Does God Exist?

[Bolthame]

A lot of the Christian celebrations (or at least the names they use) were taken from Pagan festivals, aswell..

[ismavatar]

Another thing, if Adam and Eve were the only people in the world at the time, and they had Cain (is that the right spelling?) and Abel, doesn't that mean we're all inbred?

Not just that, but somehow Cain and Abel pulled off a gay birth, no? And then Cain kills Abel (sounds like a regular old marriage)

the bible(if you choose to believe it) says that he was descended from king David

First off, they had to add this in, because it was one of the Messianic Prophecies. Had to be born a descendant of David. Now, the only way David links up is through Joseph. But Joseph isn't Jesus' dad, God is. Joseph had nothing to do with it, or if he did, Mary wasn't a virgin!

A lot of the Christian celebrations (or at least the names they use) were taken from Pagan festivals, aswell

Very true. Christmas was the pagan celebration of the winter solstace. It's shifted a couple days since we locked it in. The 12 days were the 12 days before New Years for the Pagans. In some traditions, they'd take a man, and let him be free from the law for those 12 days, free to enjoy all the feasts and women. And on the 12th day, they'd sacrifice him.
There's also something to be said about Easter, but that actually predates pagan times. I highly encourage you to see the movie Zeitgeist (see it here) to find out more. Although watch with skepticism, because several parts have been debunked, in particular, many pieces of parts 2 and 3, but part 1 (pertaining to religion) hasn't been touched much (I wonder why)

Also interesting to note is that we've tried to cover up the christian references with characters like Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Definately says something about the credibility of God. In fact, I feel more comfortable believing in Santa, because he brings me presents, and the Easter Bunny, because he brings me candies (though I have to search for them) and eggs (huh? bunnies don't lay eggs...), and what does God bring? Eternal damnation to those who don't heed his word. And for those that do, you get harps and angels that sing "holy holy holy" all day.

[brandonslau]

Ok and another thing people on the site says god talks to them or has before.And believers of god say that's not true..If you believe in god then you believe in the bible is true. So how did all those words of god get recorded if he never spoke to anyone.

[ismavatar]

You're beginning with the assumption that us non-believers still believe in the bible. Now, there may be some non-believers who believe in the bible (I call them crazy), just like there are plenty of God-believers who don't believe in the bible (I call them dangerous), but I think the bible is just as much of a fable as the concept of God. In fact, I oftentimes like to use the bible as a demonstration that there is *no* God, because the bible has too many contradictions (I've already stated a few of them above). Not to mention, the people who God spoke to in the bible made it into the bible for good reasons - because God spoke to them. They were considered Prophets, and what they heard, they made sure to write down and record in the Bible. Anybody who claims to be hearing God today should likewise be recording what he says, because that's a huge event, and it should become a continuation of the bible. Of course, in attempting to do so, you'll probably be accused of blasphemy and stoned to death - unless God really does talk to you, in which case he'll protect you. You better step into a lion's cage first, to make sure.

Now don't get me wrong, I really like the bible, and I do think it's a very good book.... when placed in the Fantasy section and taken with a grain of salt. But I wouldn't use it as an accurate historical account, and I wouldn't use it as a moral grounds (I think Grimm's Fairy Tales does a better job at that anyways). I consider God to be an interesting fictional character who plays a crucial role in the story (and a recurring role in other stories), just like how I consider Harry Potter to be an interesting and crucial character in his story.

[codepyro]

i believe in god, but i'm emo so theres my problem.

[Mat Ethers]

codepyro said:

i believe in god, but i'm emo so theres my problem.

And this contributes to the debate how?

[pudding]

Ok first of all God is spelled with a capital g because god is for polythietic religiouns. If you dont belive in God explain who made the uneiverse(dont dare say big bang or evelution. And most certintly the Bible is true. Many ofits prophicys have been true. And if you dont belive in God and arent saved you will be left behind for a 7 year tribulation facing the most exruciaing things ever in the history.(like meeting saten himself) sO too conclude God Most certintaly is real for every thing crete must have a creator (a drawing doesnt just draw itself) so pick up a Bible and see wha its all about!

[Mat Ethers]

Pudding that's just saying that we are all wrong and giving no reason for it.

And then not letting us use the 2 key arguments of big bang and evolution which have been proven by science, and not even attempting to disprove them just saying don't you dare use them.

So.

What if I were to do this.

God is fake. The big bang is real, how else could the universe be created. And don't you dare say God or Jesus. Because eventually the universe will collapse and no one will save you, and you will be gone... forever.

You wouldn't believe that so why should we believe you. It's arguments like that, that turn people away from Christianity. It's like some strange form of extreme scepticism, no it's not. It's blatant and stubborn refusal of plausible ideas.

[palimpsest]

most certintly the Bible is true.

