Originally posted by debbiejo
The divorce rate for believers to non believers are about equal..........Much strife is caused by differing believes...............better to marry someone who is stagnant in their view, cause if you don't there will be problems.
Umm.. Ok. Thats not what I meant in my post. I wasn't comparing divorce rate percentages.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Hello...did SAY God doesn't exist? No....I said it is FOOLISH for one to think that he or she can SPEAK for God....
I am VERY OPEN to the possibility that God may exist, but i do not beleive this God to be the sort from ANY religion.
Really?
Because the impression this sentance gave
''There's no PROOF of God's existance, only circumstancial evidense which Evolution has a LOT MORE OF'
would suggest that your idea of God is either very limited to idea of Abrahamic God. My idea of God is everything we can see, touch, smell - including those things we cannot - thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.
Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god, was my argument from the begining - yet your argument still searches for proof, which leads me to believe that your idea of god is limited to a certain deity.
ONCE AGAIN....
I am open to all possibilities and everyone's intepretation of GOD...especially yours.
However, when I am debating with a Christian, Jew, or Muslim who claims to speak God's will, I directly ADDRESS THIER GOD
by saying that there is no proof of the Existance of THIER GOD....they have every right and probably numerous reasons to beleive in THEIR GOD
But for them to claim the existance of thier GOD as absolute FACT and expect the rest of us to recognize the SAME version of GOD, when there is no proof of it (other than the Bible and Quran which is the only source of info they seem to draw upon)...is in my opinion invalid.
Does that mean their GOD does not exist? No...i cannot say that either, but do not tell me that YOUR GOD exists and that's final if you can't prove it.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Really?Because the impression this sentance gave
''There's no PROOF of God's existance, only circumstancial evidense which Evolution has a LOT MORE OF'
would suggest that your idea of God is either very limited to idea of Abrahamic God. My idea of God is everything we can see, touch, smell - including those things we cannot - thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.
Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god, was my argument from the begining - yet your argument still searches for proof, which leads me to believe that your idea of god is limited to a certain deity.
Well, that is all your "opinion." All of it is an opinion anyway...
ok well god is well, everyone knows what god is.
now if hes all powerful past what any human mind could even begin to think of, he very well could make himself have a foe who could challenge him.
and i mean that about all the many gods not just one god.
(fine print)
even tho there is only one true god and most of the people out there do not understand this such as the Catholic people who dont understand Jesus was a Jewish man they for he would be Jewish and not that of the Christian faith making him have a different god then that of the Christian faith showing full on proof that no matter what the Catholics are wrong in every way shape and form.
these are not the full on believes that of me or my computer i shall not be held response able for any known death chaos change in faith and or world mass wide panic started, done and or see here on this thread in anyway.
thank you, and have a nice day.
(fine print ends)
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god
?????
Originally posted by dave_kodak
that is so freaking true!
but i still say there are many gods. even tho that totaly screws its self over no matter what.
Actually that was my quote and he added ''?????'' at the end 😛
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god
?????
So what exactly is confuing you in my answer? If you bothered to read the whol thing perhaps you wouldnt be ''confused.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Really?Because the impression this sentance gave
''There's no PROOF of God's existance, only circumstancial evidense which Evolution has a LOT MORE OF'
would suggest that your idea of God is either very limited to idea of Abrahamic God. My idea of God is everything we can see, touch, smell - including those things we cannot - thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.
Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god, was my argument from the begining - yet your argument still searches for proof, which leads me to believe that your idea of god is limited to a certain deity.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Really?Because the impression this sentance gave
''There's no PROOF of God's existance, only circumstancial evidense which Evolution has a LOT MORE OF'
would suggest that your idea of God is either very limited to idea of Abrahamic God. My idea of God is everything we can see, touch, smell - including those things we cannot - thus the proof of God is everything and everywhere, because god is everything and everywhere.
Nature = god, animals = god, humans=god, grass = god, rain=god, gravity=god, universe=god, evolution=god.
Whats there to prove, when ALL is god, was my argument from the begining - yet your argument still searches for proof, which leads me to believe that your idea of god is limited to a certain deity.
Your concept of God is a tautology, i.e. the way you define God makes your argument valid whether or not your premises are true or false.
Originally posted by Storm
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don' t believe, no proof is possible
Excellent Argument Storm.
This is why I believe when someone mentions "God" that person should not expect that everyone else is on the same level of understanding of thier version of God, nor should they expect everyone to have the same moral intepretations.
PLEASE....do not misunderstand me...my GOAL IS NOT to turn people away from their Faith or convince them that thier GOD doesn't exist.
I am being attacked for not beleiving in your versions of God, because not only is there no proof to back this up, but your versions of "GOD" and many of your versions of "morality" in general go against things that i have learned from personal experiences, logical reasons, and manny other ways of thinking.
I am just trying to tell you where i am coming from, and CLARIFY that giving me arguments such as "WEll God says" or "the Bible says" or "the Quran says" is not going to convince me of anything having to do with human rights or logic in general.
I am NOT ATHIEST...once and for ALL...i am in limbo between being Agnostic and Christian....i was once CATHOLIC....until a few years ago when i began to turn away from it..little by little for many reasons.
Re: Could god challenge himself?
Originally posted by eleveninches
If there were a god, and he is capable of doing whatever he wants, then would he also be able to set himself a task that would be challenging for him, and would be difficult for him to do. If he is capable of doing anything, then he would be able to instantaniously solve the puzzle and complete the challenge, but if he can do ANYTHING, then he could be able to create a puzzle for himself that even he could not easily solve.What are your thoughts???
Well, i guess he would question himself about the physics of other universes, since he knows everything about this one.
Originally posted by Alliance
Why would it matter if you were athiest anyway?
Nothing.
But a few people here want to classify me as such, therefore rendering any point I make about God or Religion Invalid.
What they don't get is that I grew up Catholic, and went to religious institutions all my life.
So I would know a thing or two about religion.
Not to mention on my spare time i always research Ancient Mythology and current religious beleifs (for artistic reasons)
I beleive any point I make regarding religion is Valid, as long as I have enough fact to back my views up.