Why I'm not a Christian anymore. What about you?

[QUOTE="Wolf-Man2006"]

[QUOTE="MrPraline"] True, but it's alot harder than you'd think after you've been taught (at school even) all your life that it's real. I'm glad I got out when I did. TheGreatOutdoor

I wasn't being forced to become a Christian, it was a decision I made years ago.

I have to go for now, but I am curious. How were you forced to go at the age of eight? How old are your children?

It's an omniscient statement of absolute knowledge that encompasses the immaterial knowledge and experiences of every living and dead person ever to exist, now, in the past, and in the future. Obviously, you guys are deities.Theokhoth

[QUOTE="Juice_13"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]Lol, ok then if it didnt come out of no where, and u dont believe in god, where did it come from?

magnax1

Just for the sake of argument, if you believe that God created everything and something can't come out of nothing, where did God come from?

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]Yeah, it basically comes down to how was the universe created and what happens after you die. Nobody has the answers to those 2 questions (yet). Eventually they will be answered.scorch-62

I'm pretty positive that science can eventually explain how our universe came into existence, we might not live till that day though. And if there's an afterlife, all of us will eventually be able to answer the question about death. ;) Unless there's nothing, then it will be silent I suppose. :)

[QUOTE="TheGreatOutdoor"]

[QUOTE="Wolf-Man2006"]

I wasn't being forced to become a Christian, it was a decision I made years ago.

stepnkev

I have to go for now, but I am curious. How were you forced to go at the age of eight? How old are your children?

[QUOTE="scorch-62"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]Then obviously you guys have the answer, since you can say with definite certainty that nobody out of seven billion (living) people could possibly have an answer.Theokhoth

It's an omniscient statement of absolute knowledge that encompasses the immaterial knowledge and experiences of every living and dead person ever to exist, now, in the past, and in the future. Obviously, you guys are deities.

When you try to make that statement you take into account various problems. Such as the fact that god (whoever that might be) is of course greater than us therefore no one can perceive him/her/it fully in this life. This is just ONE problem.

Even in the case of god speaking directly to a select few people then they too cannot perceive god fully, being humans after all. Therefore, human nature, pretty much grants us this answer and in no way do we have to be deities to assume that.

But even if your point is valid, I dont see how it indicates something in favour of the validity of any religion.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

[QUOTE="Juice_13"]

Just for the sake of argument, if you believe that God created everything and something can't come out of nothing, where did God come from?

-Sun_Tzu-

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

Sir you have it down!

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Lol, ok then if it didnt come out of no where, and u dont believe in god, where did it come from?

Theokhoth

Gee... I'm no scientist, but let's assume that our universe isn't the only universe out there, mayber there are millions of universes for all we know. Maybe some other universe died, exploded or whatever and created the beginning of our universe. Or matter escaped from another universe through a tear or wormhole in space and formed our universe. Maybe black holes have something to do with it, because (according to wiki) at the center of a black hole lies thesingularity, where matter is crushed to infintedensity, the pull of gravity is infinitely strong, and spacetime has infinite curvature. Maybe that singularity can be the beginning of a new universe.

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

[QUOTE="Juice_13"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]Lol, ok then if it didnt come out of no where, and u dont believe in god, where did it come from?

magnax1

Just for the sake of argument, if you believe that God created everything and something can't come out of nothing, where did God come from?

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]

Gee... I'm no scientist, but let's assume that our universe isn't the only universe out there, mayber there are millions of universes for all we know. Maybe some other universe died, exploded or whatever and created the beginning of our universe. Or matter escaped from another universe through a tear or wormhole in space and formed our universe. Maybe black holes have something to do with it, because (according to wiki) at the center of a black hole lies thesingularity, where matter is crushed to infintedensity, the pull of gravity is infinitely strong, and spacetime has infinite curvature. Maybe that singularity can be the beginning of a new universe.

Teenaged

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

but basically all the theories for alternate universes are made up too, so....... its not, they are both seeking answers with basically no proof.

