As far as I can tell there is no evidence for a God as the religions of the world claim. And I view this from a scientific standpoint. However that does not mean God does not exist. However this also means Santa Claus does not exist.

Therefore I say withhold belief until ample evidence is provided.

Faith I think is a mistake. Isn't the idea to withhold believing in things until evidence is brought forth? If we don't do that then we are apt to fall for the next con artist or charlatan that comes our way. Faith is a mistake, in anything, whether it be religion or faith you will win the lottery.

That all being said I think the best approach to life is not to think about death at all, because you have no control of what will happen to you when you will die. When you die, you die and from there you go to where you go, whether it is an eternal dreamless sleep or a paradise or a place of fire brimstone and torture.

Science disproves religion, not God. Two completely different things.

Actually, Santa Claus did exist, but he's dead now. Instead of presents, he'd bring coal to poor people Christmas eve so that they could all have a fire on Christmas Day.

Instead of presents, he'd bring coal to poor people Christmas eve so that they could all have a fire on Christmas Day.

no shit?

LAWL EVIDENCE!!!!11-1

What I'm saying here is that do you really think something as omnipresent and powerful as "god" can be accurately represented and represented by something so possibly primitive as Human science? Another thought is...God, is that something that's there, or is it the ability that something is allowed to be there or not to be there? If God and the spiritual/mystical is so often described as "not of this world" what makes you think that a science that IS of this world is anything but a shot in the dark in the wrong direction?

EDIT: a good quote: "It is the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power to perceive is also the limit of all there is to perceive."

As far as I can tell there is no evidence for a God as the religions of the world claim. And I view this from a scientific standpoint. However that does not mean God does not exist. However this also means Santa Claus does not exist.

Therefore I say withhold belief until ample evidence is provided.

Faith I think is a mistake. Isn't the idea to withhold believing in things until evidence is brought forth? If we don't do that then we are apt to fall for the next con artist or charlatan that comes our way. Faith is a mistake, in anything, whether it be religion or faith you will win the lottery.

That all being said I think the best approach to life is not to think about death at all, because you have no control of what will happen to you when you will die. When you die, you die and from there you go to where you go, whether it is an eternal dreamless sleep or a paradise or a place of fire brimstone and torture.

Science and Religion... These types of forum posts have been repeated again and again. Truth be told God is within and so is The Devil, these are not "personal beings" but internal metaphors. "Wherever we look God is their" the phrase escapes most peoples minds, especially when you trying to disbelieve in God.

Evidence... Shouldnt your existence, your being be enough?

There is a difference between blind faith and true faith, blind faith is what most practice and true faith is what few practice, most religions have told us that we need the ability to discern to see whether or not we should have faith in something.

I agree theres not much arguing in your last paragraph... :)

Science disproves religion, not God. Two completely different things.

disproves what about religion because right now that statement doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

disproves what about religion because right now that statement doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

Faulty reasoning. Powerless idols. Meaningless rituals. Myths. Miracles. Intercession.

Science disproves religion, not God. Two completely different things.

First of all, he never suggested science disproves God.

Secondly, if you define a God well enough, logic can rip that belief asunder. Example, would be the Abrahmic God.

Actually, Santa Claus did exist, but he's dead now. Instead of presents, he'd bring coal to poor people Christmas eve so that they could all have a fire on Christmas Day.

I think you knew he was referring to the modern day concept of Santa Claus, that is alive in most children under the age of 7 or 8.

"It is the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power to perceive is also the limit of all there is to perceive."

Another mistake would be to believe everything you read.

Evidence... Shouldnt your existence, your being be enough?

Oh........I am sorry.........but no.

Shouldn't the fact that everything rotates in the universe (including electrons and the like) in a circular fashion suggest that God is a circle?

O <------GOD

There is nothing to suggest that an all powerful being is needed to create such a place as Earth, or such pathetic creatures as humans.

If I were all powerful I could do a much better job at creation.

First of all, he never suggested science disproves God.

I know he didn't. But I did.


Secondly, if you define a God well enough, logic can rip that belief asunder. Example, would be the Abrahmic God.

I can't define God well enough. No one can. What you percieve as the "Abrahamic God" isn't God.

Another mistake would be to believe everything you read.

A mistake would be to believe you know enough.


Oh........I am sorry.........but no.

Shouldn't the fact that everything rotates in the universe (including electrons and the like) in a circular fashion suggest that God is a circle?

O <------GOD

The fact that you can't walk through a wall implies that you are subservient to certain laws. You don't create your own reality, except the one inside your head.

The fact that they everything in the universe rotates the way it does implies that IT is subservient to certain laws. (eg. gravity)

There is nothing to suggest that an all powerful being is needed to create such a place as Earth, or such pathetic creatures as humans.

Build something from scratch.

Science disproves religion, not God. Two completely different things.

Wrong.

Nothing can be disproved. You cannot disprove a negative.

Moron

LAWL EVIDENCE!!!!11-1

What I'm saying here is that do you really think something as omnipresent and powerful as "god" can be accurately represented and represented by something so possibly primitive as Human science?

Ok fine, but then I will say there is still no evidence of the God that the religions of the world are talking about. All those are, are stories made up thousands of years ago, long before our great technological civilization.

Another thought is...God, is that something that's there, or is it the ability that something is allowed to be there or not to be there? If God and the spiritual/mystical is so often described as "not of this world" what makes you think that a science that IS of this world is anything but a shot in the dark in the wrong direction?

Science is not in the wrong direction because it produces results. Do you think you would have a fridge if it wasn't for science? What about hospitals and vaccines? What about television and microwaves? What about the computer you are using to see what I am saying to you.

