<span style='font-size:6pt;line-height:100%'>...I thought it was funny...</span>
If you hate the bible, then you're not really a protestant, like Cyndane said. God doesn't seem to come into it much, either. What's Christianity without God or the bible?
It is hard to be a christian when you are not following the rules and the rules are laid out in the bible.
Therefore, reguardless of what you "do", you are not protestant, no matter what you claim.
When you do not believe the actions you are doing, you are basically failing to understand why the actions are there in the first place. Refer back to my orginal post.
@Metalcat: I have never heard of "tongue.gif" per se but can imagine what it is. I simply wished you well in your pursuit of an ideal mate, mate. No insult. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
*... sorry to drift off topic but felt it necessary to clarify my well wishing*
You were just being dense as usual. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Not the dense, just more selective in my "marrying type" criteria. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
It is hard to be a christian when you are not following the rules and the rules are laid out in the bible.
Therefore, reguardless of what you "do", you are not protestant, no matter what you claim.
When you do not believe the actions you are doing, you are basically failing to understand why the actions are there in the first place. Refer back to my orginal post.
Religious rites with no faith, mean nothing. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> refer to all my other posts in discussion to see my points on religion acts, or on believing in religion...
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 7 2005, 11:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 7 2005, 11:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So we are in agreement then, you are not protestant and neither is depot. :-) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> why aint depot?
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 7 2005, 11:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 7 2005, 11:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> He isn't because neither of you follow the bible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> we does, the protestant way of bible!
Even if you actually did follow the bible (I doubt you do), why would you follow a way of life when you hate its cornerstone? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 7 2005, 12:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 7 2005, 12:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> He isn't because neither of you follow the bible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I know of NO Protestant that follows the Bible (100%), hence we all are sinners. That doesn't mean I or anyone else is necessarily not a Protestant.
Even if you actually did follow the bible (I doubt you do), why would you follow a way of life when you hate its cornerstone? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> its something called tradition and culture, ever heard about that? maybe you should read the posts instead of just going to the last page on the thread
Just because you - or, in fact, "we", since England's state church is protestant, and a lot of <i>our</i> cultures and traditions have been influenced by religion, too - have grown up in a protestant climate, doesn't mean you are protestant. All it means is that you live in a protestant-influenced culture. Otherwise, I'm a protestant too! And I don't think I even believe in God!
You actually have to follow the rules if you want to be a Christian. I can go get married in a church and follow the traditions, but that doesn't mean I'm a Christian on its own. That could mean I like the church, or I want to keep the old tradition going, or my parents might be willing to pay for a religious wedding but not one held at a registrar's office, or my chloroformed wife-to-be is religious...
Thanks for the support snidely, but yes neither of you are protestant unless you follow the bible which is what christ/god tells you to do. :-)
You can claim it all you want, but since you don't follow it, and don't even try to claim that you are. For you are not protestant/catholic/christian. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndane+Jun 7 2005, 01:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndane @ Jun 7 2005, 01:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Thanks for the support snidely, but yes neither of you are protestant unless you follow the bible which is what christ/god tells you to do. :-)
You can claim it all you want, but since you don't follow it, and don't even try to claim that you are. For you are not protestant/catholic/christian. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Suffice it to say, you've both just described 99.9% of all Protestants. Good job. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Alright, I'm a bit insulted by how this is turning out, so I'll throw in my two cents:
A lot of this arguement is crap, so I get to have fun in the same way.
Metalhead, can you prove...absolutely PROVE that there is no God, that everyone who follows a religion is wrong, or that even ONE of them is?
Can anyone? The existence of God, by DEFINITION, cannot be proven. Neither, therefor, can the nonexistence of that same God. This is true in every single one of the major religions of which I am aware (all of which are likely represented on these forums).
Personally, I don't see how any of you can say one way or the other. BOTH sides take on faith what can't be proven, and any atheist who says otherwise is feeding me a load of crap. Atheism itself is hardly different from religion, by the simple fact that to be atheist, you have to take some on faith as well. So the same arguements apply to both.
