Who won?

[Dogger807]

[youtube]o65mjKTRm6E[/youtube]

LiveLeak.com - Does God Exist (part 2)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=636_1178758846

[youtube]7qkVRgMpHvw[/youtube]

[youtube]AyGrxFnRONA[/youtube]

Personally, I think the theists got eaten alive on this one

 

[Spartacus FPV]

They said that they were going to PROVE god's existence without citing the Bible. They bit off more than they could chew.

His three arguments were sooooo expected. Creationism? Seriously? What a joke...

 

[Cephus]

It was utterly laughable, as expected. Any time a theist really tries to rationally defend their faith, they get pounded into the ground. There is no rational defense of religion, it's a silly, childish belief in invisible friends that simply cannot be justified as true.

Too bad most theists don't get that.

 

[DivineComedy]

Kirk Cameron would make an excellent shrunken head.

I will never forget the time my parents took me out of public school and I had to go to these religious schools. They shaved my head and dragged me off to school. I got kicked out of the first one, the second one had a midget as a math teacher and I got kicked out before “God’s will” drowned my barracks with a broken dam, like thank God for that one, the third one was just right; Patty (huge ****), Lynn (used to give me a hard on you wouldn‘t believe just looking at that angel, where I couldn‘t stand up, luckily she came before me and sometimes she would fetch my paper for me when the teacher called, seriously I would have broken something), and Sally (when she would put Vaseline on her legs in class I would be humming the halleluiah chorus). One day this guy is like trying to prove the existence of God to me with the bible. He says this, and I say but where is the proof that is true, and he turns to another page and said it says this here, and I say where is the proof that is true, and he turns to another page and says here it is, and I say where is the proof that is true…I think we went from Genesis and Alpha and Omega, to the Revelations that I was Satan himself. The guy was seriously afraid of me.

The scientific proof of the non-existence of G0d is very simple. And you don’t have to spend three hours to do it. There really is no debate at all about it. It is more than child’s play. I can prove to anyone in an instant whether G0d exists. Simple logic is all that you need, and a seed of an argument to prove that there is or is not a God. Everyone is familiar with the basic argument. Since I think, therefore I am (here). People get all upset with that ancient “I am,” burning bush. :flames: The only burning bush I have ever seen is in the White House. There are more drawn out procedures and arguments. Like doing the calculations and finding the point at which the first singularity had what you would call a change in state at which point the singularity exploded into the big bang. The calculations are extremely complex, taking virtually a lifetime I am sure. So the most basic argument is preferable to the complex. And that argument only takes a few minutes. The way you win the argument once and for all is to die, and that only takes a couple of minutes. Then after you are gone I will take it on faith that I won the debate. I hope this has been of some help to you guys.

 

[Jerry]

Kameron must have missed the fact that the whole thing is set up so that it can not be proven.

It’s about faith, buddy. Proving a thing doesn't help people believe in it.

Absolute proof will come in it's time, which is not today.

 

[Cephus]

Kameron must have missed the fact that the whole thing is set up so that it can not be proven.

It’s about faith, buddy. Proving a thing doesn't help people believe in it.

Absolute proof will come in it's time, which is not today.

Of course, you can use the same argument with just about any ludicrous idea. Aliens, flat-earth, geocentrism, you name it, it can be 'defended' with the whole faith nonsense.

And you know something? It doesn't stop any of it from being complete and utter BS. Faith is a dodge, if faith is all you have, you're just wasting your time.

 

[Felicity]

The Atheists won the debate--but Kirk is right.

To answer the statement that got the clap at the end--God is a cultural delusion--citing Christian sources was the wrong tack for the Theists--God is not religion (any of them). They should have cited the human action that is seeking to answer such metaphysical questions. The fact that man has a rational will and can conceptualize possibilities beyond our experience is evidence itself. The "thinking" that is the god of the Atheists actually evidences "something" beyond the physical evidence. One cannot "prove" thinking or rational thought--it IS. The fact that rational thought that creates meaning exists without physical proof, evidences the reality of the existence of that which can be known without physical evidence. Hence--if one can elevate rational thinking to such an extent to believe that it can know facts, one is actually believing in something for which there is no physical evidence. Not much different than those who believe in a rational Will outside of their own that knows more than they.

 

[DivineComedy]

“In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’” (Carl Sagan, “Pale Blue Dot,” page 52 of my copy.)

