-
Welcome to ForumKorner!
Join today and become a part of the community.
Is God real?
- Thread starter ORC
- Start date
God is not real pure and simple. I refuse to believe in a magic man who was born of a woman who didn't have sex to conceive him. The whole bible is Bull. Just my opinion, religion has caused nothing but hatred, wars, and pathetic nonsense throughtout human history.
v
That logic is so fallacious.
What if someone thoroughly thought you were created to kill someone for God? What if you thoroughly thought you were suppose to kill your children for God? There's numerous things wrong with your statement, especially when it doesn't concern superstition or religion.
Highten said:
That logic is so fallacious.
What if someone thoroughly thought you were created to kill someone for God? What if you thoroughly thought you were suppose to kill your children for God? There's numerous things wrong with your statement, especially when it doesn't concern superstition or religion.
Curley said:
That's incorrect, it has caused much more than those few things you listed. You chose to list only negative things in your statement because you don't believe and want others to believe likewise. You should have also noted that it has brought people together into communities to live in peace for thousands of years. It's not simply the existence of religion that causes conflict between religious groups, it's their conflicting beliefs. Many people choose to believe their side must be correct and there can't be any other possibilities other than what they've been taught to believe. I choose to believe there is a God, simply because I feel there must be something worth living for. I don't want to believe in the saying "life's a bitch and then you die," I feel it must lead to something, if not, there simply wouldn't be a point from my point of view. I'm not really religious, so I won't force my opinions upon anyone. I understand that through science and logic up to this point aren't in favor of a God existing, but I must have something personally. Otherwise, what's the point?
Color said:
Please explain to me why there needs to be a point or meaning to life.
The saying "Life's a bitch, then you die" is just a pessimistic perspective of life. It just depends how you look at the cup. Half full or half empty?
Cann!bal said:
There doesn't NEED to be a point. I prefer to look at it as there is something larger than myself and what we know. I have no evidence that a God does or doesn't exist, of course, but I choose to believe there is something. It's just my way of looking at things when things aren't so easy. Some may view this in a separate way, this is mine. I don't see any solid evidence for either point of view, it's all in the mind. If you have anything that proves to you that a God doesn't exist, please, let me know. I'm more than happy to look at it from another viewpoint.
Color said:
You can still have hope when times are rough rather than using God as a figurative crutch.
The burden of proof is not upon me. It's upon theists for the reasoning radical claims call for radical proof. However, if you want the closest thing to proof, use logic.
Cyanide said:
It completely rational and possible for something to come from nothing. I suggest you study the basics of quantum physics.
God does not solve the origin of everything, it just arises another question, which is who created God.
Prism said:
The God debate is very important to some, it dictates how they live the rest of their lives.
God is not a "magic man". He simply just helps people in time of need which in many ways can't be explained. The only religions where people worship "magic men" are mostly those found in Africa such as Voodoo.Curley said:
Cann!bal said:
I'm going to re-type this. I just typed a very long reply that strayed off topic due to other beliefs, not concerning God in particular. Yes, at the moment, "logic" points somewhat in favor of nonexistence of a God. I don't see this as a very valid concept to disprove it in entirety though. It may be hard to grasp now, but hundreds of years ago, thousands at that, the only "logic" that made any sense was that there had to be a God, it couldn't be anything else. Being they had the lack of technology to explore different ideas, this only made sense. We're still evolving, who's to say far after our existence, "logic" won't point in the direction once again to the existence of a God?
Cyanide said:
He also lets people in time of need die which in many was can't be explained. Hence, double standard and invalid logic.
Color said:
I'm well aware that for primitive men thousands a year ago, the concept of a God was the only logical explanation, but that's only because they knew practically nothing compared to what we know now. They could only observe the world to an extent and made assumptions that seemed plausible then.
Modern logic, I suppose.
There's no way to prove if he's real at all, but our brain are so powerful that we can make things real. Ex: A poltergeist. So I believe a person can make him real and it could become actual thing because people bring him to reality with faith.
Cann!bal said:
This is actually exactly what I went off topic with. I believe there is to some extent no full control of your fate. Similar to the term "everything happens for a reason."
I'm well aware that for primitive men thousands a year ago, the concept of a God was the only logical explanation, but that's only because they knew practically nothing compared to what we know now. They could only observe the world to an extent and made assumptions that seemed plausible then.
Modern logic, I suppose.
[/quote]
Yes, but what we know now will be just as outdated in the future. These generations will be looked back upon just like we look back on them. As you stated, they had limitations on what they could observe, so do we, we just don't know it yet. No one is to say there won't be a breakthrough leading to new assumptions.
Color said:
That baby who was murdered and raped by her father, that was her fate, her destiny was predetermined by a master dictator?
This claim you're making is also another unfalsifiable claim, which are always invalid.
No one is to say there won' be a breakthrough leading to new assumptions that the flying spaghetti monster exists. That might have been an ill example, but get the gist?
Featured
Share this page