In any case, I thought I'd throw in another non-religious viewpoint, because Metalhead seems to be giving every one on the planet a bad name for it. Ignorance is bliss?
Its Metalcat, not metalhead... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Jun 7 2005, 12:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Jun 7 2005, 12:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You actually have to follow the rules if you want to be a Christian. I can go get married in a church and follow the traditions, but that doesn't mean I'm a Christian on its own. That could mean I like the church, or I want to keep the old tradition going, or my parents might be willing to pay for a religious wedding but not one held at a registrar's office, or my chloroformed wife-to-be is religious... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> YOU WIN COOKIE!
@Zavaro: i consider myself part of it, well i dont i consider me part of Denmark and this is what people do in Denmark and this doesnt mean its waht they do in all countryes that are protestant.
@asal how do you want to prove faith? What if i said that starwars really did happen, could you ever prove that? NO therefor that is some ****
<!--QuoteBegin-Metalcat+Jun 7 2005, 12:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Metalcat @ Jun 7 2005, 12:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> @asal how do you want to prove faith? What if i said that starwars really did happen, could you ever prove that? NO therefor that is some **** <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Metalcat, what you're speaking of is a fallacy. It's an appeal to ignorance. (See : <a href='http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html' target='_blank'>Appeal to Ignorance</a>)
Lack of evidence isn't enough to make a conclusion for either side. There are few exceptions, as with criminal law, but even then, you can't make a judgement from the angle that there is no information. The only valid, reasonable conclusion would be that "You simply don't know or can't know". However, this isn't to take a logical positivist attitude and say that you should ever stop trying to find information, but rather, that you wouldn't be intellectually honest by taking a position on the issue because "You can't prove it therefore it's not true" which may or may not be the case.
If you want to take that position, go ahead, but I assure you, you're on logical shaky ground.
<!--QuoteBegin-Asal The Unforgiving+Jun 7 2005, 02:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Asal The Unforgiving @ Jun 7 2005, 02:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Alright, I'm a bit insulted by how this is turning out, so I'll throw in my two cents:
A lot of this arguement is crap, so I get to have fun in the same way.
Metalhead, can you prove...absolutely PROVE that there is no God, that everyone who follows a religion is wrong, or that even ONE of them is?
Can anyone? The existence of God, by DEFINITION, cannot be proven. Neither, therefor, can the nonexistence of that same God. This is true in every single one of the major religions of which I am aware (all of which are likely represented on these forums).
Personally, I don't see how any of you can say one way or the other. BOTH sides take on faith what can't be proven, and any atheist who says otherwise is feeding me a load of crap. Atheism itself is hardly different from religion, by the simple fact that to be atheist, you have to take some on faith as well. So the same arguements apply to both.
In any case, I thought I'd throw in another non-religious viewpoint, because Metalhead seems to be giving every one on the planet a bad name for it. Ignorance is bliss? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No, you're forgetting that Atheism is the default. Babies aren't born believing in God.
The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> No, you're forgetting that Atheism is the default. Babies aren't born believing in God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This isn't a very good argument. Babies don't believe in alot of things because they're babies. They don't believe in gravity, they don't believe in Pluto, they don't believe in "Insert X". If you don't believe something because of lack of information, you simply "Don't know", you don't "Not believe".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see what you're trying to say, but once again, it isn't a very good argument. You're clearly oversimplifying the situation. There is some evidence towards the existence of a god. Could Nostradamus predict the future? I don't think so, but there is some evidence to support that he may have been able to do so. Does god exist and did he create the universe, and have his son descend on earth and perform miracles etc? I don't necessarily believe so, frankly I dont know. But there is <b>some</b> evidence to support that conclusion.
