Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Snipers Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, voting in polls, and introducing yourself to our entire community. Registration is simple and fast!


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
GOD/JESUS/SATAN
Topic Started: Thu Nov 1, 2007 12:47 am (1,521 Views)
Bravo
Helping Women Everywhere Recover From Boring Boyfriends
Tonic
Feb 13 2008, 01:26 AM
Well, I think we've done this before so I'll keep this concise.

The choice(which I'm deliberately simplifying) is to place faith in religion or science.

Faith in science means faith in the scientific method, which is a standardized, systematic way of evaluating our physical world. Gathering data and testing hypothesis under carefully controlled circumstances, basing theories on factual evidence, using a regimented method that has been developed and constantly improved for hundreds of years.

Faith in religion mean placing your faith in an omnipresent, detached, and apparently unconcerned entity in which we are morally obligated to place our everlasting and unwavering trust in, for fear of being punished in an alledged afterlife. No factual evidence of this entity exists, and the only semblance of proof we are given is almost completely anecdotal in nature, along with random and unsubstantiated accounts of "miracles" which are almost always explainable by modern science.

The choice is yours.

Although you give me a choice, I have a strong feeling you lean towards the first one rather then second, at least your writting suggests so.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Lintendo
Level 5
Quote:
 
No factual evidence of this entity exists, and the only semblance of proof we are given is almost completely anecdotal in nature, along with random and unsubstantiated accounts of "miracles" which are almost always explainable by modern science.


haha hes not leaning on a side, hes just calling u an obvious retard if u believe in the second one from his explanation
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
Hey, what's a bias guys?
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
FaZ-
Level 39
You can't be biased if you're stating your opinion... Tonic's post was obviously not meant to be objective in manner (though I consider it relatively so =D), anyone who can't see that needs to go read a book or twelve.

That's all. I'm agnostic if anyone cares. No need to waste part of my life believing in that which has no proof.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
Alright, so I'm taking a level two philosophy course and we're talking about proofs/disproofs of God. Everyone keeps saying 'oh theres no proof of God'. Well there is. Here's one proof of God, called the cosmological argument (paraphrased in my own words):

1) Whatever exists must have a reason (cause) to exist. (Something can't come from nothing)
2) Things exist
3) => There must have been either an infinite chain of causes and events, or an eternal, unchanging, necessary first cause
4) An infinite chain of causes and events (an infinite series) is impossible (4*)
5) Therefore, the only explanation for existence is an eternal, unchangeable first cause (God)

4* i) All things must have a cause
ii) An infinite series can be treated as a thing
iii) The series is contingent (which means it is non-necessary; it could have happened in any of a number of different ways. For example, you could read this message, or you could not, and the universe would still exist)
iv) Therefore, the infinite series must have a necessary, external cause (God)



Thats the gist of the argument. And if your looking for physical evidence of God, the entire universe is evidence of his existence if you accept that he exists. :P
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Etra
Level 22
Username
Feb 14 2008, 01:14 PM
Everyone keeps saying 'oh theres no proof of God'. Well there is.

There are plenty of proofs for the existence of God, there just aren't any sound ones.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
FaZ-
Level 39
Username
Feb 14 2008, 12:14 PM
Alright, so I'm taking a level two philosophy course and we're talking about proofs/disproofs of God. Everyone keeps saying 'oh theres no proof of God'. Well there is. Here's one proof of God, called the cosmological argument (paraphrased in my own words):

1) Whatever exists must have a reason (cause) to exist. (Something can't come from nothing)
2) Things exist
3) => There must have been either an infinite chain of causes and events, or an eternal, unchanging, necessary first cause
4) An infinite chain of causes and events (an infinite series) is impossible (4*)
5) Therefore, the only explanation for existence is an eternal, unchangeable first cause (God)

4* i) All things must have a cause
ii) An infinite series can be treated as a thing
iii) The series is contingent (which means it is non-necessary; it could have happened in any of a number of different ways. For example, you could read this message, or you could not, and the universe would still exist)
iv) Therefore, the infinite series must have a necessary, external cause (God)



Thats the gist of the argument. And if your looking for physical evidence of God, the entire universe is evidence of his existence if you accept that he exists. :P

That's a reasonably sound proof that there's some sort of higher power that started everything, but that's still incredibly far from proving religions are even close to being true. I don't see how that in any way proves that higher power must be eternal. Maybe there was a God to start the universe, but if he died right after doing so, what difference does it make to us?

