Question about the Christian God

[Luminothe]

Most christians hate me. Whenever I see one of those nationalist like christians who get up and preach their annoying beliefs, I tell them to shut up.

Obviously their is no scientific way to prove god, which is the arguments greatest strenght and weakness.

Do I believe in god? Not sure. I certainly think it is much more complicated than you live, then you die, the you go to heaven or burn. For one thing there is the existence of ghosts which we must consider. ANd the fact that if you look, you can see that everythig is connected and has a purpose.

So is there a god? Maybe,, maybe not. I don't feel like telling everyone what I believe though.

I will say that if I had to pick the religions that make the most sense, It definitely would not be Christiananity, Judiism, orany of those other cults/religions. The ones I think have the most truth are Buhdism, Stoiism, Taoism, and Shinto. I'm not even Asian! I'm german/polish/urkrain/italian.

I'm probably going to get flamed like crazy for saying that(yay for peigan religions)

[Defeatist Elitist]

Most christians hate me. Whenever I see one of those nationalist like christians who get up and preach their annoying beliefs, I tell them to shut up.

Obviously their is no scientific way to prove god, which is the arguments greatest strenght and weakness.

Do I believe in god? Not sure. I certainly think it is much more complicated than you live, then you die, the you go to heaven or burn. For one thing there is the existence of ghosts which we must consider. ANd the fact that if you look, you can see that everythig is connected and has a purpose.

So is there a god? Maybe,, maybe not. I don't feel like telling everyone what I believe though.

I will say that if I had to pick the religions that make the most sense, It definitely would not be Christiananity, Judiism, orany of those other cults/religions. The ones I think have the most truth are Buhdism, Stoiism, Taoism, and Shinto. I'm not even Asian! I'm german/polish/urkrain/italian.

I'm probably going to get flamed like crazy for saying that(yay for peigan religions)

I see, you're substituting one crazy, completely unfounded belief set for another!

Edited November 25, 2009 by ZXValaRevan

[Esau of Isaac]

Most christians hate me. Whenever I see one of those nationalist like christians who get up and preach their annoying beliefs, I tell them to shut up.

Obviously their is no scientific way to prove god, which is the arguments greatest strenght and weakness.

Do I believe in god? Not sure. I certainly think it is much more complicated than you live, then you die, the you go to heaven or burn. For one thing there is the existence of ghosts which we must consider. ANd the fact that if you look, you can see that everythig is connected and has a purpose.

So is there a god? Maybe,, maybe not. I don't feel like telling everyone what I believe though.

I will say that if I had to pick the religions that make the most sense, It definitely would not be Christiananity, Judiism, orany of those other cults/religions. The ones I think have the most truth are Buhdism, Stoiism, Taoism, and Shinto. I'm not even Asian! I'm german/polish/urkrain/italian.

I'm probably going to get flamed like crazy for saying that(yay for peigan religions)

I see, you're substituting one crazy, completely unfounded belief set for another!

Of course you would say that; you're probably just a crazed adherent of Christiananity.

[Luminothe]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

[Shuuda]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

Sorry, but being criticised for having an uniformed opinion does not count as being flamed. Really, what were you expecting?

[Defeatist Elitist]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

Well yes, religions are based on faith, which is essentially belief without evidence, something also often attributed to the insane. I am calling pretty much every religion crazy!

Also, <3 Esau

Edited November 26, 2009 by ZXValaRevan

[BK-201]

Well yes, religions are based on faith, which is essentially belief without evidence, something also often attributed to the insane. I am calling pretty much every religion crazy!

People have referred to Darwinism as a religion. Darwinism does have a lot of evidence yet is labeled a religion by some. Faith is not necessarily based off no evidence. Out of body experiences and revelations. These people convert after miracles that are "godsent".

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

We are saying your beliefs are hypocritical. Your argument for not believing a religion is the exact same as your argument for supporting another.

Obviously their is no scientific way to prove god or ghosts, which is the arguments greatest strenght and weakness. Do I believe in god? Not sure. I certainly think it is much more complicated than you live, then you die, the you go to heaven or burn. For one thing there is the existence of ghosts which we must consider. ANd the fact that if you look, you can see that everythig is connected and has a purpose.

Edit made in italic and here's my argument to back it up.

