<p>do you really think that WE ALL came here by a big bang? or some single cell?
come on, you know there has to be a creator out there that made this all happen</p>
<p>I haven’t read this thread, but for me, I was not religious until I came to college. I did not grow up in a religious family and everyone else in my family is an atheist. In my case, I became the lost freshmen that had no idea what to do in my life. Religion helped me cope with my sense of helplessness. What was I going to do with my life? To know that everything happens for a reason and that God will always be at my side through thick and thin has given me a sense of purpose. I know that I have done a lot of horrible and mean stuff in my life, but the fact that God will forgive me and love me gets me through the toughest times in my life.</p>
<p>I think that too many people stress the statements in the Bible. They are not to be taken literally(to me that is). People too often stress reason than faith. The tv show “Lost” portrayed the conflict between reason and faith through John Locke and Jack. It made me look at religion in a different light. We all have a purpose and a reason to be alive. It is no coincidence that we were born. Don’t mistake coincidence for fate. If you believe that it was only random chance that gave you an opportunity in life, then I truly feel sad for you because you don’t realize how special you really are.</p>
<p>Since I didn’t grow up in a religious household, I don’t have the knowledge of a particular religion, but I definitely believe that there is a God.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I’m saying that’s awfully convenient. I think it’s bunk. If God created the universe, who created God? How come the universe just couldn’t “exist” when God just “existed”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously, I disagree. Christianity - like Judaism, the Greek Pantheon, Islam, Hinduism, etc. - attempts to explain the why by collecting followers for a base. Religion was used - and is still used - to explain the “why” of what we don’t (and maybe won’t ever) understand. I won’t ever understand multivariable calculus. We may never understand the entire universe. Why does that imply there is a god?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure. You were brainwashed by a book. Some are brainwashed by a community. Some are brainwashed by books. The guys who led cults founded those cults by themselves - would you say they were not brainwashed?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There isn’t one. They aren’t really opposites. Science is the quest for knowledge. Religion is the destruction of knowledge; an attempt to explain the “why” and “how” of the world around us by means of ancient documents and supernatural beings. Science cannot even begin to look at religion - beyond the psychological as gotakun has shown us - because science makes no attempts to consider the supernatural. Science and religion “oppose” each other, I suppose, in that science limits itself to the natural whereas religion has no problem exploring magic, supernatural beings, ghosts, the spirit, etc.</p>
<p>I would say you have been indoctrinated:
“to teach (a person or group of people) systematically to accept doctrines, esp uncritically”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I don’t think you understand the Big Bang Theory at all. But that’s another topic. Yes, I absolutely believe we all came from a single cell. You should read up on natural selection. It’s fascinating, and all very logical - those who developed beneficial traits lived, whilst others survived. There’s no reason to believe that we didn’t all come from a single cell. Why, then, do all animals have extremely similar DNA? Why are we all made up of the same basic chemical elements?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. Religion helps people cope. That doesn’t make it any more true; it just makes it comforting. Remember when you were little and there were monsters under your bed? My mom told me that as long as my head was covered by the blankets, a monster couldn’t get me. I certainly believed that! I was comforting, but it wasn’t true - monsters weren’t real, and if they were, covering my head from blankets wouldn’t protect me from them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course not, unless you were an accident. My mother deliberately had me. She wanted two kids.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t think we’re special. Well, let me rephrase that - we are special, if you think about it. Think of all the random and systematic processes that have led to sentience. That’s amazing. We may not have been “created” for some “special” purpose, but our level of intelligence certainly makes us “special.” Even then, I feel sorry for the people who think humans are truly special and, in turn, superior. This has led to all kinds of destruction, including racism, animal cruelty, and environmental deterioration.</p>
<p>“it’s real complicated stuff that i do not yet understand……”</p>
<p>…but one day you will…</p>
<p>“Present at least one of these arguments, in your own words, otherwise I will have to assume that there are no credible, rational, and logical philosophical arguments for his existence.”</p>
<p>From something I posted earlier:
