Does god exist?

[thejvman]

As an atheist who often must talk to very theistic people I often find myself wondering why there are no intelligible debates on the matter of whether or not there actually is a god. I intend for this forum to contain only well thought out and logical statements so please do your best not to ruin this forum with evangelical nonsense, or excessive cursing.

[jlwelch]

The very question of whether the One True God exists is as ignorant as it is insulting. However, since you started the topic, I will finish it.

First off, when you see a painting you know there is a painter. When you see an automobile, you know there is a maker. Therefore, just seeing the world is absolute proof that there must be a maker. As the Way of the Master Guys say, all you need is "eyes that can see and a brain that works".

Here are some valuable links on the subject.

http://video.google...;q=Way+of+the+Master

http://www.jesus-is-..s/is_there_a_god.htm

http://www.jesus-is-..ity_of_salvation.htm

[Neoptolemus]

Well, technically speaking gods do exist. They are a socio-psychological construct in order to give our lives meaning and purpose. They are there because Mankind needed to live in a group in order to survive. In order for this to properly work our minds needed to be able to worship our group which, through time, became the worship of gods.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 03:05 PM, jlwelch wrote: The very question of whether the One True God exists is as ignorant as it is insulting. However, since you started the topic, I will finish it.

First off, when you see a painting you know there is a painter. When you see an automobile, you know there is a maker. Therefore, just seeing the world is absolute proof that there must be a maker. As the Way of the Master Guys say, all you need is "eyes that can see and a brain that works".

Fuck that, not the damn teleological (or tele-illogical as i like to say) argument, it's aload of nonesense. Basically, you're saying the fact the universe looks to be designed there must be a designer.
Basically you're saying that just because something is complex that it has to be designed..Well that's not so, the first premise of the argument is countered by evolutionary biology...

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:08 PM, neoptolemus wrote: Well, technically speaking gods do exist. They are a socio-psychological construct in order to give our lives meaning and purpose. They are there because Mankind needed to live in a group in order to survive. In order for this to properly work our minds needed to be able to worship our group which, through time, became the worship of gods.

Sigh...I really wish I could make you realize the severity of your mistake neo. The One True God is the One True God and you are going to realize this on your day of Judgement. People can die at anytime and I feel it is essential that you realize the truth before you become permenantly lost to us. There is nothing more important than your eternal salvation friend. I am completely serious!

[Jesus-made-me-do-it]

God only excists in the minds of the believers that follows him

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 03:14 PM, jlwelch wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:08 PM, neoptolemus wrote: Well, technically speaking gods do exist. They are a socio-psychological construct in order to give our lives meaning and purpose. They are there because Mankind needed to live in a group in order to survive. In order for this to properly work our minds needed to be able to worship our group which, through time, became the worship of gods.

Sigh...I really wish I could make you realize the severity of your mistake neo. The One True God is the One True God and you are going to realize this on your day of Judgement. People can die at anytime and I feel it is essential that you realize the truth before you become permenantly lost to us. There is nothing more important than your eternal salvation friend.

Look, by your very own idea of "god" regardless of my beliefs (or lack therein) i will ultimately go to "heaven" as i live a morally just life. I give to the poor, i help the down trodden. I actively aim to help the world. Surely, an omnibenevolent god (which is what you worship) wouldn't mind if i do not believe it exists aslong as i live a good life.

I am completely serious!

That makes me doubt that you are.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:12 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:05 PM, jlwelch wrote:

Fuck that, not the damn teleological (or tele-illogical as i like to say) argument, it's aload of nonesense. Basically, you're saying the fact the universe looks to be designed there must be a designer.

Notice your anger. Scriptures tell of the lost becomine inexplicably angered towards those who seek to reveal the truth to them. This is a red flag, and I hope you look at it, and realize it for what it is.

Basically you're saying that just because something is complex that it has to be designed..Well that's not so, the first premise of the argument is countered by evolutionary biology...