Carl, I didn’t say that. Who said that? It wasn’t me. Bigger universes are fine with my little brain.

How would a Carl Sagan create another intelligence so that it possessed as much free will as Carl Sagan? He would have to stop thinking of himself in the way that Carl Sagan thought of God. If he decided to start with a bit, he would have to understand random numbers. If he decided to start with biology, he would have to understand natural selection. “It’s alive!” Somewhere along the line young Frankenstein would smile at the guy who said his creation acting that way was “a consequence of belated intervention.” (ibid, p, 57)

What Is the Size of the Human Brain?

Ask.com

“Sponsored Results Human Brain
Looking for Human Brain? Find exactly what you want today.
www.eBay.com”

Oh, let’s see, the “average number of neurons in the brain = 100 billion,” in what proportion is that to the size of the universe? The intelligence in elementary school said atoms were made of electrons, protons, and neutrons. There is nothing smaller than a proton…?

*****

The excellent argument that it is an awful waste of space not believe to in aliens, couldn‘t convince a doubting Thomas.

So the question to the Christian is, how can I judge the doubting Thomas that needs to see the physical proof?

The Christian cannot judge the doubting Thomas that needs to see physical proof.

Is a righteous person believing in the word of God, that which is God, even when they are a doubting Thomas that does not “believe” without actually seeing physical proof?

Can you be a righteous person?

Well, if Felicity is right, “rational thought…IS,” and to me it follows that righteousness must also be existent as well. If you believe in righteousness… :respekt:

 

[Felicity]

I wish I could follow your train of thought DC...it looks like a scenic ride.:mrgreen:

 

[Jerry]

Of course, you can use the same argument with just about any ludicrous idea. Aliens, flat-earth, geocentrism, you name it, it can be 'defended' with the whole faith nonsense.

And you know something? It doesn't stop any of it from being complete and utter BS. Faith is a dodge, if faith is all you have, you're just wasting your time.

You obviously do not understand what you are talking about, but hay, if telling yourself that makes you feel better about whatever it is your mad at, that's just fine by me.

 

[Dogger807]

You obviously do not understand what you are talking about, but hay, if telling yourself that makes you feel better about whatever it is your mad at, that's just fine by me.

Seems to me he knows exactly what he's talking about. Faith proves nothing.

There have been thousands of belief systems since the dawn of man, yet to this day faith has no power to change reality. It can change the minds of men you shape reality, but it by itself can not. Having faith that throwing a virgin in a volcano stop eruptions does nothing for the volcano. Plus it's awful hard on the virgin.

I short, basing any argument on faith is admitting you have no ground to stand on.


If I actually believed in god I would note that the three major religions of Judaism, christianity, and islam all claim to believe in the same god. Furthermore none of them play very nice together, and that's not even counting the individual sects within each major division. From this I can conclude that I would have complete faith that this god character is a magnanimous screw up of epic proportions. But hey, that's just what I would have faith in.

 

[Jerry]

Seems to me he knows exactly what he's talking about. Faith proves nothing.

It's not supposed to. It's faith, not science. I can't believe you didn't know that.

There have been thousands of belief systems since the dawn of man, yet to this day faith has no power to change reality. It can change the minds of men you shape reality, but it by itself can not.

EEG Power and Coherence in Zen Meditation

I short, basing any argument on faith is admitting you have no ground to stand on.

Eh, in your opinion. I know otherwise so anti-God atheists such as yourself are no challenge.

If I actually believed in god I would note that the three major religions of Judaism, christianity, and islam all claim to believe in the same god. Furthermore none of them play very nice together, and that's not even counting the individual sects within each major division. From this I can conclude that I would have complete faith that this god character is a magnanimous screw up of epic proportions.

God...or men more likely.
Logically if God is perfect and men are not, who screwed up? Men. That's why atheists such as yourself make no sense.

 

[Cephus]

You obviously do not understand what you are talking about, but hay, if telling yourself that makes you feel better about whatever it is your mad at, that's just fine by me.

No, I do understand exactly what I'm talking about, you just don't like the fact that I pointed out that your faith is no different than that of the tinfoil-hat-wearing rejects out there who think aliens are stealing their brainwaves.