"and the simple believe every word" -- that's kind of a circular argument. The Bible is true because the Bible says so? In principle that should apply to any text that says "this is the Truth"-- Plato's Atlantis, among others.

It saves us from considering who was holding the pen, and when, and who translated everything, and how, and who decided which books were not supposed to be included, and why. When you blindly attribute the Bible with containing what it's all about, you might end up worshiping Emperor Constantine, following the agenda of King James, and some old Rabbis who were used to having bird entrails and ox blood on the altar.

Then there's the actual text. Parables aren't "true" in the sense that there was really a guy Jesus knew who took advantage of his dad's fortune and wasn't punished, but they're true in that they're illustrative -- the prodigal son was a hypothetical example of how precious sinners are in comparison to the constantly righteous.
The dreams that Joseph Snazzycoat interpreted were metaphorical, as many visions from the book of Revelations that have been deemed correct were metaphorical. Has anybody actually seen an a horseman, even an astral horseman, making sure there was famine in Ethiopia?
So it's not that much of a stretch that "let there be light"="big bang".

On the other hand, if you would have anecdotal evidence, my experience leads me to be very sure that there is a God... or at least a huge honkin' mass of something-like-psi that made me faint that one time my mother hosted missionaries at our house and they started praying. I don't worship this thing because, aside from that one group of missionaries, most of His followers who I know personally are... well, jerks (not you, pudding, I don't know you personally) and His Word's done more harm than good that I could see. Besides, it might've been just a construct... no less real, but it is interesting to think that we made God in our own image.

[ismavatar]

big bang and evolution which have been proven by science

I really really hate to bring this up in a religion debate - really. But I just can't let it go.
They are not proven. They are theories. Theories cannot be proven. You can run 2 billion tests that all hold true, and it still doesn't prove it, because the 2-billion-and-first test could disprove it.
However, unlike God and Jesus, The Big Bang and Evolution *can* be scientifically tested. Thus, they are science, and we can assert that through all the evidence that's been stockpiling, they are extremely likely - extremely.

God and Jesus - that's not science. There's no way to test it. You can't sit God down in a room and so "ok, so... create another universe?" and a lot of the information about Jesus was in fact fabricated, and there's some question as to whether he ever existed or not.

Many of its prophicys have been true

Which ones? And why not all of them? Was one of them wrong? It only takes 1 false prophecy to make a false prophet - you can't just pick and choose prophecies.
Many of its prophecies have also been fabricated - and their truths equally fabricated. Some things were written in *after* they happened. That's like if right now I were to write a note that says "On September 11, 2002, terrorists will attack the world trade center. This letter is dated January 8, 1993." Would you call it a prophecy come true? No, you'd call it a fraud. So why do we make an exception for some of the bible's prophecies, when a lot of them are just as fraudulent.


By the way, excellent post palimpsest. I think it sums it up nicely.

[Mat Ethers]

ismavatar said:

big bang and evolution which have been proven by science

I really really hate to bring this up in a religion debate - really. But I just can't let it go.
They are not proven. They are theories. Theories cannot be proven. You can run 2 billion tests that all hold true, and it still doesn't prove it, because the 2-billion-and-first test could disprove it.
However, unlike God and Jesus, The Big Bang and Evolution *can* be scientifically tested. Thus, they are science, and we can assert that through all the evidence that's been stockpiling, they are extremely likely - extremely.

God and Jesus - that's not science. There's no way to test it. You can't sit God down in a room and so "ok, so... create another universe?" and a lot of the information about Jesus was in fact fabricated, and there's some question as to whether he ever existed or not.

Yeah that's what I mean by proven. Probably should have been clearer on that one and put "proven LIKELY" by scientific tests. I have a habit of doing things like that.

But I totally agree with you.

[ismavatar]

Elohim, that's mostly correct. Hebrew word meaning "Gods" (plural. Singular form is El or Eloah). Yahweh was the name of one of the gods (the Torah/Tanakh/Old Testament use the plural terms most commonly), and the only God accepted by the Jewish people (so you'll often see "Elohim" and "Yahweh" used synonymously). Sometimes Yahweh is translated Jehovah, although the general consensus is that Jehovah was a mistranslation - they mean "He who will be". Then there's also Ail and Shaddai, respectively meaning "strength" and "the mighty ones" (plural, again. Singular is Shad), sometimes used together to become Ail Shaddai, "God Almighty".

You're also using "proof" and "proven" incorrectly (with.are.t. Science). See my post above. Science has been twisted away from its original intent these days, and it is sad to see so many people running in the wrong direction with it. It can be a great thing when used correctly.

