#2
Number 3: A lot of people are suffering all over the world today. The world population have grown over the years. When did that many people lived and misbehaved? Where did all those souls wait before living today? And how did they misbehave then?
The above does of course not prove or disprove anything about gods, nothing does.
@J_SEDA_conant said in #9:
> 1. There’s tons of evidence. Go ask anyone who miraculously survived cancer when they 100% should have died.
Don't you think there's some sort of survivorship bias going on there? I mean, it's kinda hard to "[g]o ask anyone who has [...]" died from "[...] cancer when they 100% [...] have died.", isn't it? Do those people also count as evidence for God's existence? Do people who die or don't die from other sources count as well?
One could easily reply (and this would be an equally bad argument): "Well, ask all the people who have died from cancer what THEY think about God saving them from certain death!" Unfortunately, you can't ask those people. Because they're dead.
But whether you can or cannot ask someone about their opinion is irrelevant to the validity of the attempt at an argument you're presenting here. In either case, the outcome of your poll would be nothing but an accumulation of these people's personal opinions. You cannot construct a coherent logical argument from this (as far as I can see). In case you try and say that one group is more competent in answering this question than another (because they have defied death or what have you), that turns out to be nothing more than an appeal to authority:
"X is true because authority A says so." That's not a sound argument.
> There’s a movie I watched a while ago called “Miracles from Heaven”. It is a true story about a girl with an untreatable disease. SPOILERS! She falls down a giant hole in a tree roughly 2-3 stories high head first and is not killed, not paralyzed, but healed. Explain that for me
"I can't explain Y, therefore X." is not a sound logical argument either, wouldn't you agree?.
That something has not yet been explained does not point towards one particular explanation. It merely means that it hasn't yet been explained. We gain no insights about what the actual explanation might be by merely observing that so far something hasn't been explained.
> 2. Illogical? Yeah, so is the Big Bang Theory.
I agree that "It's illogical." is not a measured and sound argument against the existence of God.
However I disagree about the point you're making about the Big Bang theory. It's not illogical, it's actually perfectly self-consistent. That a universe expanding from a hot and dense state actually cools and becomes more rarified is not illogical, is it? The same happens with a compressed gas that is allowed to expand.
@SpeedRunTo2100 said in #3:
> Nobody created us
> Have you heard of the "big bang" theory my friend :))
> Dude, You've literally been brainwashed :)
> GOD DOESN'T EXIST
> Also yessss life's extremely good without god :)
I won't argue on your other idiosyncratic stuff but as pointed out by other,you have no idea what big bang hypothesis is all about..I am pretty sure you don't even know the basic model of big bang... Big bang has nothing to do with creation of humans,your claim is just laughable...
Also, as far as my insights reach @clousems post was a satirical comedy mocking the contradiction in your posts...First you disapproved god then you proceeded to certify your claims through a hypothesis,which was provided by a "catholic priest"
But after reading your posts,it doesn't amaze me that you aren't smart enough to get a basic joke...
@SpeedRunTo2100 said in #1:
> 2.It’s illogical
Do not confuse "non-logical" (ie, that can't be logically proved) with "illogical" (ie, it logically leads to a contradiction).
The fact that something is non-logical is not a reason to not believe it.
In the case of God, the fact that it is non-logical is actually a reason (for some people) to believe in it: "credo quia absurdum".
Disclaimer: I don't personally believe in God. But I also don't like logic being misused, in one way or in the opposite.
@J_SEDA_conant said in #9:
> 1. There’s tons of evidence. Go ask anyone who miraculously survived cancer when they 100% should have died. There’s a movie I watched a while ago called “Miracles from Heaven”. It is a true story about a girl with an untreatable disease. SPOILERS! She falls down a giant hole in a tree roughly 2-3 stories high head first and is not killed, not paralyzed, but healed. Explain that for me
> 2. Illogical? Yeah, so is the Big Bang Theory.
> 3. Ok so as a Christian number 3 is absolutely false. Have you ever read some of the laws in the Bible? Some of them clearly state that anyone who makes certain sins shall be stoned. The Bible is the word of God, meaning he himself spoke the words of it. He is caring; he is loving. But as in Romans 6:23, “the wages of sin is DEATH”. He shows mercy to anyone who repents, but he has killed many. Also, there is an internet meme floating around that “God has many kills, but Satan doesn’t”. I just want to quickly disprove this. Number one, the book of Job is about a man who is put through a trial of faith by having every member of his family killed, BY SATAN, as well as all his livestock. Second, in the first book, Genesis, the devil himself made an appearance to Adam and Eve. He deceived them and made them sin, bringing it into the world. Since then, every person has sinned (I don’t care what you say, yes you have). Looking back at Romans 6:23, it can be made obvious that every death that wasn’t directly caused by God had been caused by the devil, for he brought sin and therefore death.
> 4. Again, ask literally anyone who should 100% die but doesn’t
> 5. Same as 4.
1. Have you ever heard of statistics? Just because it's unlikely that something is to occur, doesn't mean the Christian God exists when it does.
2. TheRoadto2100 doesn't understand philosophical discussion.
3. According to the theology you have provided, it is logical. I have a clarifiying question to ask you. Is it sin itself that kills man, or punishment from God that kills man? It seems unlikely that so many people die purely from sin. Also, can you prove, logically and thoroughly, that sin is the direct cause of death? Do not quote holy scripture, for it provides no further explanation other than anecdotes and the abscence of statistical rigor.
4. and 5. See my response to 1.
@Lie8341 said in #15:
> 1. Have you ever heard of statistics? Just because it's unlikely that something is to occur, doesn't mean the Christian God exists when it does.