 

[ARealConservative]

No, I do understand exactly what I'm talking about, you just don't like the fact that I pointed out that your faith is no different than that of the tinfoil-hat-wearing rejects out there who think aliens are stealing their brainwaves.

hmmm. It seems Jerry is quite comfortable acknowledging his beliefs are faith based and not fact based. And when you witness his comfort with it - you decide maybe you didn't twist the knife hard enough for your liking so you went in for a second try. Who knows, maybe after enough attempts you will strike the nerve you seem to be wildly angling for?

 

[Jerry]

hmmm. It seems Jerry is quite comfortable acknowledging his beliefs are faith based and not fact based. And when you witness his comfort with it - you decide maybe you didn't twist the knife hard enough for your liking so you went in for a second try. Who knows, maybe after enough attempts you will strike the nerve you seem to be wildly angling for?

He'll have to keep trying

 

[Jerry]

No, I do understand exactly what I'm talking about, you just don't like the fact that I pointed out that your faith is no different than that of the tinfoil-hat-wearing rejects out there who think aliens are stealing their brainwaves.

See? You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Felicity]

No, I do understand exactly what I'm talking about, .

Do you have physical proof that you understand?

 

[Edify_Always_In_All_Ways]

It's not supposed to. It's faith, not science. I can't believe you didn't know that.

If it's not supposed to prove anything, why do people try to convert others? They're trying to prove something.

EEG Power and Coherence in Zen Meditation

Which "faith" do the meditators have? Seems to me they are utilizing the power of relaxation. That is all that the article states...

Eh, in your opinion. I know otherwise.

The power of faith once again... using it in a debate really does look silly. Jerry, you seem to be quite intelligent for a super-conservative. Why all the rapture silliness?

Anti-God atheists such as yourself are no challenge.

I don't believe in unicorns either. Does that make me anti-unicorn?

God...or men more likely.
Logically if God is perfect and men are not, who screwed up? Men. That's why atheists such as yourself make no sense.

Logically, if God were perfect and created men, they could have made them perfect. They didn't. Therefore they are also imperfect, allowing us to suffer and be imperfect. That is why "God-Perfectionists" (GPs for short) make no sense.

 

[Felicity]

Logically, if God were perfect and created men, they could have made them perfect. They didn't. Therefore they are also imperfect, allowing us to suffer and be imperfect. That is why "God-Perfectionists" (GPs for short) make no sense.

You're assuming it would be best for God to create perfect beings that were equal to his perfection. This is a false dichotomy.

 

[Jerry]

If it's not supposed to prove anything, why do people try to convert others? They're trying to prove something.

Evangelicals, of which I am not one of, try to convert others out of a notion that they are commanded to :aliens2: It's not that they are trying to scientifically, euphorically, objectively prove something and submit it to a peer reviewed, accredited journal so that the community can give a given convert a critical review. They do it out of obeying the laws of their religion; no different than attending mass.

Which "faith" do the meditators have? Seems to me they are utilizing the power of relaxation. That is all that the article states...

That was one such study on that sight which focuses on Zen Meditation techniques presented in a religiously neutral way, ie; "relaxation".

The power of faith once again... using it in a debate really does look silly. Jerry, you seem to be quite intelligent for a super-conservative. Why all the rapture silliness?

1. It's "Evil Conservative" :angel?: "Super" implies tights and a cape, which 1069 would love to see, but is not acuret.

2. Rapture? Where have I talked about the Rapture?

I don't believe in unicorns either. Does that make me anti-unicorn?

Make ya a deal: As long as not believing that abortion is a responsible choice makes me "anti-choice" according to PCers such as 1069 and rivrrat, then not believing in unicorns makes you anti-unicorn.

I'm also anti-Clinton and anti-mother in-law.

Logically, if God were perfect and created men, they could have made them perfect.

That is a true premise.

They didn't.

They did.

Even if they didn't, our nature doesn't dictate theirs. It doesn't follow.

Therefore they are also imperfect, allowing us to suffer and be imperfect.

Allowing us to make our own choices is good. It's very pro-choice of God to do this. The catch: we have to live with our decisions.

 

[laska]

Logically, if God were perfect and created men, they could have made them perfect. They didn't. Therefore they are also imperfect, allowing us to suffer and be imperfect. That is why "God-Perfectionists" (GPs for short) make no sense.-Edify_Always-In-All-Ways.