Really, the largest evidence for a god is creation. Many Christians use this as evidence for a god, because there's something here. For more information (I didn't want to go into specifics, but I'll indulge you just once) See Aquinas "Five ways":
Now, I don't necessarily believe this, but the point is that you are clearly not understanding the situation correctly if you're saying that there is NO evidence.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sirus+Jun 7 2005, 06:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Jun 7 2005, 06:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> No, you're forgetting that Atheism is the default. Babies aren't born believing in God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This isn't a very good argument. Babies don't believe in alot of things because they're babies. They don't believe in gravity, they don't believe in Pluto, they don't believe in "Insert X". If you don't believe something because of lack of information, you simply "Don't know", you don't "Not believe". <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I understand what you're going for.
But, Pluto and gravity are both able to be confirmed by evidence. There is no such evidence for god. Plus, if you raised a person in isolation, I don't believe he would come out at 75 years old with belief in the Christian god. He would have no concept of a god at all. This is what I mean by default.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see what you're trying to say, but once again, it isn't a very good argument. You're clearly oversimplifying the situation. There is some evidence towards the existence of a god. Could Nostradamus predict the future? I don't think so, but there is some evidence to support that he may have been able to do so. Does god exist and did he create the universe, and have his son descend on earth and perform miracles etc? I don't necessarily believe so, frankly I dont know. But there is <b>some</b> evidence to support that conclusion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can you tell me what this evidence is for the existence of god? I don't see any. Please, don't refer me to 2000 year old witness testimony. I want *good* evidence. I can show you thousands of people who think they've been abducted by aliens but I wouldn't take it as good evidence for the existance of aliens who abduct people. I do, however, see lots of evidence that points to this god not existing. Contradictions, inaccuracies, and plain cruelty in the bible, for one. In the bible, God tells Moses that all homosexuals should be put to death. I'd say that is evidence against God existing. It shows the signs of the times and it shows that it's man made.
Edit: Briefly scanning over the links you provided, I see a totally absurd argument. Why does this first cause have to be god? What caused god? What created god? It's pointlessly saying 'goddidit' because humans simply don't know yet. I think it's better to simply say that we don't know yet rather than make up a story with no evidence that has no credibility and say, yep, that's it. For a stupid analogy: my keys moved over night. I don't know who moved them. I could be ignorant and say, "God moved my keys." or I could attempt to figure out who moved my keys or how it happened. Saying God moved my keys doesn't give me the correct answer-- all it does is give me false reassurance that I'm amazingly good at figuring things out. All I have to do is say goddidit all the time!
Well, I didn't say that you had to agree with the evidence they provide. And you can disagree, but the distinction I'm trying to make is it's a far cry from "making up pink elephants and praising them as god". You may not like what Aquinas or Anselm have to say about the matter, in fact, many are critical of their views. But, I'm just trying to be reasonable here.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Plus, if you raised a person in isolation, I don't believe he would come out at 75 years old with belief in the Christian god. He would have no concept of a god at all. This is what I mean by default.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you're making a claim that you can't substantiate. Really, who knows what they would think or believe. However, I'd say that the lack of science leads to a mystical or supernatural belief of your surroundings. People say that there is no such thing as order in the world, as it's man who applies the idea of order to the world. Be it through science or religion, a man will often if not always try and make sense of his world even if he ends up making errors in his observations.
So to respond to the particular quotation, even though we can't substantiate the claim, I would in fact say that a man in isolation would be more likely to believe in a god. And taking it further ( according to your own formula), he would have a concept of a god, because he attributes order to his environment through the supernatural, therefore, god is "default".
But really, we're being silly. We don't know because we've never seen it happen, and if we're going to be honest with ourselves, all we can do is look for answers and humbly concede that we simply don't know.
Keep in mind that nearly every culture has a religious explanation for the surroundings. Even at a most primative level, there is an intuitive sense of order and meaning behind creation.
This isn't a strong argument for Christianity, however. It does become stronger when we couple it with statements by Paul concerning the Greeks and their unknown god, or better yet, Romans 1:23, (Paraphraised: That all people have seen God's invisible qualities in the world, and have made God out to be in the image of animals or men.)