Would you believe me if I said that suddenly, out of nowhere, a sweet, brown, bubbly liquid emerged from a rock that just sprang from the big bang and over millions of years, aluminum crept up from the sides and wrapped around it? Would you believe me if I then said that red and blue ink also came out of the Big Bang, eventually found its way to the system, and gradually evolved the words "12 fluid ounces"? Of course not! All it takes is eyes that can see and a brain that works to see that Pepsi is made by a soda company! In the same way, how could all of creation, which is perhaps infinitely more complex, be an accident? How less intelligent is it to believe so? And yes, this argument also easily thwarts the pitiful counter argument of evolution.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:20 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:14 PM, jlwelch wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:08 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

Look, by your very own idea of "god" regardless of my beliefs (or lack therein) i will ultimately go to "heaven" as i live a morally just life. I give to the poor, i help the down trodden. I actively aim to help the world. Surely, an omnibenevolent god (which is what you worship) wouldn't mind if i do not believe it exists aslong as i live a good life.

The Bible clearly states you cannot get to heaven by works but by faith ALONE! We are all guilty of sin and must repent and beg Christ for forgiveness (that is why He sacrificed himself in the first place). Your acts are indeed quite noble, but you cannot buy your way into Heaven. Such a thing is the biggest misconception on Earth.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 03:20 PM, jlwelch wrote:
Would you believe me if I said that suddenly, out of nowhere, a sweet, brown, bubbly liquid emerged from a rock that just sprang from the big bang and over millions of years, aluminum crept up from the sides and wrapped around it? Would you believe me if I then said that red and blue ink also came out of the Big Bang, eventually found its way to the system, and gradually evolved the words "12 fluid ounces"? Of course not! All it takes is eyes that can see and a brain that works to see that Pepsi is made by a soda company! In the same way, how could all of creation, which is perhaps infinitely more complex, be an accident? How less intelligent is it to believe so? And yes, this argument also easily thwarts the pitiful counter argument of evolution.

Right, this is the teleological argument.
(P is premise while C in conclusion)

P1 X is too (complex, orderly, adaptive, apparently purposeful, and/or beautiful) to have occurred randomly or accidentally.
P2 Therefore, X must have been created by a (sentient, intelligent, wise, and/or purposeful) being.
P3 God is that (sentient, intelligent, wise, and/or purposeful) being.
C Therefore, God exists

You could also put it as this:
1. Every design has a designer.
2. The universe has highly complex design.
3. Therefore, the universe has a Designer.

Like i said previously.. complexity does not mean that it has to have an intelligent designer. Just look at diomonds or snow flakes. They are complex yet they are caused by a natural phenomena.

Even if the first and second premise are accepted the implied designer might be an unknown force or mere demiurge, not God as God is commonly understood.

Even if the argument is so, it does not prove the existence of an omnipotent, all knowing etc god.. All it proves is that the universe was created by a designer. however, wouldn't this designer also have a creator.. Afterall everything that exists has a cause to its existence. Why must the universe have a designer yet the designer does not?

[jlwelch]

Neo, the fact that the Universe is complex is proof that there is a Creator. Imagine launcing paint across a room at a canvas to get a completely random painting. What would you see? Now imagine a master painter like Da Vinci doing his thing. What would you see? What are the chances of launching paint at a canvas and accidentally getting an exact remake of Van Gough? Similarly, what are the odds of a Big Bang (which completely defies every conservation law there is) accidentally producing all there is? The snowflakes and other items you mentioned are just another part of the Universe that is God's great design.

And God does not have a creator for he created time, and therefore exists at all points in time. Such a thing teeters on the edge of human understanding and a more indepth understanding may only occur if you have been saved and have the chance to ask him yourself.

[Peter-II]

At 10/29/06 03:05 PM, jlwelch wrote: First off, when you see a painting you know there is a painter. When you see an automobile, you know there is a maker. Therefore, just seeing the world is absolute proof that there must be a maker. As the Way of the Master Guys say, all you need is "eyes that can see and a brain that works".

Arguments such as the one you presented seem compelling at first but do not pass the test of careful revision.

jwelch, the only reason we know that a painting has a painter is through experience of seeing paintings and knowing / being taught that they were made by the process of painting, and were thus made by a painter. Same goes with automobiles, coke cans, etc.

However, there is no experience in creations made by supernatural processes. The fact is, you can't know if the universe was created because we as humans have never seen a creation made by means of natural processes before. This is why your argument begs the question - it assumes the existence of a creator in the first place. Thus, the argument is logically flawed.

