If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I always say prove it... Then they get all whiny and say "you prove your point"...
Simple.
If there is no evidence for something, then it is said to not exist. There is no evidence for your assertion. Evidence being a much needed part of proof and all that.
Secondly, you cannot measure somebody's "inner faith" anyway, it is the same as trying to measure somebody's happiness or sadness. I sincerely hope you do not work in psychology or with people... Thatwould worry me.
Saying "there's no such thing as God" is a statement of fact and one that could be considered arrogant. Saying "I don't believe in God" is simply stating your belief shaped by the world around you.
If you lived in a tribal village and all the time your village was beng raided by men with red caps and you only ever experienced men in red caps being violent and thieving then would you not say "all men in red caps are coming to steal my posessions"? Because it is what you have experienced and what people tell you... When in reality, there could be some very nice men in red caps that you just haven't met yet.
There is a difference between saying "this chair is not red" and "that man is not nice". One is shaped by what we know and the other by our experience and the experience of others. Maybe that man is very nice, but had a bad day... And how do you define "nice" anyway?
Get me?
Actually that's not true. Unless there is no evidence its unproven it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
To use a non-religious example say I batter a man to death, but clear up my tracks so well there is no evidence that I did it. The police question me because I had a grudge against him, but they're unable to do more because there's no dna evidence, no fingerprints, witnesses etc.
There is no evidence I committed the murder, by your logic that means I did not do it and the man himself whacked himself over the head fifty eight times with a blunt instrument
"There is no god" is still different to "I do not believe in god"... The same as somebody saying "I believe in God" instead of "God exists and I am so high and mighty I know it".
Besides, faith is not a matter of proof anyway.
There is evidence of a murder though, isn't there?
There is no proof that is admissable in court of the existence of god. THerefore under those rules there isn't one.
If you commited murder because your imaginary mate "harry" told you to, then we would look for evidence that this was the case. Finding none, you would be marked down as a nutter and banged up for the rest of your days.
If your mate is "Jesus" or "allah" or whatnot then your insanity is pandered to.
If you say so.
What if I also disposed of the body and left a forged handwritten note saying my victim was emmigrating to Australia. Then there's no evidence of murder.
Lack of evidence for the existence of God is not the same as evidence of the lack of existence of God.
if it was taken to court ...it would be preytty difficult to prove that everything just came into existence from nothing by a billion accidents.
science shows that life can only come from life ...good eveidence to put before the court.
nothing materialises from nothing ...ever as far as we can show scientificaly.
the fact that the universe is here and life ...is enough evidrence for most believers to believe.
If that is the principle that defines what you believe in then you have to beleiveeverything and doesn't lead to a belief in a single universal kind of god anymore than another principle because if you admit for everything it doesn't really count as proper belief to my mind..........
Is this the case with you?
but ...in a court case scenario ...it would be very difficult to convince a jury that everything came into existense from nothing ...that life came from none life ...as scir=entificaly this would be absurd.
so ...the believer would say ...well the only sensible conclusion to come to ...based on our scientific knowledge would be ...it must have been created.
Science might be completely and utterly incorrect. This does not alter the veracity of the "god" hypothesis one iota.
Although science would point out that in the universe as it is known nothing can be created or destroyed, only altered in it's form. As nothing is created, there is no need for a creator. If everything does need to be created, then God must have a creator as well.
Different religions have different concepts of what 'God' is. 'God' does not have to be a creator at all... But then being an expert, you knew that... right?
Yep.
Yep, right ok. Still don't exist of course, not nirvana, not a three headed goat shagging the sun, not the eye of ra beaming down or any of it.
Unless you've got a religion that says "god doesn't exist and is a very very silly idea indeed" I guess I am not going to be onboard.
Funny lad!
I was however referring to your "dragon" comment immediate preceeding my post.
Theres no need for belief if there is no doubt, that's the whole point. All religions specifically state they have no proof but you must believe anyway.
For all I know either one could be true. But I believe the latter and not the former; knowing has nothing to do with that.
I didn't ask you to be on board, it is just that most you have said about religion seems to apply more to the Judeo-Christian strain of thought... I'm not saying that any deity does or doesn't exist, that you are right or wrong... But what I am saying is that there is no evidence for any deity not existing.
Because you have no evidence to back up your claim, it becomes only what you believe. Therefor you are just like them. No better, no worse.
I know. It wa just a reference to the old "Puff the Magic Dragon" drugs jokes.
Either way.... it seems a few people here could do with a little puff.
This is nonsense. You cannot prove negatives. Theres no evidence for any insane theory you might want to invent being the case if you want to play that game.
So we would have to define what proof was, what belief was and where all that hung together. As there is no evidence for god on any standard of proof I am aware of, he doesn't exist.
The only claim I make is that in the absence of evidence there isn't anything there. The fact that it's applicable to god is more or less a side issue.
Fucking hell, you spend most of your time here trying to prove countries don't exist, tax doesn't exist and government's don't exist...