To me a perfect God would not be perfect if A/there was not an opposition in all things, good and evil, and B/if that being did not have agency to choose between the two, good and evil, with a real possibility of falling. This is true character, perfect character. To me this why in Genesis when Adam and Eve fell, the Gods stated that they had become like them to have a knowledge of good and evil. Without a fall from innocence, how could they know true joy if they never experienced any sorrow, or taste the sweet without tasting the bitter. So a perfect God like you suggest, the only one you state that makes sense, makes no sense to me. A perfect God could not exist in such an environment.

 

[DivineComedy]

You're assuming it would be best for God to create perfect beings that were equal to his perfection. This is a false dichotomy.

If man was perfect he wouldn’t need a screw driver or anything to stick it in. {There is more than one scenic view of that logic. There is the feeling of accomplishment after having fixed my wife‘s ceiling fan.}

Two perfect beings alone in the universe would have a really boring existence; there is no logical reason to have more than one perfect being. {Using the most obvious scenic view.} As a Sci-fi nut, I think an example of God’s love includes the imperfect folds in Erin Gray’s lips in Buck Rogers in the 25th Century:

If a woman doesn’t look like that the atheist might claim God is allowing them to suffer.

I married a blonde, and every blonde doesn’t look like Donna Douglas in The Twilight Zone episode “The Eye of the Beholder:”

“Now the questions that come to mind. Where is this place and when is it? What kind of world where ugliness is the norm and beauty the deviation from that norm? You want an answer? The answer is, it doesn't make any difference. Because the old saying happens to be true. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, in this year or a hundred years hence, on this planet or wherever there is human life, perhaps out amongst the stars. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Lesson to be learned—in The Twilight Zone." (Rod Serling's closing narration) The Eye of the Beholder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thank God for that. My wife has a twin…oops…

*****

I think with the picture I only reminded the atheists of the line from “The Devil's Advocate:”

“It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, f***in' *** off! He's a tight-***! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER!”

Free will, right?

*****

If man chiseled his understanding into a pretty marble stone he would have physical proof of “whatever” he chiseled, but still could lack an understanding of faith in righteousness.

 

[niftydrifty]

the pairing of prominent atheist authors and thinkers with theological lightweights is typical. the god (little 'g') which they don't believe is different than the God that serious Christians believe in. this is typical of Dawkins, as well as the regular suspects here.

it's typical of these gents to misrepresent faith when they speak about it. behold:

you just don't like the fact that I pointed out that your faith is no different than that of the tinfoil-hat-wearing rejects out there who think aliens are stealing their brainwaves.

it's a silly, childish belief in invisible friends that simply cannot be justified as true.

it's absolutely telling that no one was quoted in the above member's posts. it's also telling that this particular character loves to show up whenever religion is mentioned and offer absolutely nothing to the particular debate at hand, by merely insulting all believers and all people of faith in general, every time, rather than discussing the topic. it's illogical. it's to me amusing to hear someone constantly accuse others of being illogical while consistently being illogical, himself.

dare I say that the mean-spiritedness of the atheists in this thread is evidence of the lack of God in their lives?







(I won't hold it against them. Believers, it'll just be our little secret.)

.

 

[Felicity]

Two perfect beings alone in the universe would have a really boring existence;

Perfect would be immutable. In perfection, they couldn't be bored. Evidence points to a creative God.

there is no logical reason to have more than one perfect being. {Using the most obvious scenic view.} As a Sci-fi nut, I think an example of God’s love includes the imperfect folds in Erin Gray’s lips in Buck Rogers in the 25th Century:

She's lovely, but I had the hots for Starbuck.

If a woman doesn’t look like that the atheist might claim God is allowing them to suffer.

Atheists b!tch about everything. Nothing's fair to them.:mrgreen:

“It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, f***in' *** off! He's a tight-***! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER!”

But if you look correctly, you see. If you touch properly, you feel. If you taste with restraint, you savor.....It's all part of the lesson and the GIFT.

Free will, right?

Yup!:mrgreen:

*****

If man chiseled his understanding into a pretty marble stone he would have physical proof of “whatever” he chiseled, but still could lack an understanding of faith in righteousness.

His "understanding" could not be proved to be true. I say every blade of grass evidences God. Every breath I take evidences God. Every atom everywhere speaks to His reality. Can I prove it? No...just as the thought that passes through an atheists head, that makes so much sense to him and seems to rely on all the evidence the world has to offer, is no more provable than God Himself. OUr rational Will is what mirrors the likeness of God. In that--is the proof that is intangible.

 

[niftydrifty]

Atheists b!tch about everything.

"Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?" - Psalm 2:1