Best one sentence summation of how I feel, ever.

[Hasbinbad]

motorhead > megadeth

[Illuzionz]

Kind of amusing how people who hate the church think that God doesn't exist because of some douche bag priests even though the Bible clearly states to beware of false prophets and that you will know whether they are doing God's work by their actions. If they are molesting little boys and doing other shady evil type shit, odds are they are false prophets. God warned about this and yet he gets the blame.

I don't see how it's possible you can think that God doesn't exist. Finite things can't just make themselves. Everything that has a beginning, has to have a creator. The Universe had a beginning, therefor it and everything in it has a creator. This should be basic 1st grade level logic.

[DrKvothe]

Originally Posted by Illuzionz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't see how it's possible you can think that God doesn't exist. Finite things can't just make themselves. Everything that has a beginning, has to have a creator. The Universe had a beginning, therefor it and everything in it has a creator. This should be basic 1st grade level logic.

The cosmological argument does not necessitate a god. It simply requires a First Cause. The big bang theory provides a First Cause, because in the absence of any form of dimensionality, the concept of something happening "before" is meaningless. Before time exists, causality can't exist.

God is always exempt from having a prior cause because he's not 'finite'. But the universe need not be finite either: perhaps the 'birth' of our universe rose from the 'death' of a previous, possibly identical universe. If such a cycle were infinite, it would be exempt from requiring a prior cause just like God.

What would it take to convince you that the claims of any one of the other thousands of religions that have existed or will exist is actually true? You would require PROOF. Does your own religion truly meet that burden of proof?

[Illuzionz]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The cosmological argument does not necessitate a god. It simply requires a First Cause. The big bang theory provides a First Cause, because in the absence of any form of dimensionality, the concept of something happening "before" is meaningless. Before time exists, causality can't exist.

God is always exempt from having a prior cause because he's not 'finite'. But the universe need not be finite either: perhaps the 'birth' of our universe rose from the 'death' of a previous, possibly identical universe. If such a cycle were infinite, it would be exempt from requiring a prior cause just like God.

What would it take to convince you that the claims of any one of the other thousands of religions that have existed or will exist is actually true? You would require PROOF. Does your own religion truly meet that burden of proof?

Of course it necessitates a God. Only consciousness can create things. The big bang itself can't be the cause. Someone would have to trigger it just like a gun won't ever fire if nobody is there to pull it's trigger. Consciousness is the only possible logical cause for existence. Even if you were to suggest the cycle of the big bang were infinite, the first one would still had to have been caused by a conscious being.

Also, it doesn't matter how many religions there have been, there is still only one true God. The "gods" of ancient times aren't the same as God as they to are the children of the same one true God. All of the so called "gods" are the fallen angels and the Nephilim offspring they produced, they weren't actually made up characters but beings that actually existed and walked the Earth. However, Jesus proved his father is the one true God when he was raised from the dead as well as a plethora of other miracles.

Aside from the Bible there is also plenty of scientific proof that God exists the best of which is the discovery of DNA. Only a conscious being of unimaginable intelligence could create something such as DNA which is really just an ultra complex biomechanical computer capable of creating living organisms. It's written in a specific chemical language with it's own alphabet. At some point someone would have had to define this alphabet as inanimate matter is incapable of doing so.

You wouldn't go to some ancient temple, see a bunch of hieroglyph's and think "hmm cool natural formation!". No, it's obvious that someone created it. The only difference between those hieroglyph's and DNA is that DNA is much smaller and harder to see and far more advanced.

[DrKvothe]

Originally Posted by Illuzionz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Of course it necessitates a God. Only consciousness can create things. The big bang itself can't be the cause. Someone would have to trigger it just like a gun won't ever fire if nobody is there to pull it's trigger. Consciousness is the only possible logical cause for existence. Even if you were to suggest the cycle of the big bang were infinite, the first one would still had to have been caused by a conscious being.

Also, it doesn't matter how many religions there have been, there is still only one true God. The "gods" of ancient times aren't the same as God as they to are the children of the same one true God. All of the so called "gods" are the fallen angels and the Nephilim offspring they produced, they weren't actually made up characters but beings that actually existed and walked the Earth. However, Jesus proved his father is the one true God when he was raised from the dead as well as a plethora of other miracles.

Aside from the Bible there is also plenty of scientific proof that God exists the best of which is the discovery of DNA. Only a conscious being of unimaginable intelligence could create something such as DNA which is really just an ultra complex biomechanical computer capable of creating living organisms. It's written in a specific chemical language with it's own alphabet. At some point someone would have had to define this alphabet as inanimate matter is incapable of doing so.

You wouldn't go to some ancient temple, see a bunch of hieroglyph's and think "hmm cool natural formation!". No, it's obvious that someone created it. The only difference between those hieroglyph's and DNA is that DNA is much smaller and harder to see and far more advanced.

I already answered the physics things. Time is not linear, and before time there can be no causality, so requiring something something to have set off the big bang makes no sense.

Neither the bible nor DNA are evidence that God exists. If God wrote or inspired the writing of the bible, why is it so damn wrong or awful at nearly every page? Why is the bible's most important character a blatant ripoff of a preceding pagan god? Why does it blatantly encourage rape, slavery, prejudice, and genocide? You don't have to cherry-pick verses to make the bible sound flat out evil, but you have to ignore large sections to make it seem good.