I am curious as to why the onotological argument, or variations thereof, are so rarely brought up on this forum. Are we simply not that philisophical here?
Really, I don't understand Anselm's argument very clearly. Even further, I hardly understand Kant's response in a "Critique of Pure Reason". Either way, I did a quick search, anyone interested in the ontological argument can read more : <a href='http://www.angelfire.com/mn2/tisthammerw/rlgnphil/ontological.html' target='_blank'>Here</a>
Snippets of Kant's refutation of the ontological argument : <a href='http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Mode/ModeDeLo.htm' target='_blank'>Here</a>
<span style='color:red'>Warning: Understanding alot of these concepts clearly (understand, not just be able to regurgitate their words), and being able to apply them to discussion is not for the faint of heart. I haven't even conquered reading both Anselms and Kant. (Yet.) I often read <i>late</i> at night and it is nearly impossible to understand. If you're up to the daunting task, do it with ample sleep, coffee, and a good meal. Especially if you're reading Immanuel Kant. <i>I am <b>not</b> kidding</i>.</span>
Comments
<span style='font-size:6pt;line-height:100%'>...I thought it was funny...</span>
If you hate the bible, then you're not really a protestant, like Cyndane said. God doesn't seem to come into it much, either. What's Christianity without God or the bible?
It is hard to be a christian when you are not following the rules and the rules are laid out in the bible.
Therefore, reguardless of what you "do", you are not protestant, no matter what you claim.
When you do not believe the actions you are doing, you are basically failing to understand why the actions are there in the first place. Refer back to my orginal post.
Religious rites with no faith, mean nothing.
*... sorry to drift off topic but felt it necessary to clarify my well wishing*
Yes I knew that one, but ..... it .... just ... didn't .. make. sense. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
It is hard to be a christian when you are not following the rules and the rules are laid out in the bible.
Therefore, reguardless of what you "do", you are not protestant, no matter what you claim.
When you do not believe the actions you are doing, you are basically failing to understand why the actions are there in the first place. Refer back to my orginal post.
Religious rites with no faith, mean nothing. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
refer to all my other posts in discussion to see my points on religion acts, or on believing in religion...
doh now i get it
why aint depot?
DONT CONFUSE ME ;P
we does, the protestant way of bible!
we follow the bible our way
Even if you actually did follow the bible (I doubt you do), why would you follow a way of life when you hate its cornerstone? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I know of NO Protestant that follows the Bible (100%), hence we all are sinners. That doesn't mean I or anyone else is necessarily not a Protestant.
Don't confuse us! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Even if you actually did follow the bible (I doubt you do), why would you follow a way of life when you hate its cornerstone? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
its something called tradition and culture, ever heard about that? maybe you should read the posts instead of just going to the last page on the thread
You actually have to follow the rules if you want to be a Christian. I can go get married in a church and follow the traditions, but that doesn't mean I'm a Christian on its own. That could mean I like the church, or I want to keep the old tradition going, or my parents might be willing to pay for a religious wedding but not one held at a registrar's office, or my chloroformed wife-to-be is religious...
You can claim it all you want, but since you don't follow it, and don't even try to claim that you are. For you are not protestant/catholic/christian. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You can claim it all you want, but since you don't follow it, and don't even try to claim that you are. For you are not protestant/catholic/christian. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Suffice it to say, you've both just described 99.9% of all Protestants. Good job. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And due to the fact you said religion is stupid, why do you consider yourself part of it, now?
A lot of this arguement is crap, so I get to have fun in the same way.
Metalhead, can you prove...absolutely PROVE that there is no God, that everyone who follows a religion is wrong, or that even ONE of them is?
Can anyone? The existence of God, by DEFINITION, cannot be proven. Neither, therefor, can the nonexistence of that same God. This is true in every single one of the major religions of which I am aware (all of which are likely represented on these forums).