> 2. TheRoadto2100 doesn't understand philosophical discussion.
> 3. According to the theology you have provided, it is logical. I have a clarifiying question to ask you. Is it sin itself that kills man, or punishment from God that kills man? It seems unlikely that so many people die purely from sin. Also, can you prove, logically and thoroughly, that sin is the direct cause of death? Do not quote holy scripture, for it provides no further explanation other than anecdotes and the abscence of statistical rigor.
> 4. and 5. See my response to 1.
1. 100% means 100%. Like as in the doctor said “you have x days to live” because of cancer or something. Things like that don’t just go away. Also, it just doesn’t make sense how an UNTREATABLE disease is suddenly cured by an event that should have killed the person. While it isn’t 100% proof of God, it is a big piece of evidence, which I was mostly using to counter-argue the OP instead of prove that God is real.
3. Ok, so I may have been a little unclear with some of the connections. Firstly, I want to clear something out. “ Do not quote holy scripture” is impossible. Why? Because it is the law and basic rules of how it works. Without scripture from the Bible, everything I say becomes irrelevant as there would be nothing to back it up. It’s like saying “prove x without providing evidence”. It just doesn’t work, as there is nothing to back up any points. And yes, sin does cause death, but somewhat indirectly. Sin was brought into this world through the actions of the devil. Because of it, there is fighting, brutality, and pain. This is all the devil’s work, and it’s what he wants: for us to believe that God is doing nothing to help so we turn on him. Finally, it was probably unclear, but sin does not bring physical death (i.e. Adam and Eve could not have lived forever if they never took a bite of the fruit), but instead spiritual death and eternal separation from God. So yes, sin is directly correlated to spiritual death, but not physical death. God himself does not actually kill us spiritually, but instead it’s the fact that he is perfect and righteous, but we aren’t and never will be. It’s just that he cannot be with us because of his holiness. So it is a yes that it is both the punishment of God and sin that kills us spiritually. God does punish; he punished Satan for his deception by casting him out of Heaven and will throw him into the lake of fire.
@Thalassokrator said in #12:
> Don't you think there's some sort of survivorship bias going on there? I mean, it's kinda hard to "[g]o ask anyone who has [...]" died from "[...] cancer when they 100% [...] have died.", isn't it? Do those people also count as evidence for God's existence? Do people who die or don't die from other sources count as well?
>
> One could easily reply (and this would be an equally bad argument): "Well, ask all the people who have died from cancer what THEY think about God saving them from certain death!" Unfortunately, you can't ask those people. Because they're dead.
>
> But whether you can or cannot ask someone about their opinion is irrelevant to the validity of the attempt at an argument you're presenting here. In either case, the outcome of your poll would be nothing but an accumulation of these people's personal opinions. You cannot construct a coherent logical argument from this (as far as I can see). In case you try and say that one group is more competent in answering this question than another (because they have defied death or what have you), that turns out to be nothing more than an appeal to authority:
God has a plan for everyone. If he needs them saved so they can do his works, he will save them. If he doesn’t need them, they will die. Also, no, I don’t think there is a bias here. Mainly because, like I said, let’s say there is a 100% chance of death, and they have 3 days to live. Let’s say it’s because of brain cancer. If they somehow survive, then there must be a reason. Cancer doesn’t just go away. And while it isn’t clear, concise, conclusive proof, it’s evidence.
> "X is true because authority A says so." That's not a sound argument.
Ok, so tell me. Where did morals come from? How did we just assign one action as good and another as bad? There must have been some authoritative figure that said, at some point in time, “stealing is bad, killing is bad, but generosity is good”. Also, think about people with messed up morals. Why do we not like their morals? It’s because we as a community agreed on a set of rules, but somebody had to come up with those rules, whether it was multiple people or just one. So your statement is somewhat invalid because, as another example, the entirety of math hinges on the fact that someone said 1+1=2 and everyone agreed that this guy “said so” and must be right. Nobody ever thought to question it.
>
> "I can't explain Y, therefore X." is not a sound logical argument either, wouldn't you agree?.
That’s not what I said. Read it again and you will understand that I am not trying to prove the existence of God, I am merely providing unexplainable evidence that points towards a miracle, which in turn provides evidence for God.
> I agree that "It's illogical." is not a measured and sound argument against the existence of God.
>
> However I disagree about the point you're making about the Big Bang theory. It's not illogical, it's actually perfectly self-consistent. That a universe expanding from a hot and dense state actually cools and becomes more rarified is not illogical, is it? The same happens with a compressed gas that is allowed to expand.
Yeah? Then number one, how long did it stay in a tiny, dense state? Number two, what caused it to expand? Number three, why didn’t it expand any time before when it did? I agree that the logic behind how God would exist is confusing, as he has been there forever, which is something us humans can’t understand or comprehend. Likewise, you could easily argue that “the Big Bang theory is just incomprehensible for humans to understand”. But we have reason to believe that a universe that didn’t completely implode on itself did not come from a huge mess of atoms and particles.
OP's account is closed now
When you think of it, all the religions are telling you to make peace and be a good human being, there's no problem with that.
Here's an interesting (but somewhat opinionated) read on this topic: https://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2009/01/the-teapot-analogy/55930/
My opinion-
1. If god exists, then surely this God exists in all forms across all religions
2. Secularism dictates that we respect and accept all religions. So the Church of the Invisible Pink Unicorn and the Flying Spaghetti Monster cannot be absurd!
3. Russell's Teapot
4. Russell's Teapot
5. Russell's Teapot
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.