidence that there isn't one. But since there's no reason to suggest that this is the case, I have no reason to believe it.
Likewise, gravity could reverse itself within the next hour and I will collapse onto my ceiling. But with no reasoning behind this occurence, I don't believe it will happen.

In a universe with infinite possibilities, the burden of proof is used to determine what is worth holding credence in and what isn't.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"I have no desire to teach you about god. Why? Because it's not really something I believe can best be learned by instruction."

In that case, you should leave this thread now because you are spamming the place up.
I have had no qualms about supporting my belief and following the standard requirements of a meaningful discussion.
You are doing the opposite, I'm afraid.

"Also, because you have repeatedly stated that god is a fake and you have absolutely no desire with anything in relation."

I have dropped that belief for the sake of argument.
I believe in god now, theorhetically.

"Not everything in existence has to be tangible for it to exist."

Existence is not the issue.
There is a very, very minute chance that god exists, and I accept it as possible despite the insurmountable implausibility.

Relevance is the issue.

If god isn't relevant, then there is no point in supporting him.

If god is relevant, you should be able to describe that relevance through meaningful discussion.

God makes you happy. That's relevant.
Whether or not he exists is irrelevant.
That is why I am accepting, for the purpose of argument, that he does.

'why I haven't just stopped posting? [...] there's always the whole claim of "Well he just stopped posting obviously because he couldn't take the heat."'

Spamming is far, far lamer than "giving up."
You haven't made an argument in the first place. How can you abandon it?
The only thing you've let us agree on is that you aren't contributing to this discussion. Please just stop posting.


"I don't like [Fred Phelps], he's scum. But why don't you see that I think that?"

Now I know that your religion does not support Fred Phelps.
Thank you for telling me that relevant fact.
Was that so difficult?

 

[Raziaar]

In that case, you should leave this thread now because you are spamming the place up.

Spamming is far, far lamer than "giving up."
You haven't made an argument in the first place. How can you abandon it?
The only thing you've let us agree on is that you aren't contributing to this discussion. Please just stop posting.

I haven't been spamming. I've been discussing the topic at hand, even though I haven't necessarily given you what you wanted to hear. You're pretty naive if you think what i've been posting is spam. It's not like i've been posting pictures of the president of asia. My posts have had substance relating to the topic at hand, that being religion and god, even if it's not the substance that satisfies what you're seeking.

So if i'm being silly and spamming, why don't you report me? EDIT: I've done it for you.

But yes, i'm leaving the thread. But if you don't stop asking me questions, I will keep coming back to respond to them.

Now I know that your religion does not support Fred Phelps.
Thank you for telling me that relevant fact.
Was that so difficult?

I didn't have to explicitly state what I did for you to know i'm not aligned with Fred Phelps. He's a hate monger, and I have clearly shown no indication that I am. It's not guilty until proven innocent. And i'm being accused of being ignorant? Why don't you just assume i'm a redneck neo-nazi just because KKK members claim to be christians. Or why don't you go generalize muslims as terrorists because they have radical militant fanaticals who claim to be muslim.

 

[Absinthe]

But yes, i'm leaving the thread. But if you don't stop asking me questions, I will keep coming back to respond to them.

But you're not responding to them. All your posts essentially say "I don't need to address your questions, and I will continue repeating this over and over".

If you're not going to respond them, then you're not going to respond to them. There's no need to continue stating this ad nauseum.

 

[Raziaar]

But you're not responding to them. All your posts essentially say "I don't need to address your questions, and I will continue repeating this over and over".

If you're not going to respond them, then you're not going to respond to them. There's no need to continue stating this ad nauseum.

They do not all essentially say that. I have answered many of the questions asked of me. What I *HAVE* been saying however, is that no matter what you say, it's not going to alter how I feel.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"It's not guilty until proven innocent."

Since when is free speech "guilty"?
If you were Fred Phelps, it would make no overall difference to me in terms of what you could or could not say/

Take this as an example:

You meet a man on the street in the United States know nothing about him or where he is from.
The man openly declares that he does not follow the laws of the United States.

The man then proceeds to follow you around, saying "I do not follow the laws of your country. Your police can't stop me from completing my mission."

Every public place you go to, he is right behind you saying "I do not follow the laws of your country. Your police can't stop me from completing my mission."

So you ask the man what he means.
He refuses to say.
You ask him why he is exempt from the law.
He refuses to say.
You ask him what the mission is.
He refuses to say.
You ask him to go away.
He refuses.