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Lol, ok then if it didnt come out of no where, and u dont believe in god, where did it come from?

Theokhoth

Gee... I'm no scientist, but let's assume that our universe isn't the only universe out there, mayber there are millions of universes for all we know. Maybe some other universe died, exploded or whatever and created the beginning of our universe. Or matter escaped from another universe through a tear or wormhole in space and formed our universe. Maybe black holes have something to do with it, because (according to wiki) at the center of a black hole lies thesingularity, where matter is crushed to infintedensity, the pull of gravity is infinitely strong, and spacetime has infinite curvature. Maybe that singularity can be the beginning of a new universe.

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

That's absolutely true, I wasn't saying that it's more valid. But these are just some things that I can come up with and I'm not a scientist. I just don't get that a lot of people automatically insert god when there's a question without an answer, there could be a million different answers. And to me personally, I find science more plausible than the answers of any of the 3 holy books (all the other religions aside). But I'm also a man of faith, I have faith in science.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

[QUOTE="Juice_13"]

Just for the sake of argument, if you believe that God created everything and something can't come out of nothing, where did God come from?

BumFluff122

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

[QUOTE="Juice_13"]

Just for the sake of argument, if you believe that God created everything and something can't come out of nothing, where did God come from?

BumFluff122

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

Nobody said he lived out of space time, acutally if you wanted to look at religions as a reference, he almost always has a way of communicating with or coming to people on earth, wich would require him to be in space/time.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]How is the fact that no one knows an answer?Teenaged

It's an omniscient statement of absolute knowledge that encompasses the immaterial knowledge and experiences of every living and dead person ever to exist, now, in the past, and in the future. Obviously, you guys are deities.

When you try to make that statement you take into account various problems. Such as the fact that god (whoever that might be) is of course greater than us therefore no one can perceive him/her/it fully in this life. This is just ONE problem.

Even in the case of god speaking directly to a select few people then they too cannot perceive god fully, being humans after all. Therefore, human nature, pretty much grants us this answer and in no way do we have to be deities to assume that.

But even if your point is valid, I dont see how it indicates something in favour of the validity of any religion.

I agree that God can't be fully perceived for the reasons you gave, but I do not agree that God cannot be perceived period for that reason.

The only religion that gets validity from my statement is the one that worships the guys that omnisciently say we can't know the answer.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

magnax1

but basically all the theories for alternate universes are made up too, so....... its not, they are both seeking answers with basically no proof.

The difference is that science isn't stopping when they come up with a theoretical answer. Scientist will keep on searching until they can prove it to be right or wrong.

Nobody said he lived out of space time, acutally if you wanted to look at religions as a reference, he almost always has a way of communicating with or coming to people on earth, wich would require him to be in space/time.

magnax1

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]

Gee... I'm no scientist, but let's assume that our universe isn't the only universe out there, mayber there are millions of universes for all we know. Maybe some other universe died, exploded or whatever and created the beginning of our universe. Or matter escaped from another universe through a tear or wormhole in space and formed our universe. Maybe black holes have something to do with it, because (according to wiki) at the center of a black hole lies thesingularity, where matter is crushed to infintedensity, the pull of gravity is infinitely strong, and spacetime has infinite curvature. Maybe that singularity can be the beginning of a new universe.

Teenaged

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

The theories presented are no less "conveniently made up" than God. . .in fact, they are "conveniently made up" to explain away God.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

magnax1

but basically all the theories for alternate universes are made up too, so....... its not, they are both seeking answers with basically no proof.

God as a theory needs a special frame in order to be supported which inevitably must be set somewhere outside the natural world. The fact that the super-natural world has been fathomed doesnt make it existant. It is a possibility but it is based on nothing tangible.

A scientific theory is trying to make a cake with eggs and other ingredients.

A god theory is trying to make a cake with the thought that "my fridge should have ggs and the other ingredients".