And when you're responding to this, don't give me that evangelical bullshit. I want to keep this a purely logical argument. Nothing you can do or say will make me convert to Christianity.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 03:37 PM, jlwelch wrote: Neo, the fact that the Universe is complex is proof that there is a Creator. Imagine launcing paint across a room at a canvas to get a completely random painting. What would you see? Now imagine a master painter like Da Vinci doing his thing. What would you see? What are the chances of launching paint at a canvas and accidentally getting an exact remake of Van Gough? Similarly, what are the odds of a Big Bang (which completely defies every conservation law there is) accidentally producing all there is? The snowflakes and other items you mentioned are just another part of the Universe that is God's great design.

Seriously Jlwelch you have brightened up my day. I thank you for that. By the way, you can't actually compare the universe to a painting as a painting has a creator. Also, the big bang didn't create the stars, planets etc, it just created space, the matter (gases whatever) were already there from the previous universe.
Back to the topic. Right, lets just assume that the universe was created by the big bang whic his infact just some huge explosion. The universe will expand until the force which caused the big bang depletes and thus eventually it will start to cave in on itself due to the mass (and thus gravitational pull) of all the matter (and darkmatter). Eventually the universe will start to implode, it will become as small as physically possible and when it can't implode anymore it will thus explode and create another universe. This is one way in which the universe counld have been created, it is a never ending chain of events.

And God does not have a creator for he created time, and therefore exists at all points in time. Such a thing teeters on the edge of human understanding and a more indepth understanding may only occur if you have been saved and have the chance to ask him yourself.

God doesn't have a creator? Then how come it exists? Everything that exists not only has a cause for its existence is also subject to change and decay. I see you didn't answer that with any actual knowledge so i said it again.
Also, why exactly do you call your god a "he" referring it to being a male? Surely it would be without a gender.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:43 PM, Peter-II wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:05 PM, jlwelch wrote:

jwelch, the only reason we know that a painting has a painter is through experience of seeing paintings and knowing / being taught that they were made by the process of painting, and were thus made by a painter. Same goes with automobiles, coke cans, etc.

Ok...I agree with you so far...

However, there is no experience in creations made by supernatural processes.

Actually there is. Noah saving selected animals from a flood, the parting of the Red Sea, these and more are all recording in a most valuable historical document called the Bible.

:The fact is, you can't know if the universe was created because we as humans have never seen a creation made by means of natural processes before.

Well what other logical explanation do you have to offer? Anything other than a Creator defies the already established mass/energy conservation laws, the law of momentum conservation, conservation of charge, etc... Any nonCreation explaination is in direct violation of scientific fact, which is why I deem Evolution and the Big Bang to be an embarrassment to the name of Science.

:This is why your argument begs the question - it assumes the existence of a creator in the first place. Thus, the argument is logically flawed.

See above reply.

And when you're responding to this, don't give me that evangelical bullshit. I want to keep this a purely logical argument.

The "Evangelical BS" is much more logical than Evolution or Big Bang for the reasons described above. The Bible warns of inexplicable anger in the lost towards those who attempt to witness to them. I hope you recognize this for what it is.

:Nothing you can do or say will make me convert to Christianity.

And nothing you can say or do will make me stop trying for I fear for your fate after your time in this world expires.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:46 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:37 PM, jlwelch wrote:

Back to the topic. Right, lets just assume that the universe was created by the big bang whic his infact just some huge explosion. The universe will expand until the force which caused the big bang depletes and thus eventually it will start to cave in on itself due to the mass (and thus gravitational pull) of all the matter (and darkmatter). Eventually the universe will start to implode, it will become as small as physically possible and when it can't implode anymore it will thus explode and create another universe. This is one way in which the universe counld have been created, it is a never ending chain of events.

You are only proving my point more neo. If there was a previous universe that this "new universe" for lack of a better name, exploded onto, then what created the original universe and the original matter? Furthermore, how come new Universes do not just continually explode on top of ours? You would think such a thing, if natural, would continue.

:God doesn't have a creator? Then how come it exists? Everything that exists not only has a cause for its existence is also subject to change and decay. I see you didn't answer that with any actual knowledge so i said it again.

Actually, I answered that with all the human knowledge possible. Since God created time, and was in existance during all points of time and beyond, there was never a point in time, before which there is no God. Such a thing makes no sense. And again, this teeters on the edge of human understanding so I encourage you to wait until the time arrives in which you have been saved and ask Him yourself.

:Also, why exactly do you call your god a "he" referring it to being a male? Surely it would be without a gender.