Is that not bizarre?
Are the questions unwarranted?
That is what you are doing in this discussion, except on the internet, showing disdain for the basic laws of how to have a meaningful discussion.

Law one: ensure that you are speaking the same language.
Law two: answer questions to the best of your ability.

 

[Raziaar]

If you look back. I have answered many of your questions. I cannot help that you choose to overlook them and just respond to single bolded sentences of my entire posts.

<sigh>

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Relevance! You haven't answered enough relevant questions to uphold the first or second laws of meaningful conversation.

Almost all your answers have been variations on "I don't know" and "I refuse to answer".

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Let's try this again.

I am assuming, for the sake of argument, that god exists as you describe him.

You have said:

-God is invisible.
-God is inaudible.
-God wants you to be happy and be kind to others.

My questions are:

-How did you learn his wants, given that there is no communication between you?

-What are the standards god applies to happiness and kindness (if any exist)?

 

[Raziaar]

Let's try this again.

I am assuming, for the sake of argument, that god exists as you describe him.

You have said:

-God is invisible.
-God is inaudible.
-God wants you to be happy and be kind to others.

My questions are:

-How did you learn his wants, given that there is no communication between you?

-What are the standards god applies to happiness and kindness (if any exist)?

I took qualities that have been detailed in the bible. The good things, not the bad, and while I obviously cannot know what god wants, i'm going by my belief that god would be pleased by the positive things I do for myself, my loved ones, and other human beings and animals/the earth. I don't have direct communication with god. He doesn't speak to me. I speak to him. And not in the crazy sense, but in the sense that when I pray or whatever, that is my communication with him. Just a silent, simple thing I do.

The standards god applies to happiness and kindness. Since I don't know the answers of the universe and the true reality of god(just what I believe), I don't know. However, I would imigine that god(s) is/are benevolent. And thusly, they would want us to treat things with respect and kindness, and not cause harm to other well meaning entities.

And since I believe we are gifted free will by god, man has the ability to do things other than good, and even if they do something unjust and wicked that makes THEM happy... it doesn't please god. I'm talking about seriously wicked and evil things, not silly things like masturbation. Therefore to answer the question I think you were asking in the past, I think happiness can exist in any form, but it doesn't mean it's condoned by god(s). So I don't think there are any 'standards' to happiness, but there are standards to the way you treat other human beings positively... as long as it is purely positive.


And to answer any further question you might have, concerning the bible, and what it says, and the bad things it says. I believe that it was a very different time back then, and that the bible is not written by god, but scribed by the hand of man from god's words. Thus I don't believe in or practice everything the bible has to offer. The main things I focus on is the fact that Jesus is the son of god, blah blah blah(preachy stuff I know, and i'm only doing this for the discussion), and that he died for the sins of mankind, blah blah blah, and that to get into heaven I need to acknowledge that fact and seek to absolve my sins through jesus.

 

[colson]

I'm not really tuning anything out. I already know my religion cannot be proven. I've known for a very long time. And so what? Am I not supposed to believe in a god simply because I cannot prove the existence? Why... when my faith goes on the factor that it cannot be proven, just trusted to be so?

What harm is the religion bringing to my life, other than the criticisms and possible persecutions of other people? All I see is benefit. The benefit of spiritual happiness that is granted by the practice of my religion that other people apparently don't have, or don't want to have.

Anyways... I hate to sound kind of preachy, since I'm really not.

Hahhaaha! Blind faith in something that cannot be proven makes me laugh. Your religion has brought harm to your life because you have invested so much time and energy into something that can be proven to be false. I'm assuming as a religious person you have gone to church or read a bible or something one time or another. So yes it has harmed your life because you've been lied to your whole life. Realizing that you have been lied to your whole life really bothers me just how it bothered me when I was old enough to realize Santa Clause was bullshit. All religions that I know off are alll the same: straight horse shit!

 

[Raziaar]

Hahhaaha! Blind faith in something that cannot be proven makes me laugh. Your religion has brought harm to your life because you have invested so much time and energy into something that can be proven to be false. I'm assuming as a religious person you have gone to church or read a bible or something one time or another. So yes it has harmed your life because you've been lied to your whole life. Realizing that you have been lied to your whole life really bothers me just how it bothered me when I was old enough to realize Santa Clause was bullshit. All religions that I know off are alll the same: straight horse shit!

How are you able to prove that it's all a farce? Prove it here now please. Without any shred of doubt. Scientific proof that a greater being that created reality as we know it does not exist. I'll be interested to hear what you have to say. If you can PROVE that a god of sorts does not exist, I vow to dissolve my faith.