[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

I dont know, but it makes just as much sense as everything coming out of nothing lol. Its kind of a fruitless arguement, but it makes more sense that one thing made everything than nothing made everything.

Teenaged

Another one: Could. "It could have been this," or "it could have been that, therefore it isn't God."

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]But the theories presented by theflush are more in accordance to the proceedure of seeking answers, than conveniently making them up (like in the case of god).

Teenaged

but basically all the theories for alternate universes are made up too, so....... its not, they are both seeking answers with basically no proof.

And the "God theory" is based on principals as well, that you may or may not consider natural. If you don't, is it no longer "correct" because it isn't natural? I thought you liked philosophy.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

It's an omniscient statement of absolute knowledge that encompasses the immaterial knowledge and experiences of every living and dead person ever to exist, now, in the past, and in the future. Obviously, you guys are deities.

Theokhoth

When you try to make that statement you take into account various problems. Such as the fact that god (whoever that might be) is of course greater than us therefore no one can perceive him/her/it fully in this life. This is just ONE problem.

Even in the case of god speaking directly to a select few people then they too cannot perceive god fully, being humans after all. Therefore, human nature, pretty much grants us this answer and in no way do we have to be deities to assume that.

But even if your point is valid, I dont see how it indicates something in favour of the validity of any religion.

I agree that God can't be fully perceived for the reasons you gave, but I do not agree that God cannot be perceived period for that reason.

The only religion that gets validity from my statement is the one that worships the guys that omnisciently say we can't know the answer.

When can we say we know something? When we know for sure. 100% Therefore yes we cannot know 100%. We may have indications (indications of course prove nothing) but we have no certainty, thus we have faith.

So do you claim that a person can know? He/She doesnt know if he/she doesnt know 100%. Its partial knowledge, therefore not direct/absolute answers. Therefore answers that are not valid beyond any doubt.

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Nobody said he lived out of space time, acutally if you wanted to look at religions as a reference, he almost always has a way of communicating with or coming to people on earth, wich would require him to be in space/time.

BumFluff122

Well if you think of it that way, if the universe was made without a god, whatever way it was made it would need to be made outside of spacetime too. See both science and God require faith, its basically just picking your poison.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

but basically all the theories for alternate universes are made up too, so....... its not, they are both seeking answers with basically no proof.

Theokhoth

And the "God theory" is based on principals as well, that you may or may not consider natural. If you don't, is it no longer "correct" because it isn't natural? I thought you liked philosophy.

Anyway like I said I dont believe a god theory is invalid because it is not based on the natural world. Wrong conclusion of yours there.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]Te universe could be cyclic. It needent have come from nothing. It could have also 'popped' into existence via vacuum fluctuations. God is suppose to be a creature that lives outside of spacetime. How can anything live outside of spacetime?

Theokhoth

Another one: Could. "It could have been this," or "it could have been that, therefore it isn't God."

EDIT: My comment is valid because god is used many times as a wild card in the lack of knowledge.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]No Theokhoth you dont have to be a diety to know it. And its not an omniscient statement either.

When you try to make that statement you take into account various problems. Such as the fact that god (whoever that might be) is of course greater than us therefore no one can perceive him/her/it fully in this life. This is just ONE problem.

Even in the case of god speaking directly to a select few people then they too cannot perceive god fully, being humans after all. Therefore, human nature, pretty much grants us this answer and in no way do we have to be deities to assume that.

But even if your point is valid, I dont see how it indicates something in favour of the validity of any religion.

Teenaged

I agree that God can't be fully perceived for the reasons you gave, but I do not agree that God cannot be perceived period for that reason.

The only religion that gets validity from my statement is the one that worships the guys that omnisciently say we can't know the answer.

When can we say we know something? When we know for sure. 100% Therefore yes we cannot know 100%. We may have indications (indications of course prove nothing) but we have no certainty, thus we have faith.