Good post, though. Very interesting.

though we have almost identical homoglobins of that of a certain monkey

That wouldn't happen to be the Bonobo, would it . Fascinating creatures. It's almost freaky how human-like they are.

also why ambulances have a snake somewhere in their symbols

This image? That's not satan, you goofball. It's Asclepius's staff. Asclepius, son of Apollo, great healer, was killed by Zeus because Zeus was afraid of him, but then realized he'd made a mistake and restored him to life.
www.bravoambulance.org/star.htm

[Admiral Refuge]

I skimmed though most of this, and it seems that alot of it is just referring to biblical reference... So let's prove a god by using something other then religion.
I'm a skeptic, and I don't believe anything unless there is enough scientific data to back it up...
My basic thesis is in how the universe was formed... I've done abit of research on this subject, and from what I found, there is no way the universe could of formed by chance, meaning that it had to be created by a "creator" or intelligent design... Here is a peice of one of the articles I have found in my research:

---

"For the universe to exist in its present form, there are almost an infinite number of cosmological constants needed to keep the universe stable. These constants control everything from the spin radius of an electron around the nucleus of an atom, to the speed of light. If there were no constants in this universe, it would cease to exist as we know it. Scientists have formed a group of 75 cosmological constants that are absolutely essential to the formation of life .... Two of the constants ... are strong nuclear forces and the expansion rate of the universe. If strong nuclear forces are just two percent less, nuclei are destroyed. If strong nuclear forces are two percent more, matter is prevented from forming. The same results are true when looking at the expansion rate of the universe. When the expansion rate is less by one part in 10¹², the universe would collapse very early in its formation. If the expansion rate is greater by one part in 10⁶, stars would never even get a chance to form...

Probability that the universe formed to support life is 10⁻⁹⁹. This is the same to the probability of a tornado touching down in a junkyard, rearranging all of the parts, and leaving a fully operational Boeing 747 in its wake. This incomprehensible event wouldn’t happen only once, it would happen a million times! Such an event is nearly impossible, and so is the creation of our universe without God .... To suggest that the universe formed completely by chance is statistically improbable"

---

Here is the whole article(very big err... 20 pageish read I think)
That article also explains how God can be everywhere at once, how God didn't have a beginning, why we can't see God, etc... As I said though, you really have to understand physics or atleast the nature of dimensions... Oh, and the SuperString Theory.... Well, they try to explain it, but it helps if you already know it...

I'm sorry if this was already brought up before in the last five pages, but as I said, when I was skimming though it, but I didn't see anything like this yet.

[ismavatar]

Ooh, I can chime in on this one!

Probability that the universe formed to support life is 10⁻⁹⁹. This is the same to the probability of a tornado touching down in a junkyard, rearranging all of the parts, and leaving a fully operational Boeing 747 in its wake. This incomprehensible event wouldn’t happen only once, it would happen a million times!

Yes, it is highly improbable for a planet to have formed life. Maybe that's why there's so many billions of planets and stars and solar systems and galaxies. Because it took a couple tries of failed planets before one of them fulfilled the probabilities. Yes, it's highly unlikely that rolling a 20-sided dice will yield a 20, but if you roll it 20 times, it becomes very highly probable (64% chance). If you roll it 100 times, there's a 99.5% chance. 200 times becomes 99.99996% chance.

There's an estimated 7×10^79 hydrogen atoms in the known universe. Notice that's only hydrogen, and only its atomic form. Nevermind how many strings make up the hydrogen. It's not that far from counterbalancing your 10^-99




The formula for the dice problem:
1 - (19/20)^n where n is the number of rolls
This is because your chances of not rolling a 20 are 19/20, and your chances of not rolling a 20 in 2 rolls is 19/20 * 19/20, and you just keep multiplying. But that's the chance of not rolling a 20. The opposite, the chance of rolling at least one 20 is 1 - that value. E.g. if you have a 25% chance of winning, you have a 75% chance of losing. 1 - .25 = .75





And then of course to top it all off, like furmen said, if the Universe is not self-supporting, what makes you think a god is? God is so complex, that he requires 2 trillian constants to figure out how he created the universe. Then another 20-quintillian to keep it running. How does this simplify our universe's 75 constants? It doesn't. It just makes it more confusing.

But then there's the multiverse theory. The idea is that there are parallel universes each with a slightly different constant. If you're just looking for our current constant and the number right next to it, there's 2 possibilities per each constant, so there would be 2^75 universes to attempt to achieve ours (using the brute-force method). That number is 37,778,931,862,957,161,709,568, or about 38 sextillion universes - not really that many, considering there's 7*10^79 hydrogen atoms in our universe alone. That number is slighly larger than sextillion - about 56 digits larger.

[AnimalGurl]

Who's to say? The answer could be in the middle somewhere. If you look far enough back man had religious/spiritual ideas before he had any concept of some god as an entity. I think religion is mans attempt to define and personify god. I have seen things before that made me wonder if the universe itself does not have an intelligence. Everything has energy, we are all made out of energy and you can break it down and look at it any number of ways. Energy itself might have some form of intelligence to it. Depending on which way you look at it there could be 10 different ways to define some concept of god and they could all be partly right.