The burden of proof rests on you, since you're claiming you can disprove it. I'm not claiming I can prove anything.

Your religion has brought harm to your life because you have invested so much time and energy into something that can be proven to be false.

I've only invested as much time and energy as anybody who has a hobby. Probably less, too.


Oh and by the way, I am glad you managed to get a good hearty chuckle from all this. Laughing is good for you.

 

[A True Canadian]

You willfully cling to a delusion. Personally, I'm not trying to convert you. I'm just trying to understand this wonderful little brain fart.

Oh sure, the smoker accuses the religious guy of having a brain fart.

 

[Raziaar]

Oh sure, the smoker accuses the religious guy of having a brain fart.

How come you edited out the other thing you said?

Absinthe's on smoking: http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1966498&postcount=108

Absinthe's on religion: http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2004526&postcount=195

And then there was something about Irony. I dunno, I can't remember it exactly except for that. I thought it was pretty funny.

 

[Crowbar-at-hand]

To All Athiests: If you dont have a religion I feel sorry for you, You never heard of the Storys before? Letmbe tell you......Have ever heard of the Marks of Christs Crucificion(random People all of asudden have the marks of Christs suffering) they did'nt just apear there An all powerful being oviously did something. If you dont have religion How the F**k do you get married to some one, eh? tell me.
I guess its cool thing with people that live by a Socialist Gov't(Cannada anyone?) or Liberalism which is a form of Socialism.

 

[PvtRyan]

To All Athiests: If you dont have a religion I feel sorry for you, You never heard of the Storys before? Let be tell you......Have ever heard of the Marks of Christs Crucificion(random People all of asudden have the marks of Christs suffering) they did'nt just apear there An all powerful being oviously did something. If you dont have religion How the F**k do you get married to some one, eh? tell me.
I guess its cool thing with people that live by a Socialist Gov't(Cannada anyone?) or Liberalism which is a form of Socialism.

Who the hell taught you English? Or better yet: who neglected to?

But aside from that, why would I invoke your pity for not being religious? What is it that I'm missing?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"I took qualities that have been detailed in the bible. The good things, not the bad,"

-What is the process used to tell the difference between good things and bad things / what is "purely positive"?

-Why did god grant free will?

-Does free will contradict omniscience?

-Why do you pray?

"[...] to get into heaven I need to acknowledge that fact and seek to absolve my sins through jesus."

-How do you know what is a sin and what is not?

-Why do you need to acknowledge jesus to get into heaven?





Time out from the discussion for a second. I gots a challenge.

"If you can PROVE that a god of sorts does not exist, I vow to dissolve my faith."

You have two identical apples, then you pick up another two identical apples.
How many apples are there?
The answer to this question (even if you say 2^2 or -8+12) is always equal to 4.
So, there is is only one real answer to the question, I think we can agree.

We now know that there is only one (1) correct answer to the apple question.

Now, here is the important part: how many incorrect answers are there, to the apple question?

1 is wrong, 2 is wrong, 3 is wrong, 5 is wrong, etc.
0.001 is wrong, as are 7.8981^800,000 and -4.768*10^198,000.
So, we can probably agree that "all numbers which are not four" are wrong.
Out of all the numbers, four is the only correct one.

How many numbers are there?
Think of the highest number you can imagine and then add 1. Then add 1 again.
That number can always grow larger, forever. It can also always grow smaller if you subtract.

There are an infinite amount of numbers.
That is our target range.
Out of that infinite range, I have chosen a number.
Can you guess it?
Okay, write down your guess right now.

The answer is at the bottom of this post.

Don't cheat!

Now, the chances of that being the right answer are one out of infinity. Since infinity is hard to measure, let's narrow it down to "a googolplex to the power of a googolplex".

(10^10^100)^(10^10^100)

This is several trillion times more than the number of basic particles in the known galaxy.
It is physically impossible to understand this number.
You can never write it down in uncondensed form because there is not enough matter in the known universe to make the sheet of paper large enough to fit it, nor the ink required to write it.

The chances of winning top prize in the British Columbia Lotto 649 Lottery on your first try are 1 in 13,983,816,000,000.

This is a much, much smaller number. You are more likely to win the next hundred Lottos in British Columbia in a row before you guess my number. Do not peek!

So, (10^10^100)^(10^10^100) is a lot of potential wrong answers.

Now for god.

Now let's say there is one god, just as there is only one answer to the apple question.

