Re: Existence of God

by kslidz Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:37 pm

felix weve all seen you and know you arent fat or good looking its okay

by Felix Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:41 pm

kslidz wrote:felix weve all seen you and know you arent fat or good looking its okay

and you're retarded.

Balance is achieved.

by kslidz Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:08 am

...
:.(

by Zaki90 Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:36 am

ReconToaster wrote:
Zaki wrote:The object in question (in this case religion) is being questioned in matter of validity we look to the object to see any factors that prove or disprove the validity of the object. It's just logical.

That methodology only works if you are trying to prove that something occured WITHIN YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM SPECIFICALLY, not the realy world.

If I tell you "no, the Qur'an didn't say 'blank'

Then you can pull out the Qu'ran, and show me the passage where it did indeed happen.

However, If I say "there is no historical evidence that Muhammad said 'blank'"

You cannot then pull out that same copy of the Qu'Ran to prove me wrong. That's like citing fox news when justifying a political viewpoint. It's OBVIOUSLY a tad bit slanted.

ReconToaster wrote:

The thing is, you are basing your argument for the validity of your religion by CITING YOUR RELIGION!

Apparently something has occurred which is an argument for the validity of my religion. Thus I go to the source to get the correct and accurate information.

Islam isn't based solely upon Muhammad. Thus Muhammad is not the source of the religion. And so I go to the source of Islam, the Quran, it has the correct and accurate information I will cite.

Same with Christianity. You don't go up to Jesus and ask him whether the religion is true or not. Because he does not encompass the whole religion. You go up to the Bible.

by Toaster Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:42 pm

Zaki wrote:Same with Christianity. You don't go up to Jesus and ask him whether the religion is true or not. Because he does not encompass the whole religion. You go up to the Bible.

Sure, if I'm trying to prove that, within the canon christianity, jesus said something.

However, if I'm trying to prove that, in REAL LIFE, Jesus said something, the bible it an extremely biased source.

by Cheese Sun Jun 07, 2009 2:16 pm

Personally I think Jesus would have a very valid perspective on whether religion is true or not Razz

by Toaster Sun Jun 07, 2009 2:36 pm

Cheese wrote:Personally I think Jesus would have a very valid perspective on whether religion is true or not

Schizophrenia can sometimes alter one's perspective Razz

by Rasq'uire'laskar Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:10 pm

ReconToaster wrote:
Cheese wrote:Personally I think Jesus would have a very valid perspective on whether religion is true or not

Schizophrenia can sometimes alter one's perspective

But you cannot, by historical or biblical means, prove he was a schizo. Razz

by kslidz Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:42 pm

well zaki it is all based on muhammad because he wrote the quran

by Zaki90 Tue Jun 09, 2009 5:01 pm

kslidz wrote:well zaki it is all based on muhammad because he wrote the quran

Muhammad was illiterate. The quran was based on Jesus, Muhammad, Moses, Adam, Mary, Eve, Abraham, and a lot more.

by Esruku Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:37 am

There is no god because all you can zoom out to the edge of the universe then into the depths of the particles and there is no existence of god... humans like to think there is a god because no one likes the idea of dying then rotting in the ground...id like to go to heaven and have 47 virgins for ever!

by TNine Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:23 am

Zaki90 wrote:
ReconToaster wrote:
Zaki wrote:The object in question (in this case religion) is being questioned in matter of validity we look to the object to see any factors that prove or disprove the validity of the object. It's just logical.

That methodology only works if you are trying to prove that something occured WITHIN YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM SPECIFICALLY, not the realy world.

If I tell you "no, the Qur'an didn't say 'blank'

Then you can pull out the Qu'ran, and show me the passage where it did indeed happen.

However, If I say "there is no historical evidence that Muhammad said 'blank'"

You cannot then pull out that same copy of the Qu'Ran to prove me wrong. That's like citing fox news when justifying a political viewpoint. It's OBVIOUSLY a tad bit slanted.

ReconToaster wrote:

The thing is, you are basing your argument for the validity of your religion by CITING YOUR RELIGION!

Apparently something has occurred which is an argument for the validity of my religion. Thus I go to the source to get the correct and accurate information.