Personally, I don't see how any of you can say one way or the other. BOTH sides take on faith what can't be proven, and any atheist who says otherwise is feeding me a load of crap. Atheism itself is hardly different from religion, by the simple fact that to be atheist, you have to take some on faith as well. So the same arguements apply to both.
In any case, I thought I'd throw in another non-religious viewpoint, because Metalhead seems to be giving every one on the planet a bad name for it. Ignorance is bliss?
YOU WIN COOKIE!
@Zavaro: i consider myself part of it, well i dont i consider me part of Denmark and this is what people do in Denmark and this doesnt mean its waht they do in all countryes that are protestant.
@asal how do you want to prove faith? What if i said that starwars really did happen, could you ever prove that? NO therefor that is some ****
Metalcat, what you're speaking of is a fallacy. It's an appeal to ignorance. (See : <a href='http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html' target='_blank'>Appeal to Ignorance</a>)
Lack of evidence isn't enough to make a conclusion for either side. There are few exceptions, as with criminal law, but even then, you can't make a judgement from the angle that there is no information. The only valid, reasonable conclusion would be that "You simply don't know or can't know". However, this isn't to take a logical positivist attitude and say that you should ever stop trying to find information, but rather, that you wouldn't be intellectually honest by taking a position on the issue because "You can't prove it therefore it's not true" which may or may not be the case.
If you want to take that position, go ahead, but I assure you, you're on logical shaky ground.
A lot of this arguement is crap, so I get to have fun in the same way.
Metalhead, can you prove...absolutely PROVE that there is no God, that everyone who follows a religion is wrong, or that even ONE of them is?
Can anyone? The existence of God, by DEFINITION, cannot be proven. Neither, therefor, can the nonexistence of that same God. This is true in every single one of the major religions of which I am aware (all of which are likely represented on these forums).
Personally, I don't see how any of you can say one way or the other. BOTH sides take on faith what can't be proven, and any atheist who says otherwise is feeding me a load of crap. Atheism itself is hardly different from religion, by the simple fact that to be atheist, you have to take some on faith as well. So the same arguements apply to both.
In any case, I thought I'd throw in another non-religious viewpoint, because Metalhead seems to be giving every one on the planet a bad name for it. Ignorance is bliss? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, you're forgetting that Atheism is the default. Babies aren't born believing in God.
<a href='http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html' target='_blank'>http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/b...n-of-proof.html</a>
The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)
This isn't a very good argument. Babies don't believe in alot of things because they're babies. They don't believe in gravity, they don't believe in Pluto, they don't believe in "Insert X". If you don't believe something because of lack of information, you simply "Don't know", you don't "Not believe".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see what you're trying to say, but once again, it isn't a very good argument. You're clearly oversimplifying the situation. There is some evidence towards the existence of a god. Could Nostradamus predict the future? I don't think so, but there is some evidence to support that he may have been able to do so. Does god exist and did he create the universe, and have his son descend on earth and perform miracles etc? I don't necessarily believe so, frankly I dont know. But there is <b>some</b> evidence to support that conclusion.
Really, the largest evidence for a god is creation. Many Christians use this as evidence for a god, because there's something here. For more information (I didn't want to go into specifics, but I'll indulge you just once) See Aquinas "Five ways":
<a href='http://www.faithnet.org.uk/AS%20Subjects/Philosophyofreligion/fiveways.htm' target='_blank'>Source </a>
<a href='http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/aquinas.htm' target='_blank'>Alternate Source (Brief)</a>
Now, I don't necessarily believe this, but the point is that you are clearly not understanding the situation correctly if you're saying that there is NO evidence.
This isn't a very good argument. Babies don't believe in alot of things because they're babies. They don't believe in gravity, they don't believe in Pluto, they don't believe in "Insert X". If you don't believe something because of lack of information, you simply "Don't know", you don't "Not believe". <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I understand what you're going for.
But, Pluto and gravity are both able to be confirmed by evidence. There is no such evidence for god.
