If God did not exist

[Ropey]

I don't need to. I'm right. That's all that matters here. And you guys are just dweebs who think they're a LOT smarter than they actually are, as I demonstrated. In spades.

Jesus fucking Christ, lighten up! It's a conversation for cryin' out loud!

KG's feeling a bit tender in other threads.



G-d help her.

 

[Capstone]

lol @ the evolution of modern ethical sensibilities. I grew up with no locks on our doors. Try that now.

Still, at least we needn't worry about being drawn and quartered on allegations of heresy.

Not true. [...] Amusing how the title of the WSJ's article smashes your post. ...

What would have been amusing, if it weren't so sad, is the amount of stock you've apparently placed in the fabricated tragedy of David Berlinski.

 

[Capstone]

Really. Tell me which of the first great halls of learning were funded and established by atheists.

Share with us how the Magna Carta is an atheist document. Please.

Tell me how atheists freed the slaves, and lobbied for equal rights for all people, and how many atheists spent time in prison protesting the conditions and the practice of jailing entire families.

I'll wait.

What a surprise: another hodgepodge of nonsense that not only seeks to avoid the issue of objective morality; but in so doing inadvertently affirms my claims on the matter.

Let me go ahead and concede that there have been Christians on opposite sides of the fence, morally speaking, throughout the history of the Faith. For instance, some owned slaves (with Biblical backing), while others fought for the abolition of slavery (on lesser known grounds). THAT is precisely the point. Minus an objective proscription for proper behavior, the many historical squabbles among Christians could have been predicted from the outset of the religion.

 

[koshergrl]

Irrelevant. If you maintain that widespread character, positive values, integrity, works of humanity and universal goodwill towards man springs up IN SPITE of God and religion, then certainly there are many instances that you can point to, across the wide expanse of history, that can be easily identified as such. Go ahead. Still waiting.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Repeatedly quoting people out of context after it has been shown repeatedly that they are taken out of context is the epitome of dishonesty. And PC, post #247 is not peer reviewed. It's a post on a message board, not a peer reviewed paper published in a professional publication. By the way, Berlinsk is a retard. By his own admission, he treats the truth like he treats his ex-wives. You didn't know this? Huh.

You're a proven liar.


Get lost.

Not so fast, Miss Brooklyn bootlicker. Show where I've lied or admit that you made it up (i.e., lied).

Me: You've already admitted that I am correct, and there are no fossils that document the Darwinian myth of simple cells, leading to the trilobites and brachiopods.
You:" I have admitted no such thing. Lying for Jesus is still lying." http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/308464-how-to-define-evolution-17.html



You, earlier: " PC, just because we haven't found the fossils of the earliest trilobites yet doesn't mean that they don't exist.... As for the brachiopods, there are suggestions of what group they had their origins, but again, the fossil record is as yet spotty. But PC, just like with trilobites, just because we have yet to find the fossils, does not mean they don't exist. Just because something is unknown doesn't mean that it is unknowable." http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/308464-how-to-define-evolution-2.html


Pretty much evidence that you are a liar....and that engaging you in discussion is pointless.



Liar.

 

[whitehall]

The philosophy forum is at the bottom of the page. Use it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Irrelevant. If you maintain that widespread character, positive values, integrity, works of humanity and universal goodwill towards man springs up IN SPITE of God and religion, then certainly there are many instances that you can point to, across the wide expanse of history, that can be easily identified as such. Go ahead. Still waiting.

KG is assuming that there can ONLY be positive things because there is a God and religion. If KG's scenario were true then every single criminal would be an atheist. Instead we have reality which shows Believers committing criminal acts in the name of God and religions.

Mankind is a social animal and society determines the values and what constitutes goodwill. God and religion are manifestations of mankind's attempts to understand himself and the universe in which he finds himself. Mankind is capable of both good and evil. Fortunately the good is predominant but that is only because it a positive evolutionary trait towards the survival of mankind.

 

[Hollie]

God needs to do a better job of showing up like that and proving his existence. Once every century or so should do it

God shows up all the time to people who care. Those who don't give a darn ---- get exactly what they seek --- nothing.

Not true. I don't give a darn and god still showed up last night during dinner. He had two servings of meat loaf.