I would not know such details about God, I simply say Him because the angels and disciples did in the Bible. Still, whatever form God is is irrelevant to the central topic, or any topic of consequence.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 03:50 PM, jlwelch wrote: Any nonCreation explaination is in direct violation of scientific fact, which is why I deem Evolution and the Big Bang to be an embarrassment to the name of Science.

How is evoluton an embarassment to science? It is a scientific theory in which it has vast amounts of evidence.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 03:57 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 03:50 PM, jlwelch wrote:

How is evoluton an embarassment to science? It is a scientific theory in which it has vast amounts of evidence.

If you actually viewed my links you would know that there is actually little evidence for it. Evidence against it "Missing Link" and so on is generally ignored and even Nobel Prize winners have stated that it will one day be the joke of our time.

http://video.google...;q=Way+of+the+Master

[iros-industrial]

il find out when im dead

as of now theres no proof. just what people have told me (or forced down my throat)

[Kev-o]

God is just a concept for hope.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 04:00 PM, jlwelch wrote:

If you actually viewed my links you would know that there is actually little evidence for it. Evidence against it "Missing Link" and so on is generally ignored and even Nobel Prize winners have stated that it will one day be the joke of our time.

The missing link is in reference to some evidence to do with evolution which we are yet to find. This does not cause the theory of evolution to be discreditted. All this means is that we are yet to know all about evolution.

Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 04:04 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:00 PM, jlwelch wrote:

The missing link is in reference to some evidence to do with evolution which we are yet to find. This does not cause the theory of evolution to be discreditted. All this means is that we are yet to know all about evolution.

Then I may have mixed up technical details, but the point I was making is that there are no transitional froms from one animal to another. Even the infamous diagram going from ape to man, we have only recovered skeletal remains from ape and man (no transitonal structures to prove their prior existance).

Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome.

I agree. And in the same way there is no reason for God to suspend Hell until He has revealed Himself to everyone after death.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 04:10 PM, jlwelch wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:04 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:00 PM, jlwelch wrote:

The missing link is in reference to some evidence to do with evolution which we are yet to find. This does not cause the theory of evolution to be discreditted. All this means is that we are yet to know all about evolution.

Then I may have mixed up technical details, but the point I was making is that there are no transitional froms from one animal to another. Even the infamous diagram going from ape to man, we have only recovered skeletal remains from ape and man (no transitonal structures to prove their prior existance).

Ah, now i see, you're thinking evolution is transitional and that we are superior to other being that are part of out evolutionary chain. Evolution provides no assurance that later generations are more intelligent or complex than earlier generations. The claim that evolution results in progress is not part of modern evolutionary theory; it derives from earlier belief systems which were held around the time Darwin devised his theory of evolution.

I agree. And in the same way there is no reason for God to suspend Hell until He has revealed Himself to everyone after death.

I'll give you that as you are insistent and you have put a smile on my face.

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 04:16 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:10 PM, jlwelch wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:04 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:00 PM, jlwelch wrote:

Ah, now i see, you're thinking evolution is transitional and that we are superior to other being that are part of out evolutionary chain.

I am repeating the same portion of the Evolutionary Theory that has acquired such fame and notority. It shows how we supposively went from apes to humans and I am simply pointing out that IF it were true we should be able to prove AT LEAST one of the stages along the way. Superiority was never mentioned, however, now that you mention it, God did CREATE us above the other creatures.

I'll give you that as you are insistent and you have put a smile on my face.

So long as you realize the Truth before the end, I could care less how you look at, or think of, me or my efforts.

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 04:29 PM, jlwelch wrote: I am repeating the same portion of the Evolutionary Theory that has acquired such fame and notority. It shows how we supposively went from apes to humans and I am simply pointing out that IF it were true we should be able to prove AT LEAST one of the stages along the way.

We can prove stages. Humans (Homo Sapiens sapiens) are part of the Genus homo. Our last surviving relative, the Homo floresiensis died about 12,000 years ago. It was discovered in 2003 and found on the Indonesian island of Flores. It is, however, quite small in comparrison to modern humans and there's currently an ongoing debate due to it closely resembling a modern human and thus a debate as to whether or not to classify it as a new species or not.

I'll also give you another example of the Homo neandethalensis which existed around europe and western Asia. It was well adapted to cold climates.