So do you claim that a person can know? He/She doesnt know if he/she doesnt know 100%. Its partial knowledge, therefore not direct/absolute answers. Therefore answers that are not valid beyond any doubt.

The belief that we can't know the answer is not atheism.;)

The rest of the post doesn't deal with anything I've said.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]No they are based on priciples. Those theories are formed based on reality that you witness everyday: the natural world.

Teenaged

And the "God theory" is based on principals as well, that you may or may not consider natural. If you don't, is it no longer "correct" because it isn't natural? I thought you liked philosophy.

Anyway like I said I dont believe a god theory is invalid because it is not based on the natural world. Wrong conclusion of yours there.

That's like, three double negatives there.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]The wild-card of lack of knowledge: god

Teenaged

Another one: Could. "It could have been this," or "it could have been that, therefore it isn't God."

EDIT: My comment is valid because god is used many times as a wild card in the lack of knowledge.

No, but this is the main conclusion from people who invoke God of the Gaps: there are other possibilities, therefore you shouldn't believe it was God.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

That's a nice idea, but it's really no more valid than God Did It.

Theokhoth

The theories presented are no less "conveniently made up" than God. . .in fact, they are "conveniently made up" to explain away God.

Bringing up perhaps the bias of some scientists means nothing because the proceedure is not as easy in the scientific field and every theory is scrutinised. I wouldnt compare the validity of science with the validity of the explanation of the supernatural, simply because their two separate fields of study (natural - supernatural) cannot be compared either.

I'm not sure what relevance your beliefs have to me but it's never been a secret the OT has violent content. As a Christian one should follow the teachings in the NT which are not violent. But I still don't see why you felt the need to tell me this.

[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Nobody said he lived out of space time, acutally if you wanted to look at religions as a reference, he almost always has a way of communicating with or coming to people on earth, wich would require him to be in space/time.

magnax1

Well if you think of it that way, if the universe was made without a god, whatever way it was made it would need to be made outside of spacetime too. See both science and God require faith, its basically just picking your poison.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

I agree that God can't be fully perceived for the reasons you gave, but I do not agree that God cannot be perceived period for that reason.

The only religion that gets validity from my statement is the one that worships the guys that omnisciently say we can't know the answer.

Theokhoth

When can we say we know something? When we know for sure. 100% Therefore yes we cannot know 100%. We may have indications (indications of course prove nothing) but we have no certainty, thus we have faith.

So do you claim that a person can know? He/She doesnt know if he/she doesnt know 100%. Its partial knowledge, therefore not direct/absolute answers. Therefore answers that are not valid beyond any doubt.

The belief that we can't know the answer is not atheism.;)

The rest of the post doesn't deal with anything I've said.

Well my bad I thought in each post one makes he can add some more points... :roll: And I dont think the ones I added wereirrelevant...

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

And the "God theory" is based on principals as well, that you may or may not consider natural. If you don't, is it no longer "correct" because it isn't natural? I thought you liked philosophy.

Theokhoth

Anyway like I said I dont believe a god theory is invalid because it is not based on the natural world. Wrong conclusion of yours there.

That's like, three double negatives there.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Another one: Could. "It could have been this," or "it could have been that, therefore it isn't God."

Theokhoth

EDIT: My comment is valid because god is used many times as a wild card in the lack of knowledge.

No, but this is the main conclusion from people who invoke God of the Gaps: there are other possibilities, therefore you shouldn't believe it was God.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]But the theories presented by theflush are more in accordance to the proceedure of seeking answers, than conveniently making them up (like in the case of god).

Teenaged

The theories presented are no less "conveniently made up" than God. . .in fact, they are "conveniently made up" to explain away God.

Bringing up perhaps the bias of some scientists means nothing because the proceedure is not as easy in the scientific field and every theory is scrutinised. I wouldnt compare the validity of science with the validity of the explanation of the supernatural, simply because their two separate fields of study (natural - supernatural) cannot be compared either.