Plus, if you raised a person in isolation, I don't believe he would come out at 75 years old with belief in the Christian god. He would have no concept of a god at all. This is what I mean by default.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The burden of proof lies upon religion to show me why I should believe. It's not up to me to prove that God doesn't exist. That's simply ridiculous. Prove to me that a gigantic purple unicorn (*insert ANYTHING YOU WANT HERE*) doesn't rule the universe with his infinite power!?!? Oh, you can't? And you deny it? You're denying it on faith! (see? it makes no sense.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see what you're trying to say, but once again, it isn't a very good argument. You're clearly oversimplifying the situation. There is some evidence towards the existence of a god. Could Nostradamus predict the future? I don't think so, but there is some evidence to support that he may have been able to do so. Does god exist and did he create the universe, and have his son descend on earth and perform miracles etc? I don't necessarily believe so, frankly I dont know. But there is <b>some</b> evidence to support that conclusion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can you tell me what this evidence is for the existence of god? I don't see any. Please, don't refer me to 2000 year old witness testimony. I want *good* evidence. I can show you thousands of people who think they've been abducted by aliens but I wouldn't take it as good evidence for the existance of aliens who abduct people.
I do, however, see lots of evidence that points to this god not existing. Contradictions, inaccuracies, and plain cruelty in the bible, for one. In the bible, God tells Moses that all homosexuals should be put to death. I'd say that is evidence against God existing. It shows the signs of the times and it shows that it's man made.
Edit: Briefly scanning over the links you provided, I see a totally absurd argument. Why does this first cause have to be god? What caused god? What created god? It's pointlessly saying 'goddidit' because humans simply don't know yet. I think it's better to simply say that we don't know yet rather than make up a story with no evidence that has no credibility and say, yep, that's it.
For a stupid analogy: my keys moved over night. I don't know who moved them. I could be ignorant and say, "God moved my keys." or I could attempt to figure out who moved my keys or how it happened. Saying God moved my keys doesn't give me the correct answer-- all it does is give me false reassurance that I'm amazingly good at figuring things out. All I have to do is say goddidit all the time!
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Plus, if you raised a person in isolation, I don't believe he would come out at 75 years old with belief in the Christian god. He would have no concept of a god at all. This is what I mean by default.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you're making a claim that you can't substantiate. Really, who knows what they would think or believe. However, I'd say that the lack of science leads to a mystical or supernatural belief of your surroundings. People say that there is no such thing as order in the world, as it's man who applies the idea of order to the world. Be it through science or religion, a man will often if not always try and make sense of his world even if he ends up making errors in his observations.
So to respond to the particular quotation, even though we can't substantiate the claim, I would in fact say that a man in isolation would be more likely to believe in a god. And taking it further ( according to your own formula), he would have a concept of a god, because he attributes order to his environment through the supernatural, therefore, god is "default".
But really, we're being silly. We don't know because we've never seen it happen, and if we're going to be honest with ourselves, all we can do is look for answers and humbly concede that we simply don't know.
This isn't a strong argument for Christianity, however. It does become stronger when we couple it with statements by Paul concerning the Greeks and their unknown god, or better yet, Romans 1:23, (Paraphraised: That all people have seen God's invisible qualities in the world, and have made God out to be in the image of animals or men.)
I am curious as to why the onotological argument, or variations thereof, are so rarely brought up on this forum. Are we simply not that philisophical here?
Snippets of Kant's refutation of the ontological argument : <a href='http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Mode/ModeDeLo.htm' target='_blank'>Here</a>
<span style='color:red'>Warning: Understanding alot of these concepts clearly (understand, not just be able to regurgitate their words), and being able to apply them to discussion is not for the faint of heart. I haven't even conquered reading both Anselms and Kant. (Yet.) I often read <i>late</i> at night and it is nearly impossible to understand. If you're up to the daunting task, do it with ample sleep, coffee, and a good meal. Especially if you're reading Immanuel Kant. <i>I am <b>not</b> kidding</i>.</span>