If you belief in evolution and are atheist let me ask you a question ?

Faith is good enough for me.kingdre

Living your life by what's "good enough" will get you an ugly wife, crap job, and absolutely nowhere in general. I'm not telling you to give up your faith, just to find a new reason to believe it.

For questions that can't be unanswered, you're gonna have to take a leap of faith.kingdre

You don't HAVE to do anything....it could just remain unknown. At least that's better than filling the holes with a fairy tale.

I don't have low standards. I just think that science can't answer everything. kingdre

Science can never answer everything, but it seems to be very effective at inadvertently peeling back the layers of deception plastered over our minds by religion. That's gotta stand for something, and you can't help but notice.

And again, just because an answer to a mystery has not yet been uncovered, it does not mean there should be an imaginary superhero sitting there as a placeholder. This would actually discourage us from seeking out what is really going on...which is one of my biggest problems with religion.

[QUOTE="nbtrap1212"][QUOTE="Fortier"]

[QUOTE="Atheist"] In the beginning, there was nothing...then it exploded.Genetic_Code

In the beginning, there was nothing...than a completely omnipotent life form suddenly appeared.Christian

I wouldn't say that Christians consider God a "life form."

Is that even relevant?

And even if something had a hang in the Big Bang theory, how can we prescribe it to be God when you can't even define him?

We define God as the prime mover, not the other way around.

Goodnight.

[QUOTE="kingdre"]Faith is good enough for me.Fortier

Living your life by what's "good enough" will get you an ugly wife, crap job, and absolutely nowhere in general. I'm not telling you to give up your faith, just to find a new reason to believe it.

When I say it's good enough, I mean that I'm content with believing that some higher power is the source of all this. Science can't explain a lot of things so I have my faith to fall back on.

[QUOTE="kingdre"] For questions that can't be unanswered, you're gonna have to take a leap of faith.Deity_Slapper

You don't HAVE to do anything....it could just remain unknown. At least that's better than filling the holes with a fairy tale.

I don't have low standards. I just think that science can't answer everything. kingdre

Science can never answer everything, but it seems to be very effective at inadvertently peeling back the layers of deception plastered over our minds by religion. That's gotta stand for something, and you can't help but notice.

And again, just because an answer to a mystery has not yet been uncovered, it does not mean there should be an imaginary superhero sitting there as a placeholder. This would actually discourage us from seeking out what is really going on...which is one of my biggest problems with religion.

If science is able to prove that there is no God, then I will concede your point. Until then, I stand by my beliefs.

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="kingdre"]Faith is good enough for me.kingdre

I'm disheartened by the fact that you would set your standards so low. You can do better than that.

For questions that can't be unanswered, you're gonna have to take a leap of faith. I don't have low standards. I just think that science can't answer everything.

Define this "leap of faith" for me. It takes an atheist a leap of faith to finally see to it that god can't be real, does it not?

Science can't explain a lot of things so I have my faith to fall back on. kingdre

How about you fall back on - and be content with - the fact that we don't know everything, and also that we don't even have to know everything? That's comforting to me. To know there is so much left to learn. It's cool.

Also, by the way you worded your post, I don't think your faith is very strong anyway. You say "Science can't explain a lot of things so I have my faith to fall back on"; which insinuates that if science were able to exlpain everything, you'd throw your god completely out of your life. You're not much of a believer to begin with, are you? ;)

It also insinuates that anytime science has explained something, you accepted it as fact. And many of the things science has proven, have been things that have debunked religious (and in particular, christian) theories. So, anytime that has happened, and you realized your religion was wrong about something after it claimed to be the one and only way, shouldn't it not hit you right then and there that if this supposedly infallible creed has indeed been exposed as having at least one flaw, then can't none of it can be trusted?

[QUOTE="kingdre"][QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="kingdre"]Faith is good enough for me.Genetic_Code

I'm disheartened by the fact that you would set your standards so low. You can do better than that.

For questions that can't be unanswered, you're gonna have to take a leap of faith. I don't have low standards. I just think that science can't answer everything.

Define this "leap of faith" for me. It takes an atheist a leap of faith to finally see to it that god can't be real, does it not?

An atheists faith is that there's no God. My faith is that there is. Either way we're all believing in something that cannot be 100% proven or disproven.

I think the title should be changed to.

"If you beleive in the Big bang and are atheist , can i ask you a question?

[QUOTE="kingdre"] Science can't explain a lot of things so I have my faith to fall back on. Deity_Slapper

How about you fall back on - and be content with - the fact that we don't know everything, and also that we don't even have to know everything? That's comforting to me. To know there is so much left to learn. It's cool.

Also, by the way you worded your post, I don't think your faith is very strong anyway. You say "Science can't explain a lot of things so I have my faith to fall back on"; which insinuates that if science were able to exlpain everything, you'd throw your god completely out of your life. You're not much of a believer to begin with, are you? It also insinuates that anytime science has explained something, you accepted it as fact. And many of the things science has proven, have been things that have debunked religious (and in particular, christian) theories. So, anytime that has happened, and you realized your religion was wrong about something after it claimed to be the one and only way, shouldn't it not hit you right then and there that if this supposedly infallible creed has indeed been exposed as having at least one flaw, then can't none of it can be trusted?