Islam isn't based solely upon Muhammad. Thus Muhammad is not the source of the religion. And so I go to the source of Islam, the Quran, it has the correct and accurate information I will cite.

Same with Christianity. You don't go up to Jesus and ask him whether the religion is true or not. Because he does not encompass the whole religion. You go up to the Bible.

The Bible, the Quaran, and any other religious texts are not "correct and accurate", since religion isn't proven to be correct. Essentially, you can't assume religion, and therefore religious texts, are correct in an argument about whether they are correct.

by TNine Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:24 am

Esruku wrote:There is no god because all you can zoom out to the edge of the universe then into the depths of the particles and there is no existence of god... humans like to think there is a god because no one likes the idea of dying then rotting in the ground...id like to go to heaven and have 47 virgins for ever!

It's 72, but whatever.

And what if God and heaven isn't in this universe? Probably in another dimension.

by Felix Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:40 am

TNine wrote:
Esruku wrote:There is no god because all you can zoom out to the edge of the universe then into the depths of the particles and there is no existence of god... humans like to think there is a god because no one likes the idea of dying then rotting in the ground...id like to go to heaven and have 47 virgins for ever!
It's 72, but whatever.

And what if God and heaven isn't in this universe? Probably in another dimension.

And what if aliens came here on jet planes and then killed and had they souls placed in human bodies? Or have the Earth completely hollow? Or have an "edge" of the world?

Probably another dimension...

by Cheese Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:03 am

Felix wrote:And what if aliens came here on jet planes and then killed and had they souls placed in human bodies? Or have the Earth completely hollow? Or have an "edge" of the world?

Probably another dimension...

That's amazing. First one I need not point out. But the second was a subplot in the book I finished only yesterday >.>

It must be true!!

by Yam Head Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:56 pm

Fuck creationisim. My Bio teach believes in creationisim and we fight about it ever so often...

by Yam Head Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:58 pm

Zaki90 wrote:Due to all the non-believers of God in the Christianity vs. Islam thread.

You can debate the existence of God here.

I believe in God because if makes sense.

Its all about Faith (truely believe in God) not wether or not "God" actually exsists. I dont see a point of this thread except to bash Islamic fundamentalisim...

by Carcarius Wed Jun 10, 2009 2:29 pm

Ignorance is bliss as some say.

by TNine Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:33 pm

Felix wrote:
TNine wrote:
Esruku wrote:There is no god because all you can zoom out to the edge of the universe then into the depths of the particles and there is no existence of god... humans like to think there is a god because no one likes the idea of dying then rotting in the ground...id like to go to heaven and have 47 virgins for ever!
It's 72, but whatever.

And what if God and heaven isn't in this universe? Probably in another dimension.

And what if aliens came here on jet planes and then killed and had they souls placed in human bodies? Or have the Earth completely hollow? Or have an "edge" of the world?

Probably another dimension...

All legitimate possibilities (except the scientologist one). They were wrong, as most theories are. However, if there is a God, why would he want Heaven in reach of somebody with a transport, even if they sinned and should go to hell?

by **Rotaretilbo** Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:19 pm

This thread is still going? Truly, you guys make me all sad face inside.

by **CivBase** Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:17 pm

Rotaretilbo wrote:This thread is still going? Truly, you guys make me all sad face inside.

QFT

Even I gave up on this thread long ago. It hasn't achieved anything, and likely never will.

by Toaster Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:28 pm

CivBase wrote:
Rotaretilbo wrote:This thread is still going? Truly, you guys make me all sad face inside.
QFT

Even I gave up on this thread long ago. It hasn't achieved anything, and likely never will.

In other words.... you lost Razz

by Gauz Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:17 pm

And you also lost, or will so eventually.

They just decided to lose earlier rather than fighting a battle they can not win.

by kslidz Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:59 pm

look no one can win except me cause i have an undying will and thats what it takes to succeed

by Cheese Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:27 pm

kslidz wrote:look no one can win except me cause i have an undying will and thats what it takes to succeed

Doesnt undying will usually translate to insurmountable stubbornness?

Nobody can win except the people who gave up long ago and went on to have long and fruitful lives as glove repair people Very Happy

by Sponsored content