A scientific way to prove ghosts is obviously going to be false and biased. There is no way to prove ghosts exist. Those "accounts" of ghosts are the equivalent of "messages" from god. If you are going to shrug away the Christian message then why listen to the absolutely true accounts of ghosts. <- no sarcasm

It is a lot more complicated than you, live than die, go to heaven or die. If you call that simple what's so complicated about your belief of ghosts. The belief in ghosts is so much more simpler. You live, you die, you become a ghost. One road. While you live, you die, you go to heaven or hell has two roads.

Because 2>1 we conclude that Christianity is more complex than a belief in Ghosts.

Underlined argument.

Who ever said it's heaven or hell? Read up on religions. It's kinda obvious from that statement you only know about Christianity. Many people who are Jewish don't believe in hell. Why? Because Hell is from Christianity. A majority of religions DON'T believe in hell.

Everything is connected and has a purpose.

Just like every other religion.

Sorry if this sounds like flaming but I just can't stand arguments based off nothing. If I have mistakes in this I would like to hear them so I can edit this.

[Phoenix Wright]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

Well yes, religions are based on faith, which is essentially belief without evidence, something also often attributed to the insane. I am calling pretty much every religion crazy!

Also, <3 Esau

Contrarily, science and reason don't provide us all the answers either; never will.

Edited November 26, 2009 by Ben Stein

[Luminothe]

I was referring to christiananity when I said the hell thing.

And, one should also note that there are parapsychologists but no goddologists.

I have had personal expierience with these ghosts by the way.

[Shuuda]

People have referred to Darwinism as a religion. Darwinism does have a lot of evidence yet is labeled a religion by some. Faith is not necessarily based off no evidence. Out of body experiences and revelations. These people convert after miracles that are "godsent".

The only people who call "Darwinism" a religion are the creationists who have no understand of science or religion, usually said in an attempt to make the Theory of Evolution appear on the same level as their bronze ago mythology.

Faith is based off no evidence, because if there was evidence for something we would not need to have faith in it. The presence of evidence eliminates the need to have faith.

[BK-201]

Out of body experiences have been deemed proof. The definition of religion is more of one of faith and not "blindly following a belief without any evidence" as many here have suggested. Evidence can be scientific or personal, and in religion's case it's throughly personal which is a huge weakness. A belief in the paranormal such as ghosts is equally pathetic evidence wise. I'm not supporting religion but would like to clarify the definition to be a little more polite towards those who do follow a religion. I also dislike a hypocritical statement that is used to attack one belief and support another. That is a true example of "blindly following a belief without any evidence". If Luminothe can provide substancial unbiased evidence then it would be okay. Instead he attacks Christianity saying it can't be proven scientifically while his belief in ghosts is the same. He shouldn't deem Christianity as false until he can seperate its one weakness from ghosts. Furthermore, his statement that we should consider ghosts because "everything is linked and has a purpose" is the exact same message most religions try to transmit to us. Humans being connected to nature has come up in dozens of beliefs and yet he says everything else is false and ghosts are correct? It seems like he might as well say "I believe in ghosts." This statement is more correct then the evidence that has come up.

I was referring to christiananity when I said the hell thing.

And, one should also note that there are parapsychologists but no goddologists.

I have had personal expierience with these ghosts by the way.

I'll tackle this sentence by sentence. Firstly, you should have explicitly stated that you were referring to Christianity.

Do I believe in god? Not sure. I certainly think it is much more complicated than you live, then you die, the you go to heaven or burn. For one thing there is the existence of ghosts which we must consider. ANd the fact that if you look, you can see that everythig is connected and has a purpose.

So when was Christianity the only religion with God?

Next sentence about parapsychologists, there is something called a church that deals with holy experiences and revelations.

Last sentence, personal experience. Key word there. Same thing is echoed numerous times in religion, that isn't a very fair argument is it? Considering all those religious out of body experiences. Those are supposed to be ignored because it disagrees with your belief?

If you can fit a more substancial argument rather than respond to the meager weaker portions than I will be satisfied.

Edited November 27, 2009 by BlackKnight666

[Defeatist Elitist]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

Well yes, religions are based on faith, which is essentially belief without evidence, something also often attributed to the insane. I am calling pretty much every religion crazy!

Also, <3 Esau

Contrarily, science and reason don't provide us all the answers either; never will.

Depends what you mean. If you mean for objective facts, then science and reason are the only things that CAN really provide us with answers, and if you aren't, then they're so subjective that you can't really say they can be right or wrong.