And DNA isn't just some hieroglyphic text to be admired. It evolves! Evidence of the power of evolution is abundant: within written history we've bread milk cows capable of producing 10,000 L per year, all the various breeds of dogs are descendents of wolves, corn was domesticated from 3 inch long ears of maize, brewing yeast tolerate alcohol concentrations near 20%, fruits and vegetables are larger and more uniformly and brightly colored than they were centuries ago. These are the purposeful and deliberate products of human intervention on evolution. Over a couple billion years it is absolutely feasible that simple molecular self-regulators led to the first lifeforms.

[Illuzionz]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I already answered the physics things. Time is not linear, and before time there can be no causality, so requiring something something to have set off the big bang makes no sense.

Time is linear though so you're already wrong about that. How can the big bang have set itself off? How can a gun fire itself? It cannot.

Neither the bible nor DNA are evidence that God exists. If God wrote or inspired the writing of the bible, why is it so damn wrong or awful at nearly every page? Why is the bible's most important character a blatant ripoff of a preceding pagan god? Why does it blatantly encourage rape, slavery, prejudice, and genocide? You don't have to cherry-pick verses to make the bible sound flat out evil, but you have to ignore large sections to make it seem good.

The Bible isn't wrong about anything, you're simply misinformed or misinterpreting what you're reading. Jesus is not a rip off of any preceding pagan god, again, more misinformation/misinterpretation. The Bible does not in anyway shape or form encourage rape, slavery, prejudice or genocide. Again, you simply have poor reading comprehension if this is what you believe. Not sure what else to tell you but having read the Bible I can assure you that you are 100% wrong beyond all doubt.

And DNA isn't just some hieroglyphic text to be admired. It evolves! Evidence of the power of evolution is abundant: within written history we've bread milk cows capable of producing 10,000 L per year, all the various breeds of dogs are descendents of wolves, corn was domesticated from 3 inch long ears of maize, brewing yeast tolerate alcohol concentrations near 20%, fruits and vegetables are larger and more uniformly and brightly colored than they were centuries ago. These are the purposeful and deliberate products of human intervention on evolution. Over a couple billion years it is absolutely feasible that simple molecular self-regulators led to the first lifeforms.

Micro evolution occurs but macro evolution does not. The law of biogenesis clearly states that all life forms can only produce after their own kind and cell theory states that all cells must come from pre-existing cells. Well at one point no cells existed and cells can't come from anything other than a cell of it's own kind. This means the creation of the first cells and life forms cannot have occurred through natural means. It's scientifically impossible.

Selective breeding does not prove evolution. Sure there's lots of different dogs but guess what, they're still dogs. They came from dogs before them and will only ever produce more dogs after them. You will never see a dog produce anything other than another dog. Adding billions of years to an equation does not make impossible things occur. A billion years from now, 1+1 will still equal 2 just like in a billion years from now, dogs will be virtually identical to the dogs of today. There might be more variations/breeds but they'll still be dogs.

[Sadre Spinegnawer]

Originally Posted by Illuzionz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Of course it necessitates a God. Only consciousness can create things. The big bang itself can't be the cause. Someone would have to trigger it just like a gun won't ever fire if nobody is there to pull it's trigger. Consciousness is the only possible logical cause for existence. Even if you were to suggest the cycle of the big bang were infinite, the first one would still had to have been caused by a conscious being.

Also, it doesn't matter how many religions there have been, there is still only one true God. The "gods" of ancient times aren't the same as God as they to are the children of the same one true God. All of the so called "gods" are the fallen angels and the Nephilim offspring they produced, they weren't actually made up characters but beings that actually existed and walked the Earth. However, Jesus proved his father is the one true God when he was raised from the dead as well as a plethora of other miracles.

Aside from the Bible there is also plenty of scientific proof that God exists the best of which is the discovery of DNA. Only a conscious being of unimaginable intelligence could create something such as DNA which is really just an ultra complex biomechanical computer capable of creating living organisms. It's written in a specific chemical language with it's own alphabet. At some point someone would have had to define this alphabet as inanimate matter is incapable of doing so.

You wouldn't go to some ancient temple, see a bunch of hieroglyph's and think "hmm cool natural formation!". No, it's obvious that someone created it. The only difference between those hieroglyph's and DNA is that DNA is much smaller and harder to see and far more advanced.

cute. I especially liked how you said a causal sequence requires a conscious origin, and expected us to not see the hole in your reasoning. Conscious causality requires a conscious cause, naturally. But you didn't prove the cosmos as a consciously caused thing. So, you know, fail.

[Illuzionz]

Originally Posted by Sadre Spinegnawer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

cute. I especially liked how you said a causal sequence requires a conscious origin, and expected us to not see the hole in your reasoning. Conscious causality requires a conscious cause, naturally. But you didn't prove the cosmos as a consciously caused thing. So, you know, fail.

There is no hole in my reasoning at all. Something which at one point didn't exist, had to be created. The Universe at one point didn't exist, therefor it had to be created. Creation can only be caused by a conscious being. Therefor the cosmos is the result of a conscious act of creation.

[Ahldagor]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[pharmakos]

Originally Posted by Illuzionz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is no hole in my reasoning at all. Something which at one point didn't exist, had to be created. The Universe at one point didn't exist, therefor it had to be created. Creation can only be caused by a conscious being. Therefor the cosmos is the result of a conscious act of creation.

highlighted part is a big logical leap, may be true but needs more evidence