How many potential wrong gods are there?
By wrong gods, I mean gods that people are capable of believing in, but do not actually exist.
The answer is that there are infinite wrong gods.
There is no limit on the ability to guess and believe in a god, any more than there is the ability to guess and believe in a number.
Is it zeus? Is it the abstract concept of love? Is it a hydrogen atom in a distant nebula?
Bizzaro-god who is the opposite of your god?
No-one knows, but the there are infinite ones to choose from.
There is no limit on the human imagination.
I just imagined a ruler (10^10^100)^(10^10^100) centimeters long.

Therefore, your chances of believing in the correct god are infinitely less than one out of (10^10^100)^(10^10^100)
The chances of your idea of god being correct are infinitely low. There is no lower chance in the universe. It is, for all intents and purposes, no chance. Also, it is divided in half by the possibility that there is no god at all.

I've already ascertained that you are very probably wrong.
So to the question "does your god exist?" I can say "no" and am guaranteed beyond the least reasonable doubt that I am correct.
I can say the same to any god of any sort.


I believe that there are exactly zero gods.
We know more about zero than we do about god.
We know what zero isn't ("an amount").
So, the question for me is "Are there zero or are there more than zero gods?"
Only two options.
I may as well flip a coin.

Therefore, your chances of being correct are infinitely less than one out of (10^10^100)^(10^10^100).

Meanwhile, the chances of me being correct are 50/50.


Sorry to be long-winded, but I just started rambling. I'll check my work and simplify it down to a simple equation once I have the time. I wouldn't be surprised if I wrote something down wrong.


As for that secret number, did you really expect me to reveal the secret of the universe to you?

 

[Crowbar-at-hand]

Communism.

 

[Absinthe]

Oh sure, the smoker accuses the religious guy of having a brain fart.

Except I'm well aware of the effects my smoking has on me and why I do it. I don't kid myself into thinking otherwise. Got any other witty gems?

And then there was something about Irony. I dunno, I can't remember it exactly except for that. I thought it was pretty funny.

Please point out the relevance these posts have to each other, as well as any similarities that warrant a comparison. Or are you just throwing quotes together and hoping an argument will form out of thin air?

 

[Gunner]

To All Athiests: If you dont have a religion I feel sorry for you, You never heard of the Storys before? Letmbe tell you......Have ever heard of the Marks of Christs Crucificion(random People all of asudden have the marks of Christs suffering) they did'nt just apear there An all powerful being oviously did something. If you dont have religion How the F**k do you get married to some one, eh? tell me.
I guess its cool thing with people that live by a Socialist Gov't(Cannada anyone?) or Liberalism which is a form of Socialism.

Wow just wow. You need to educate yourself fast.

I feel sorry for you. For being so narrow minded, so clueless, so naive. You know it's okay to believe in something and to also question faith, blind faith is just ignorance.

 

[15357]

Communism.

The ****?

To All Athiests: If you dont have a religion I feel sorry for you, You never heard of the Storys before? Letmbe tell you......Have ever heard of the Marks of Christs Crucificion(random People all of asudden have the marks of Christs suffering) they did'nt just apear there An all powerful being oviously did something. .

WTF?

Just.... WTF?

I seriously feel sorry for you and your brainwashed mind.

If you dont have religion How the F**k do you get married to some one, eh? tell me.

Uh.... I dunno, at a court of law, maybe??

I guess its cool thing with people that live by a Socialist Gov't(Cannada anyone?) or Liberalism which is a form of Socialism

I don't think thats cool...... Hell, maybe, but not cool.

 

[Raziaar]

-What is the process used to tell the difference between good things and bad things / what is "purely positive"?

-Why did god grant free will?

-Does free will contradict omniscience?

-Why do you pray?

The process? Common sense. Killing someone is obviously not a good thing. Taking things from someone without their knowing or compensation is usually a bad thing. Really it all boils down to common sense and what we as a generally peaceful society have come to acknowledge. Give me a list of almost anything, and I can tell you if it would generally be considered a good or a bad thing, and the severity, based purely on common sense.

God granted free will why? Well, what I believe and as what is stated in the bible, free will was granted because god wanted to create entities with the ability to decide their own fate in this little world and/or universe he created.

Does it contradict omniscience? No... I don't see how it would. By giving man free will doesn't mean god cannot control people. It means he chooses not to. He sets them on automation of sorts. And could at any time change that, if he so wanted. Though i'm not sure why he would want to.