In any case, the big bang fits into that proof equally as well as any worshiped God on Earth. I very highly doubt that there is an interactive God.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
Question: What came before the big bang? Another big bang? That's an infinite series.

The argument can't apply to a God that dies immediately after creating the universe, because its non-contingent. That means that it would be impossible to imagine a universe where the God didn't exist. I don't think you can just say that God existed eternally then died after creation. (He wouldn't be eternal)

One problem with it is the idea that an infinite series is contingent. There are certain aspects, I think, that are necessary. For example, the universe MUST have intelligent life capable of questioning its existence (called the Anthropocentric Principle). Therefore, the universe must have 3 spacial dimensions (or matter wouldn't be able to come together). That puts a limitation on God, so he isn't all powerful.

Here's a simpler proof of God, I don't like it as much.

1) The idea of God is omniscient, omnipotent, all good, and has every perfection. (The perfect being)
2) Things that exist in the real world are more perfect than things which only exist as ideas
3)God, by definition, must exist




Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Tonic
The Mambo King
I don't really like these philosophical arguments which treat God like some factor in a mathematical problem. From my limited knowledge of the cosmological argument, I'll pose this question.

Your first point, correct me if I'm wrong, contradicts the rest of your points.

Quote:
 
Whatever exists must have a reason (cause) to exist. (Something can't come from nothing)


So, subscribing to that logic one would ultimately conclude that everything has a cause, including God. God must have a cause, or something must have created God. Does God not apply to this argument? Is God not subject to the ever-present laws of his own universe? Because you continue and say that God is not all-powerful according to this argument. If something created God, then something created that something too. And so on, so on. Kind of makes God seem a bit disappointing if you ask me. Just one link in an endless chain of successions.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
No, I think you're misinterpreting. God is eternal, and necessary. The definition of eternal exempts it from needing a cause. Otherwise, it wouldn't be God, or a first cause :P. It'd be missing the point if you just assumed that God needed a cause.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Tonic
The Mambo King
But you said it yourself. Everything must have a cause. Something cannot come from nothing. God is something, eternal or not.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
Do you know the definition of eternal? -_-
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Bravo
Helping Women Everywhere Recover From Boring Boyfriends
You guys are just playing with words now. You can't come to a conclusion on this, its a sensitive topic. You will always have believers and disbelievers, nothing you can do about that..if being a believer makes you a better, more ethical person then continue to believe and vice-versa. But obviosly this is not the case considering extremists today and in the past using religion as a justification for atrocities...but oh well, nothing you can do about that, there will always be a minority that are against the norm and impose rules on others or cause havoc.

On another note. I took a philosophy course and did not like it, to many useless questions are asked in that course.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Tonic
The Mambo King
I do, but you say:

ii) An infinite series can be treated as a thing

Wouldn't God's "eternal" existence be considered as an infinite series?

Like I said, I could be misunderstanding and any impersoinal clarification would be cool.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
I suppose you could consider God's actions to be a series, and since he is eternal, the series would be infinite. What does this contradict?
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Lintendo
Level 5
well if we dod consider god to be an infinite series then u have said b4
Quote:
 
Therefore, the infinite series must have a necessary, external cause
what is god's necessary and eternal cause
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Username
Level 9
Ah, I said that a contingent infinite series (the universe) must have a first cause. God on the other hand is non-contingent, so he doesn't need a cause. It's mandatory that he exists.

So maybe you could look at reality as a whole as a set of two parallel, separate series. One is our universe, which could happen in any of an infinite different ways, and the other is God's actions, which are perfectly required for the universe to exist.
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
TeaLaGe
Member Avatar
Level 50
Hey, here's an argument.

If god says you should worship him or you will die, what about the people who worship other gods in religions?

What if their gods say, that if they don't worship them, they would die?

explain easier:

Person 1 worship god = heaven, Person 2 worship buddist = Hell
Person 2 worship buddist = Heaven, Person 1 Worship god = hell

So to sum it all up, you're gonna go to hell whether you like it or not because every almost every religion sends you to hell if you don't worship them and you cant worship all of them at the same time, or you will go to hell for that too..

so what do you do?

Offline Profile Quote Post
 
Geofari
Level 13
you go with the fail safe - mormon
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
TeaLaGe
Member Avatar
Level 50
uh?
Offline Profile Quote Post
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Serious Discussions · Next Topic »