All impossible with out the advances of science.

Science is of this world because in order for something to not be proved wrong(nothing is ever correct, because tomorrows experiment may prove you wrong) is that all theories and hypothesis have to agree with experiment. If it doesn't agree with experiment, then its wrong. Simple as that.

Doesn't matter what your name is, or how smart you are or how much money you have, its wrong.

That is why science is not a shot in the dark.

EDIT: a good quote: "It is the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power to perceive is also the limit of all there is to perceive."

Great quote, but there still is no evidence for God(as a God in the Judeo-Christian sense), and until we find some i'm not going to jump to conclusions by saying there is one.

It is like saying, "I KNOW THERE IS LIFE ON TITAN!" There may be some biology in the ocean of Titan, but to state that there is some when we have no proof of it then we just simply look foolish to our peers.

First of all, he never suggested science disproves God.

Secondly, if you define a God well enough, logic can rip that belief asunder. Example, would be the Abrahmic God.



I think you knew he was referring to the modern day concept of Santa Claus, that is alive in most children under the age of 7 or 8.



Another mistake would be to believe everything you read.



Oh........I am sorry.........but no.

Shouldn't the fact that everything rotates in the universe (including electrons and the like) in a circular fashion suggest that God is a circle?

O <------GOD

There is nothing to suggest that an all powerful being is needed to create such a place as Earth, or such pathetic creatures as humans.

If I were all powerful I could do a much better job at creation.

You know brokeprophet we agree on many levels on a full spectrum of things on these forums. Glad to see there are some people who are really awake in this world today.

Cheers bro. You always have my respect and I will always listen to many of the things you say.

Wrong.

Nothing can be disproved. You cannot disprove a negative.

Moron

I can disprove someone's claim of being immortal by shooting him.

It boils down to a flaw in our brain that wants there to be a perfect afterlife.

It boils down to a flaw in our brain that wants there to be a perfect afterlife.

For some it boils down to a flaw in our brain that wants there to be no recompense for the actions we take and for others it is a matter of finding peace in something that is not permanent.

Oh........I am sorry.........but no.

Shouldn't the fact that everything rotates in the universe (including electrons and the like) in a circular fashion suggest that God is a circle?

O <------GOD

There is nothing to suggest that an all powerful being is needed to create such a place as Earth, or such pathetic creatures as humans.

If I were all powerful I could do a much better job at creation.

You read to literally into my phrasing of the sentence... Probably why your an atheist having turned away from God because of the fundamentalist interpretation, dont worry I was their when I was younger. You understand things by way of semantics I understand things as pragmatics, when you read something you read it literally while I read it figuratively.

If you were all-powerful you could do a much better job at creation? Please, power in the hands of a logician such as yourself would mean a very dull and boring life, there would be no symbology nor metaphor because, logic does not understand these things they see them as they are symbols and metaphors, thus you misunderstand them, symbols and metaphors represent something deeper than just face value something the left side of the brain (which believe constitutes for logical thought) can never detect.

To be a full human being you need more than just logic, you need the right side of the brain as well, but you know what science says about thought processes right? The more you think in one particular fashion the more of a long-term relationship the neurons have in your brain... Thus the more you think in one way the more you neglect in others, a "mental atrophy" if you will. Seek balance between your logic and intuition thats my advice to you.

First of all, he never suggested science disproves God.

Secondly, if you define a God well enough, logic can rip that belief asunder. Example, would be the Abrahmic God.



I think you knew he was referring to the modern day concept of Santa Claus, that is alive in most children under the age of 7 or 8.



Another mistake would be to believe everything you read.



Oh........I am sorry.........but no.

Shouldn't the fact that everything rotates in the universe (including electrons and the like) in a circular fashion suggest that God is a circle?

O <------GOD

There is nothing to suggest that an all powerful being is needed to create such a place as Earth, or such pathetic creatures as humans.

If I were all powerful I could do a much better job at creation.


You didn't really have any sort of argument there so I just wanted to ask

"If you were all powerful how could you do a much better job at creation?"

You read to literally into my phrasing of the sentence....

Fuck, I am terribly sorry, please explain to me the symbolism, pragmatic understanding, metaphors and intuitive thinking, I missed in this sentence:

Evidence... Shouldnt your existence, your being be enough?

Please define your metaphorical meaning behind this sentence......I must have missed it. Please show how my literal interpretation is way off base, instead of going on a tangent about left/right brain activities.

If you were all-powerful you could do a much better job at creation?

It would not boring. It would be relatively the same. I would of course eliminate disease and famine. I would also get rid of the human appendix (why did I put it in there to begin with....oops).

My instruction manual would be given to all races; (an omni-everything being should be above racism) Given at the same time (eliminating countless religious warfare later on); The instructions therein would be clear and concise (would alleviate mis-interpreting my messages).

And viola, I did a better job than a God.

You know brokeprophet we agree on many levels on a full spectrum of things on these forums. Glad to see there are some people who are really awake in this world today.

Cheers bro. You always have my respect and I will always listen to many of the things you say.

Glad to know other people can make sense of things as well.

It would not boring. It would be relatively the same. I would of course eliminate disease and famine. I would also get rid of the human appendix (why did I put it in there to begin with....oops).

My instruction manual would be given to all races; (an omni-everything being should be above racism) Given at the same time (eliminating countless religious warfare later on); The instructions therein would be clear and concise (would alleviate mis-interpreting my messages).

And viola, I did a better job than a God.


SRS lulz