And to answer that last question, I pray because I want to. I want to have a way of knowing that my thoughts can get heard by whatever force is up there. Not to change things, to meld the world the way I want to be... but just to air out my problems, my hopes, my dreams. Somebody to listen to what I have to say. I also do these things with loved ones too, so it's not like its a substitution for that.

Bunch of math stuff

Not exactly sure why you're going on that tangent. I don't deny math. It's a very valuable tool created by man through our very exceptional intelligence. It's been a way for us to try to percieve and understand our world. Not necessarily always how things 'exactly are'... but how we percieve them, and it works pretty damn well.

How many potential wrong gods are there?
By wrong gods, I mean gods that people are capable of believing in, but do not actually exist.
The answer is that there are infinite wrong gods.
There is no limit on the ability to guess and believe in a god, any more than there is the ability to guess and believe in a number.
Is it zeus? Is it the abstract concept of love? Is it a hydrogen atom in a distant nebula?
Bizzaro-god who is the opposite of your god?
No-one knows, but the there are infinite ones to choose from.
There is no limit on the human imagination.
I just imagined a ruler (10^10^100)^(10^10^100) centimeters long.

Hmm... Potential wrong gods. I dunno. I'm not in the habit of declaring all other gods are wrong. I don't claim to know what actually exists there, but I go by my faith and use that as sort of a window into that realm. It may not be correct, but I don't know for a certainty, except for the certainty of my faith and what I believe.

And yes, we as humans have the ability to imigine great fantastical things. We still aren't powerful enough to know everything about existence as we know it. And so it's hard to rule things out we don't know about, that we don't have the scientific knowledge to know about.

Therefore, your chances of believing in the correct god are infinitely less than one out of (10^10^100)^(10^10^100)
The chances of your idea of god being correct are infinitely low. There is no lower chance in the universe. It is, for all intents and purposes, no chance.

I've already ascertained that you are very probably wrong.
So to the question "does your god exist?" I can say "no" and am guaranteed beyond the least reasonable doubt that I am correct.
I can say the same to any god of any sort.

It's not about believing in the 'correct' god. Because I can't claim to know what the correct god is. What I do believe though is that there is a god, and by showing my devotion I am showing love and respect to whatever it is up there. Worshipping a rock or something is very different than worshipping an intangible being. Though you never know... that rock, though it may be tangible and real... could very well be god! Heh.

Again like I said though, math is a creation of man. It's very good at determining things on our planet and areas of space. That doesn't mean we can use it in application to things that manifest outside of reality 'as we know it'. You're going on probability, and that has nothing to do with the presence of a being such as a god. Nor can it explain many things, such as the causation of a big explosion that created the universe. Anyways i'm losing my train of thought here.

I can see what you're saying there, but it doesn't even come close to actually proving there is no god. There's only mathematics of our own creation. Mathematics doesn't really have the ability to solve questions such as those. It can't even answer why sentience and intelligence in life forms is at is is... rather than just a pile of inert ions or whatever that make them up. Nor can it answer the question of the existence of god or non existence.

God cannot be proven, nor can be disproven. We can only cast perceptions in the way we as man have developed for ourselves.

Please point out the relevance these posts have to each other, as well as any similarities that warrant a comparison. Or are you just throwing quotes together and hoping an argument will form out of thin air?

I didn't want it to start an argument, no. I just found it funny you defending something like smoking, something you obviously do of your own free will, and don't want people to cast judgement on you... despite the harm it obviously does to your body. Very similiar to your argument against me, in how my religion is injust and causes me harm, despite it being something that I do entirely of my own free will. Very different things, same situation.


Anyways, guys... I can't really carry on this discussion forever, so please don't just keep asking me a chain of questions endlessly expecting I have the ability to find the time to answer them all.

 

[Tr0n]

"Suriana isn't saying, just because there IS NO proof, then that means there is a god. If you read his post before, he doesn't believe in a god(s)."

WARNING!

The argument from ignorance fallacy says that god may logically exist, but all logical action simultaneously requires a Burden of Proof as justification.

Therefore, if a god exists, his existence has no discernable impact on our lives, prayer does nothing and all religions and supernatural beliefs have only a one-out-of-infinity chance of being right about him.

There are, after all, an infinite number of wrong answers to any question.
Logic is used to find the right answer(s), but logic cannot be applied to supernatural beings; they defy logical analysis by definition, save for that infinitely small chance.

When your chances are infinity-to-one against, logically speaking, it is impossible to be any more wrong.

Heard of deist right?

Therefore, even if god exists, he may as well not exist - because no-one one can ever be correct in their belief until and if scientific evidence exists to support it.