If that's how you interpreted it, then so be it. Not much I can do now is there?

An atheists faith is that there's no God. My faith is that there is. Either way we're all believing in something that cannot be 100% proven or disproven.kingdre

Actually, something remains 100% unproven until it becomes proven. Non-existence is the default position for any claim that has no evidence.

An atheists faith is that there's no God. My faith is that there is. Either way we're all believing in something that cannot be 100% proven or disproven.

kingdre

Fair enough. I don't know why I feel the need to attack you.

But I feel that if there's no evidence that a crime ever occurred even though there's the same amount of evidence that the crime didn't occur (which is none), the jury should inclined to believe that I'm innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around.

But I feel that if there's no evidence that a crime ever occurred even though there's the same amount of evidence that the crime didn't occur (which is none), the jury should inclined to believe that I'm innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around. Genetic_Code

That's a good analogy. I like. :)

[QUOTE="kingdre"]An atheists faith is that there's no God. My faith is that there is. Either way we're all believing in something that cannot be 100% proven or disproven.Deity_Slapper

Actually, something remains 100% unproven until it becomes proven. Non-existence is the default position for any claim that has no evidence.

I've heard that argument before. Point taken; but that still doesn't change what I believe.

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

Actually, something remains 100% unproven until it becomes proven. Non-existence is the default position for any claim that has no evidence.

kingdre

I've heard that argument before. Point taken; but that still doesn't change what I believe.

How could the point be taken if it meant nothing to you? Isn't that what "point taken" means?

You obviously understood that what I said was valid - I mean, you couldn't even argue with it. Shouldn't that right there be a good reason to give it some thought?

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]But I feel that if there's no evidence that a crime ever occurred even though there's the same amount of evidence that the crime didn't occur (which is none), the jury should inclined to believe that I'm innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around. Deity_Slapper

That's a good analogy. I like. :)

Thanks.

[QUOTE="kingdre"][QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

Actually, something remains 100% unproven until it becomes proven. Non-existence is the default position for any claim that has no evidence.

Deity_Slapper

I've heard that argument before. Point taken; but that still doesn't change what I believe.

How could the point be taken if it meant nothing to you? Isn't that what "point taken" means?

You obviously understood that what I said was valid - I mean, you couldn't even argue with it. Shouldn't that right there be a good reason to give it some thought?

I understood the point you were making. I didn't argue cuz I DON'T want to argue. It's obvious neither of us will budge.

Nobody claims that the big bang comes from nothing.....I have no idea where people get this idea from....yoshi-lnex

Where did it come from?

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="nbtrap1212"][QUOTE="Fortier"]

[QUOTE="Atheist"] In the beginning, there was nothing...then it exploded.nbtrap1212

In the beginning, there was nothing...than a completely omnipotent life form suddenly appeared.Christian

I wouldn't say that Christians consider God a "life form."

Is that even relevant?

And even if something had a hang in the Big Bang theory, how can we prescribe it to be God when you can't even define him?

We define God as the prime mover, not the other way around.

Goodnight.

I didn't mean to address you specificly so I apologize on that fault.

I was just saying that whether or not God is a "life form", a "super life form", or a "prime mover" doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things as long as he retains the ability to start life. Considering that the original poster you quoted defined him as an "omnipotent life form" (which gives him infinitive power including but not limited to creating life), to argue against him argues against him doesn't add anything to your own point in a sense since you're splitting a hair that's not relevant to the topic (whether or not God's "life" or not), or at least that was my impression.

It's obvious neither of us will budge. kingdre

Yeah, but you should; I've been where you are before.

It's not that I won't budge, I just can't. Denying the truth that has been revealed to me, just so I can stick to what I was used to, would be going backwards. Like, de-volving. And I can't live like that.

You on the other hand, are simply resisting new knowledge - anything that undermines what has already taken hold in your mind. That's the difference between you and I.

I like how people argue something that obviously nobody knows.blackngold29

The only thing I know is that nobody knows. That's what I'm saying. Using imaginary deities to fill the gaps in our knowledge will do us no good, however.

I like how people argue something that obviously nobody knows.blackngold29

But it remains always the ultimate question. Anyway to sum the thread -

Faith = Religion

Empircal Evidence = Science

[QUOTE="blackngold29"]I like how people argue something that obviously nobody knows.Deity_Slapper

The only thing I know is that nobody knows. That's what I'm saying. Using imaginary deities to fill the gaps in our knowledge will do us no good, however.

This "Imaginary diety" you refer to is also something that obviously nobody knows. So you just lost.blackngold29

If no one knows it, then it must be imaginary. No proof = non existant. So what did I lose? I still feel completely together...

[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]

[QUOTE="blackngold29"]I like how people argue something that obviously nobody knows.blackngold29

The only thing I know is that nobody knows. That's what I'm saying. Using imaginary deities to fill the gaps in our knowledge will do us no good, however.

People don't know if god or the Big Bang created the universe.