“I think a lot of them are compelling and convincing, and do make a lot of “sense” that some people think is only found in science. The first mover argument I think is good, basically that something had to be the “first mover” of the universe to make it into being, and that first mover is God. The argument from contingency I can understand also, which is a bit complicated, but puts forth the idea that because everything of this Earth is “contingent” as in it does not exist of its own volition, but of something or someone else’s, it then logically follows that there must be some “non-contingent” being that created a “contingent” world.”</p>
<p>But my own words are insufficient. This site articulates the argument much more clearly and in full: [Philosophy</a> of Religion The Argument from Contingency](<a href=“http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-cosmological-argument/the-argument-from-contingency/]Philosophy”>http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/theistic-proofs/the-cosmological-argument/the-argument-from-contingency/)</p>
<p>“Religion was used - and is still used - to explain the “why” of what we don’t (and maybe won’t ever) understand.”</p>
<p>I agree. I think there is an importance to trying to explain the “why”, though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s some pretty big leaps being made here that are incongruent. There is no evidence that the universe exists contingently, and if it does, the leap between 4 and 5 is unacceptable unless evidence can be brought to light that would suggest that this reason would be God.</p>
<p>Also, the first mover argument has been argued against throughout this entire thread. There is no evidence to support there having to be a ‘first mover’. The universe simply could have been. Etc, just read this thread to see arguments against this.</p>
<p>Man’s brain ='s finite understanding</p>
<p>God’s brain ='s infinitas gigantis</p>
<p>='s He can understand us. We have but crumbs of understanding: His creation being His fingerprints on and off earth. We know He’s been here. But we can’t quite put our finger on him. Probably because he is omnipresent, omnisicient, and omnipotent. That’s a lot of omni folks. So, faith has got to be a part of relating with him since our engrams would explode if we knew him. Ya know. We’d all flash “tilt”.</p>
<p>@ Truelove,</p>
<p>You studied philosophy and religion for the last five years with the intent to prove Christians wrong? Yet at the same time you were having devotionals with your family for the last 7 years? You mean to say you’ve studied philosophy since you were not even a teen? If so, then who?</p>
<p>At the graveside of Cuchulainn we’ll kneel around and pray
And God is in His heaven, and Billy’s down by the bay </p>
<p>Why is this thread is still around?</p>
<p>Obviously, no one here is going to convince anyone of anything.</p>
<p>But really - God or no God, people are mainly concerned about the afterlife here, right? If there was a God but no afterlife for you, just nonexistence, you wouldn’t be as comforted by religion, would you?</p>
<p>One way or another, I posit that it is simply impossible that your physical brain and all of its synapses - i.e. the basis for you mind - will be transported to some afterlife realm. One way or another, you will not be physically “seeing” or “imagining” or “remembering” your family or loved ones again after death - let alone who or what the hell you are, or any sensory perception at all (real or imagined).</p>
<p>Might you exist after death in some fashion? Maybe, but in no way resembling your identity or who you were on earth - if such a consciousness you inhabit can even still be called you.</p>
<p>Finally, can we stop talking about space time?</p>
<p>Time is a useful measurment - MAN MADE. Time does not actually “exist” just like an inch or a pound doesn’t actually exist - they just measure things. You can’t show me a pound, only a pound of SOMETHING.</p>
<p>Time really just measures movement - that’s all the universe is, stuff whizzing around. Only a few of you will actually comprehend this.</p>
<p>God doesn’t exist outside of time, you can’t bend time, you can’t time travel (I’m aware of Einstein’s theories). It’s impossible by definition, because stuff will just keep on moving moving moving. Even take the fictional movie back to the future. The true “time” even in that impossible movie was simply how long you have been running the movie. Doesn’t matter what the physical world resembles or what moved back where.</p>
<p>Since Easter was this weekend, here are a couple of non-faith based reasons I believe in Jesus Christ and the resurrection:</p>
<p>1) Jesus was here and there is plenty of historical evidence that shows that as well as the fact that he was crucified. The first-century Jewish historian Josephus said that
“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”</p>
<p>2) We know where Muhammad’s dead body is but where is Jesus’s dead body if Christianity is such a major religion today? There are a couple of conspiracy theories and I can address them
-The disciples of Jesus stole the body (by attacking the guards and rolling away a huge stone and then probably stuffed it in a closet somewhere) and then told everyone that Jesus rose from the dead! Well what disproves this is that all twelve of Jesus’s disciples died because of their faith (many in gruesome fashion like Peter hanging upside down on the cross). Would you die for a lie? I mean after seeing several of your friends die, wouldn’t you confess that the whole thing was a lie and save yourself from the same fate?