Well the problem is, you tell that to a christian and they will say science is the creation of god and so on and so forth.

This same argument applies to any supernatural event.

It is a variation on the classic philisophical question "if a tree falls in a forest and nothing hears it, does it make a sound?" except with the bonus assumption that the tree is invisible and intangible in addition to being silent.

The only valid answer to that question is "who cares?".
Even if the tree exists, it doesn't exist in any relevant way.
Meanwhile, the logical assumption is that there never was a tree in the first place.

The problem is, you think that anyone who believes in a god(s)/karma/allah/whatever/ believe in a supernatural being, which I stated not everyone does. You generalize. Some believe the big bang was god which I stated the first time, but yet you missed it.

A fundamental way to assess the validity of any argument for the existence of God is to examine the characteristics of that God. That is, we might ask "What is God?"

One approach to this problem, following the works of Ludwig Wittgenstein would be to attempt to extract a definition of "God" from the way that particular word is used. How do we use the word "God"? What do we mean by "God" or "gods"? However this line of questioning runs immediately into trouble if it tries to give a universal notion of "God", since that word (and its equivalent in other languages) have been used in very different ways throughout human history.

Today in the West, the term "God" typically refers to a monotheistic concept of a Supreme Being, that is being unlike any other being. Classical theism asserts that God possesses every possible perfection, including such qualities as omniscience, omnipotence, and perfect benevolence. Of course this definition is not the only possible definition of "god".

In the Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism, reality is ultimately seen as being a single, qualityless, changeless being called nirguna Brahman. However, nirguna Brahman is understood to be beyond "ordinary" human comprehension. What we ordinarily perceive, that is a world of many things, is brought on by consequences of our actions, and it is difficult, if not impossible, to conceive of nirguna Brahman. Thus, Advaitin philosophy introduces the concept of saguna Brahman or Ishvara as a way of talking about Brahman to people. Ishvara, in turn, is ascribed such qualities as omniscience, omnipotence, and benevolence.

Polytheistic religions use the word "god" for multiple beings with varying degrees of power and abilities. Some stories such as those of Homer and Ovid portray gods arguing with, tricking and fighting with one another. The length of time that these conflicts take place over (for example: the ten years of the Trojan War) implies that none of these deities are omnipotent nor absolutely benevolent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

Once again if you was very logical why do you debate something that has no point? It basically comes around in full circle..Prove it.

Prove that there is no god or there is one.

Also what's with the whole "right god and wrong god" thing? Who says it's not just one god showing himself through all the religions?

 

[Absinthe]

I didn't want it to start an argument, no. I just found it funny you defending something like smoking, something you obviously do of your own free will, and don't want people to cast judgement on you... despite the harm it obviously does to your body. Very similiar to your argument against me, in how my religion is injust and causes me harm, despite it being something that I do entirely of my own free will. Very different things, same situation.

People can cast judgment on my smoking all I want. I accept the risks of my addiction. Nor do I defend my smoking as much as I defend my right to smoke.

The difference is that I recognize the shallow, dangerous nature of my habit. I couldn't care, but I recognize it nonetheless. You, however, just sort of dismiss or ignore much of the argumentation heading your way and act as if the notion of your god is somehow still valid.

 

[Absinthe]

The problem is, you think that anyone who believes in a god(s)/karma/allah/whatever/ believe in a supernatural being, which I stated not everyone does. You generalize. Some believe the big bang was god which I stated the first time, but yet you missed it.

Let me butt in for a moment and unequivocally state that this is crap.

If you're going to consider the Big Bang a "god", then you need explain why it's deserving of the title. What makes it more than just the Big Bang? What does calling it "god" communicate? Is there anything remotely informative in doing as such?

It just waters down the term "god" into meaninglessness. My wall is God. My shoe is God. Air is God. Combustion is God. They may very well be, but then I don't see anything meaningful, substantial, or relevant coming from the classification of such things, much less their worship.

 

[Raziaar]

People can cast judgment on my smoking all I want. I accept the risks of my addiction. Nor do I defend my smoking as much as I defend my right to smoke.

The difference is that I recognize the shallow, dangerous nature of my habit. I couldn't care, but I recognize it nonetheless. You, however, just sort of dismiss or ignore much of the argumentation heading your way and act as if the notion of your god is somehow still valid.

Except for the fact that my religion is not shallow nor dangerous to my physical body, right?

Right. As long as i'm not hurting anybody or hurting myself, mentally or physically, i'm fine. And i'm doing neither.