I'm not sure why you think these theories are scientific; they have nothing to do with science and have no basis in any scientific method. They just seem "more natural." They are brought up in debates like this solely to say "Well, it could have been this way, therefore not God."

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]Did I say that a god theory is completely invalid? No. Also please dont cut my posts. I hate it and theres no reason to do that and I think that myexample at the end described it well.

Anyway like I said I dont believe a god theory is invalid because it is not based on the natural world. Wrong conclusion of yours there.

Teenaged

That's like, three double negatives there.

I can't tell what you're saying.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"](RED) A lot of misconceptions there that you put I assume to make a angry comment. Atheism is not a religion neither is there worship involved. ;)

When can we say we know something? When we know for sure. 100% Therefore yes we cannot know 100%. We may have indications (indications of course prove nothing) but we have no certainty, thus we have faith.

So do you claim that a person can know? He/She doesnt know if he/she doesnt know 100%. Its partial knowledge, therefore not direct/absolute answers. Therefore answers that are not valid beyond any doubt.

Teenaged

The belief that we can't know the answer is not atheism.;)

The rest of the post doesn't deal with anything I've said.

Well my bad I thought in each post one makes he can add some more points... :roll: And I dont think the ones I added wereirrelevant...

Strong agnosticism.

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]

[QUOTE="TheFlush"]Yeah, it basically comes down to how was the universe created and what happens after you die. Nobody has the answers to those 2 questions (yet). Eventually they will be answered.TheFlush

I'm pretty positive that science can eventually explain how our universe came into existence, we might not live till that day though. And if there's an afterlife, all of us will eventually be able to answer the question about death. ;) Unless there's nothing, then it will be silent I suppose. :)

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

The theories presented are no less "conveniently made up" than God. . .in fact, they are "conveniently made up" to explain away God.

Theokhoth

Bringing up perhaps the bias of some scientists means nothing because the proceedure is not as easy in the scientific field and every theory is scrutinised. I wouldnt compare the validity of science with the validity of the explanation of the supernatural, simply because their two separate fields of study (natural - supernatural) cannot be compared either.

I'm not sure why you think these theories are scientific; they have nothing to do with science and have no basis in any scientific method. They just seem "more natural." They are brought up in debates like this solely to say "Well, it could have been this way, therefore not God."

I love it when people say that the Bible tells Christians to stone sinners to death...Such ignorance astounds me. :roll:

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

That's like, three double negatives there.

Theokhoth

I can't tell what you're saying.

The point is that I believe that the ones based on the natural world are more trustworthy.

They are based on science, and moreover in observable clues.

Teenaged

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]No that is wrong. The may have a level of convenience to compensate for the lack of knowledge (which of course exists in the scientific field as well), as expectable, but they dont set out with the goal to invalidate god if thats what you think.

Bringing up perhaps the bias of some scientists means nothing because the proceedure is not as easy in the scientific field and every theory is scrutinised. I wouldnt compare the validity of science with the validity of the explanation of the supernatural, simply because their two separate fields of study (natural - supernatural) cannot be compared either.

Teenaged

I'm not sure why you think these theories are scientific; they have nothing to do with science and have no basis in any scientific method. They just seem "more natural." They are brought up in debates like this solely to say "Well, it could have been this way, therefore not God."

No they aren't. . .they have absolutely no evidence supporting them; there is no proof whatsoever that there is more than one universe, no proof that the universe is cyclic, etc. They have no basis in science; they are philosophical conjectures. The closest they come to being scientific is that they appear to be "natural" events.

Strong agnosticism.

Theokhoth

But as I said its not a religion and neither do I worship anyone. ;)

I'm not sure why you think these theories are scientific; they have nothing to do with science and have no basis in any scientific method. They are brought up in debates like this solely to say "Well, it could have been this way, therefore not God."

Theokhoth

I love it when people say that the Bible tells Christians to stone sinners to death...Such ignorance astounds me. :roll:

LikeHaterade