 

[orogenicman]

You're a proven liar.


Get lost.

Not so fast, Miss Brooklyn bootlicker. Show where I've lied or admit that you made it up (i.e., lied).

Me: You've already admitted that I am correct, and there are no fossils that document the Darwinian myth of simple cells, leading to the trilobites and brachiopods.
You:" I have admitted no such thing. Lying for Jesus is still lying." http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/308464-how-to-define-evolution-17.html



You, earlier: " PC, just because we haven't found the fossils of the earliest trilobites yet doesn't mean that they don't exist.... As for the brachiopods, there are suggestions of what group they had their origins, but again, the fossil record is as yet spotty. But PC, just like with trilobites, just because we have yet to find the fossils, does not mean they don't exist. Just because something is unknown doesn't mean that it is unknowable." http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/308464-how-to-define-evolution-2.html


Pretty much evidence that you are a liar....and that engaging you in discussion is pointless.



Liar.

I read this five times, and still, I don't see where I lied. Where is the lie? The only lie I see is where you are trying to put words in my mouth. That's the only lie I see. LIAR!

 

[orogenicman]

God needs to do a better job of showing up like that and proving his existence. Once every century or so should do it

God shows up all the time to people who care. Those who don't give a darn ---- get exactly what they seek --- nothing.

Not true. I don't give a darn and god still showed up last night during dinner. He had two servings of meat loaf.

Hehehehe. Good one.

 

[The Irish Ram]

koshergrl you are one of the most abusive obnoxious juvenile individuals I have ever come to know on a message board. Your trolling and abusiveness and name-calling toward others is relentless and without consequence.

Considering you arrived here this month and don't know Kosher from Adam, your judgement of her seems a little misguided and callous.
Did your "conscience" dictate your post? Was it meant for good or evil?

Here's another opinion you may want to consider:



If you don't like that opinion, there is always this:

John 13:34-35 A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

The date one joins a forum is not an indication of one's ability to spot a narcissistic arsehole when one sees one. It isn't as if that was his 'born-on' date. Assume he is old enough to figure it out for himself.

Right, but some familiarity is required to make an assessment like he did, unless he draws his assumptions from other's assumptions e.g. you, and the Pope, or some one who wrote something......
He has a tendency to assume other people's assumptions rather than doing his homework or thinking for himself. And he ends up wanting in the balance, and lacking any credibility.
He relies on his own conscience and the results are evident. Evil trumps good, and instead of love, he chooses condemnation. And thinks he's on the right track.

 

[The Irish Ram]

God shows up all the time to people who care. Those who don't give a darn ---- get exactly what they seek --- nothing.

Not true. I don't give a darn and god still showed up last night during dinner. He had two servings of meat loaf.

Hehehehe. Good one.

Nipper is right on the money. One of Christ's fortes was healing physical infirmities. Christ went to dinner at a home of one of the Pharisees. The house was packed. His gift of healing was available to everyone in that room. A cripple was lowered down into the room from the roof. He walked out of the house, the only one to benefit. The others got exactly what the sought, nothing.

So God needs to show up for your edification? Because you require evidence? He needs your seal of approval? He needs to prove something to you in order to be a efficient God?
In that case, where were you while He was creating the universe?

He doesn't need you. You need Him. His availability is constant. Since you don't know Him, you wouldn't recognize Him if He sat down in front of you and ate Hollie's meatloaf. That will end up as your problem, not His. His future is secure with or with out you. You aren't as well off.
He's done enough for you. What have you done for Him lately?

 

[Steven_R]

I want there to be something more than the physical universe, something more than just the certainty that I am the result of random chance and when I die it's lights out for eternity and that in time all of the atoms in my body will succumb to proton decay and the eventual heat death of the universe. I want there to be some proof that I'll be reunited with my loved ones and that some higher power exists and wants me to be loved.

But I've seen no proof of it no matter where I've looked outside of some Holy Books that don't match up with the historical, archaeological, and physical evidence.

 

[orogenicman]

Not true. I don't give a darn and god still showed up last night during dinner. He had two servings of meat loaf.

Hehehehe. Good one.