[BK-201]

Exactly

[Esau of Isaac]

Out of body experiences have been deemed proof

Out of body experiences have never been proven. Millions of dollars were spent on investigating them in an attempt to use them as a form of reconnaissance. Guess what came of it.

And, one should also note that there are parapsychologists but no goddologists.

God you are such a treat.

[Luminothe]

If you can fit a more substancial argument rather than respond to the meager weaker portions than I will be satisfied.

I would, but I am too lazy.

BK666, why don't you challenge yourself and take up the argument?

[BK-201]

I'm not arguing for something you believe in. Why should I bring proof to your belief? Anyways, REAL evidence that isn't based off personal experience is few in number, and most like blasphemy. Find it yourself. A detailed look would reveal all possible evidence as false.

For the out of body experience meaning that people have referred to them as proof even though they are BS. Just to show what he refers to as "proof".

Edited November 27, 2009 by BlackKnight666

[Phoenix Wright]

like I said. I'm going to get flamed like crazy.

If you call my beliefs crazy you are calling evry religion crazy, which in a way they are.

Well yes, religions are based on faith, which is essentially belief without evidence, something also often attributed to the insane. I am calling pretty much every religion crazy!

Also, <3 Esau

Contrarily, science and reason don't provide us all the answers either; never will.

Depends what you mean. If you mean for objective facts, then science and reason are the only things that CAN really provide us with answers, and if you aren't, then they're so subjective that you can't really say they can be right or wrong.

Precisely.

Love is pretty much subjective, since some believe it is there and there are other who believe it isn't. Abstract thoughts and feelings towards something may bring ideological faith in that subject. I can say love exists, and someone else can say it doesn't. I feel as if I have experienced it, while the other has never "felt it." The same thing can be said about religion. That someone else has never experienced it, therefore they feel it's not there.

Where am I going with this? No where, just like this discussion. The religious folk here feel others haven't experienced "it," and their wish is to somehow have those people experience "it."

Lol

Edited November 28, 2009 by Ben Stein

[BK-201]

Isn't experiencing "it" also subjective. Lets say I'm working on a test and can't remember the answer. Then, suddenly I remember and get it correct. I can call that experience the "it" reaction. The terming of the "it" is also subjective.

[Phoenix Wright]

Isn't experiencing "it" also subjective. Lets say I'm working on a test and can't remember the answer. Then, suddenly I remember and get it correct. I can call that experience the "it" reaction. The terming of the "it" is also subjective.

Exactly! The topic at hand is so abstract that it shouldn't even exist! People either get "it" or don't get "it."

[BK-201]

Psychic abilities are the same. OMG I watched a scary movie that scared me and I ran away from a car. Then I saw the car hit a cat therefore my experience is psychic! I say that is complete BS. Why Luminothe would say all religions are BS due to no scientific evidence is beyond me. His belief isn't supported scientificlly either. That is why I had a need to interject my comment.

[Phoenix Wright]

I know what ya mean.

Edited November 28, 2009 by Ben Stein

[TinySteps]

I was referring to christiananity when I said the hell thing.

And, one should also note that there are parapsychologists but no goddologists.

I have had personal expierience with these ghosts by the way.

the topic IS about the Christian God...

[BK-201]

He said religions in general at that statement. He added more subjects but didn't involve them in that sentence. He needs to clarify one that as he states the sentence is about religions in GENERAL. This argument is pointless right now as we have about 100x more evidence on our side/

[Crystal Shards]

What about all those times where praying has done nothing for someone? If I had a dying relative and everyone visited them wearing a top hat, would have be evidence that top hats cure incurable illnesses?

Not that I particularly care about your argument from ignorance.

The most popular answer to that is funny. "God always answers prayers... That doesn't mean it'll be a 'yes'."

Out of body experiences have been deemed proof.

Deemed proof by whom, exactly? I put the same amount of credence (read: none) to people who have "out of body experiences" as I do to people who say they "see" things while on acid.

[BK-201]

If you look back I say it's what they CONSIDER to be proof. It is used as supporting evidence no matter how false it truly was. Is there such thing as a genuinely psychic or religious experience is a question that should be asked. Anyone who believes they have something resembling the bare bones of these incredibly vague description may believe in something that is just a coincidence. I never stated anywhere that it is legitimate proof. All I said was it has been deemed proof by some. Not 100% conclusive proof, far from it. They just want to believe in some powerful non human force.