-The Romans/Jewish officials stole the body - well they hated Jesus, if anything, they would steal the body to parade it through the streets, by stealing the body, that would just cause more talk about Jesus.</p>
<p>As for the question of whether there is a God or not, how do we explain Jesus if God does not exist? The difference that I see between Christianity and other world religions is that in other religions you have to do a whole bunch of stuff to get to God or achieve nirvana. However, Christians believe that we cannot do anything as sinful human beings to get to God but that God came to us via Jesus and he was crucified for all of our sins so that we can someday be able to stand in the presence of God. There’s a lot of stuff that is beyond our human mind capacity and God is so much bigger and powerful than us that we cannot even begin to comprehend him. However, I believe there is a God based on Jesus’ coming to Earth.</p>
<p>
Please, do some research about the fraudulence of Josephus’ account. It’s a forgery. The historical evidence proves that it was a forgery. You can only base your belief that it was true on faith. Your argument is void.</p>
<p>Since you truly have no historical evidence of Jesus’ existence, the rest of your post is meaningless.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The universe is tangible. God is not. That fundamental distinction means that different laws apply to each. A characteristic of God is that he is outside science. This has already been said.</p>
<p>But in a purely empirical system, how is it possible that something came from literally nothing?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Science, politics, etc. all work the same way.</p>
<p>The fact that all claim to be correct does not mean one of them is not. Having a belief is acknowledging another belief – that that particular belief is correct.</p>
<p>that’s very true, historians say that the passage was forged so I guess some credibility is lost there. I didn’t know that till now so my apologies for quoting that :)</p>
<p>I guess for now I’ll repeat what I said about the resurrection, if Jesus Christ never existed, why would the original disciples die for a lie?</p>
<p>I’m not gonna spend a lot of time arguing about this. People are going to disagree with each other no matter what and everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. It’s not for us to judge what other people believe.</p>
<p>Lol, I remember 2.5 years ago at the beginning of 10th grade when I was really into these threads on the Internet.</p>
<p>Really, there’s very little point in having a discussion if you’re just going to say that God is not bounded by logic. It doesn’t make sense and certainly has no point in a rational discussion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not entirely sure you do. “Time” does actually exist, but in a different way than an “inch” or “pound” exists (both of which do, btw). Your statement would hold more water (but still not be true) if you had compared an inch to a second of time (comparing two units of measurement). Because something is subjective doesn’t preclude its very existence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How does this make him a deity?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First, we don’t know where the bodies of a lot of famous dead people are, so what’s your point. Second, it wasn’t much of a major religion back then - your statement is a non sequitur.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He was just one of any number of other self-(or otherwise)proclaimed “prophets”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not all Christians believe this. There is a large difference between sola scriptura, which you seem to be advocating and the faith justified by works segments of Christianity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is one problem I have with Christian apologists - this statement gets thrown around a lot as a defense, but then the same people are all too happy to define a lot of “concrete facts” about their “uncomprehendable god”. </p>
<p>For example…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do you know God is not tangible? And why do different “laws” apply to tangible vs non-tangible things in a logic-based argument context? You can’t just say that different laws apply and use that to prove your point. That is not a logically acceptible argument. You need to define and defend these different “rules”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Herein lies the crux of the matter. And this would definitely be an interesting argument as well. Logic and morality seem to exist outside of even a religious person’s concept of god. Even theologians have to admit to this. So how is god all-powerful and outside of our concept of reality if he can’t make 2+2=3?</p>
<p>The more interesting issue is this: is a religion internally consistent?</p>
<p>workin’ on my 6 page religion paper right now, whohoooooooOoOoOo!</p>
<p>x|</p>
<p>“Really, there’s very little point in having a discussion if you’re just going to say that God is not bounded by logic.”</p>
<p>thirded.</p>