Nipper is right on the money. One of Christ's fortes was healing physical infirmities. Christ went to dinner at a home of one of the Pharisees. The house was packed. His gift of healing was available to everyone in that room. A cripple was lowered down into the room from the roof. He walked out of the house, the only one to benefit. The others got exactly what the sought, nothing.

So God needs to show up for your edification? Because you require evidence? He needs your seal of approval? He needs to prove something to you in order to be a efficient God?
In that case, where were you while He was creating the universe?

He doesn't need you. You need Him. His availability is constant. Since you don't know Him, you wouldn't recognize Him if He sat down in front of you and ate Hollie's meatloaf. That will end up as your problem, not His. His future is secure with or with out you. You aren't as well off.
He's done enough for you. What have you done for Him lately?

That's a rather lame excuse, in my opinion. God doesn't need to prove to me that he exists because, well, he's god? To that, I am reminded of what Jefferson had to say about it:

"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear. "

 

[orogenicman]

I want there to be something more than the physical universe, something more than just the certainty that I am the result of random chance and when I die it's lights out for eternity and that in time all of the atoms in my body will succumb to proton decay and the eventual heat death of the universe. I want there to be some proof that I'll be reunited with my loved ones and that some higher power exists and wants me to be loved.

But I've seen no proof of it no matter where I've looked outside of some Holy Books that don't match up with the historical, archaeological, and physical evidence.

But science doesn't say that you are a result of random chance. This is an urban myth that just won't die. Natural selection, of which we are all a result, is not random.

 

[Steven_R]

Not natural selection, that my parents just happened to be at that party at the same time and met, that just the right ova and sperm got together, that of all the unlikely events that preceded my birth that it just all worked out. It would be more comforting if I knew I was pat of some plan as opposed to just a probability fluke.

 

[Chuckt]

Not natural selection, that my parents just happened to be at that party at the same time and met, that just the right ova and sperm got together, that of all the unlikely events that preceded my birth that it just all worked out. It would be more comforting if I knew I was pat of some plan as opposed to just a probability fluke.

I can work on finding evidences for you over time.

 

[orogenicman]

Not natural selection, that my parents just happened to be at that party at the same time and met, that just the right ova and sperm got together, that of all the unlikely events that preceded my birth that it just all worked out. It would be more comforting if I knew I was pat of some plan as opposed to just a probability fluke.

Well, I am perfectly happy knowing that every atom in my body was born in a star, and that when I die, those atoms will be used by some other life form, thus continuing the great chain of life. Knowing that makes me feel more connected to the universe than anything else ever has.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Not natural selection, that my parents just happened to be at that party at the same time and met, that just the right ova and sperm got together, that of all the unlikely events that preceded my birth that it just all worked out. It would be more comforting if I knew I was part of some plan as opposed to just a probability fluke.

Why? What difference could it possibly make with all the brew-ha ha over "free will"?

 

[Capstone]

Irrelevant. If you maintain that widespread character, positive values, integrity, works of humanity and universal goodwill towards man springs up IN SPITE of God and religion, then certainly there are many instances that you can point to, across the wide expanse of history, that can be easily identified as such. Go ahead. Still waiting.

Either you haven't been paying attention or you're too blinded by indoctrination to see the double-edged nature of your preferred religion's effects on humanity, because I've already highlighted or alluded to a number of such instances. That there were Christians on both sides of certain historical tragedies (E.G. the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the witch burnings, slavery, certain aspects in the religion based subjugation of women, and so on) which have long since been relegated to history's "unmarked grave of discarded lies", IN SPITE of their scriptural justifiability, large scale promotion by upper echelon clergy, and widespread practice among Christians of various eras, is a testament to the wills of the few who found the strength to rise up from within the Church in order to oppose it.

Having said that, fully recorded or not, the advent of the Judeo-Christian tradition was probably preceded by something like 50,000 years of full behavioral modernity among homo sapiens (to say nothing of the 150,000 years between anatomical and behavioral modernity), so it must be baffling to people like you that our species somehow managed to get along with no concept of right or wrong until your God (the one TRUE God, right?) came along.

Oh, that's right, I forgot: you probably believe the Earth is only around 7,000 years old...