This is a reconstruction of a neanderthal woman:

[Baron-Von-Geordie]

god is hope and conscience if we didnt have this humans wouldn't of lasted 50 years

if u dont believe and there is one ur fucked
if u believe and there isnt at least u've lived a moral life

i no where i stand

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 04:50 PM, Baron-Von-Geordie wrote: god is hope and conscience if we didnt have this humans wouldn't of lasted 50 years

if u dont believe and there is one ur fucked
if u believe and there isnt at least u've lived a moral life

i no where i stand

And what if you don't believe but you lived a moral life?

[jlwelch]

At 10/29/06 04:41 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:29 PM, jlwelch wrote:

This is a reconstruction of a neanderthal woman:

I have serious doubts about that. Experts have already determined that "Lucy" was just a tall Chimpanzee and that "Nebraska Man" was entirely based off a tooth which was later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig. Another wonder was "Piltdown Man" whose Jaw bone turned out to be from an ape. Then, more closely related to what you are using as an example, is the skull of Neanderthal Man, whose skull, found in France, was simply the skull of an old man who suffered from arthritis. Archeologists have yet to find any credible evidence on any of the transitional forms that can withstand the trials of science.

http://emporium.turn..e.net/C/cs/evid6.htm

http://video.google...;q=Way+of+the+Master

[Neoptolemus]

At 10/29/06 04:56 PM, jlwelch wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:41 PM, neoptolemus wrote:

At 10/29/06 04:29 PM, jlwelch wrote:

This is a reconstruction of a neanderthal woman:

I have serious doubts about that. Experts have already determined that "Lucy" was just a tall Chimpanzee and that "Nebraska Man" was entirely based off a tooth which was later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig. Another wonder was "Piltdown Man" whose Jaw bone turned out to be from an ape. Then, more closely related to what you are using as an example, is the skull of Neanderthal Man, whose skull, found in France, was simply the skull of an old man who suffered from arthritis. Archeologists have yet to find any credible evidence on any of the transitional forms that can withstand the trials of science.

Evolution does exist and it is happening righ tin front of your face. Just look at the cold virus(es) (or acute viral nasopharyngitis for you intellects). I'll use an example to explain my point more coherently.

Lets say there is a boy called Tom. He has just recently come down with the common cold, sure he doesn't fel too good but he knows that it'll pass in about three to five days due to his immune system creating antibodies to fight it. Before the three to five days time it takes him to get rid of it his friend, John, catches it from him. By the time Tom has gotten over the cold John then inevitably passes it back to Tom who then has it again. However, if evolution didn't exist Tom would not be able to get it again as his antibodies would easily fight it off. The thing is, the virus evolved in order to be able to fight more efficiently against certain antibodies.

Another example comes from how, at least here in Britain, antibiotics are becomming useful. This is happening because some people who are suffering from an infecting organism do not finish their full course of antibiotics and thus the organism gains defences against that specific antibiotic through evolution.

This again is similar to the development of some pesticide resistant insects.

http://emporium.turn..e.net/C/cs/evid6.htm

http://video.google...;q=Way+of+the+Master

I'm not going to look at your biased crap.

[Rasto]

At 10/29/06 03:05 PM, jlwelch wrote: The very question of whether the One True God exists is as ignorant as it is insulting. However, since you started the topic, I will finish it.

First off, when you see a painting you know there is a painter. When you see an automobile, you know there is a maker. Therefore, just seeing the world is absolute proof that there must be a maker. As the Way of the Master Guys say, all you need is "eyes that can see and a brain that works".

Here are some valuable links on the subject.

http://video.google...;q=Way+of+the+Master

http://www.jesus-is-..s/is_there_a_god.htm

http://www.jesus-is-..ity_of_salvation.htm

Think of that for a second. We know it must have a creator, but we don't know who or what created it. Is it very logical to look at something and say an all=powerful being snapped his fingers and made it appear?
And please, enough with the jesus-is-savior.com links.

[jlwelch]

I can conceed that things adapt in order to survive, that is something that God has given us. Perhaps evolution did start to occur after he created the base life forms. However, God DID create Adam and Eve directly, not through some Ape, and I do not have to poke too many holes in the "Theory" if it is even worth calling that, of Evolution to prove that point.

And regarding my sources, the Way of the Master may seem biased to you, but the other one was straight off of Google and had no immediate signs of Christian affiliation.