Do you believe in god?

[MiCr2]

I'm sorry, MiCr, but when you said you had other things to do with your time than research the other side of the argument it kind of set me off a bit. Before that I was agreeing with how you were debating.

And Chriscgr, just try to be gentler with your words. Saying someone's beliefs are ridiculous is just adding fighting fire with fire. I don't say someone is an imbecile for not liking Starwars, I question why they don't like it, to see if their reasons are valid and can be upheld. You can judge them once you know this, and even then

See, what I see is wrong with debates are these two things that were just presented to us in... well, a debate.

1. Someone is so offensive to the other side that their arguments, though possibly valid, are overlooked.

2. Someone is staying true to their side so much that they refuse to even look at the other presented material.

To have a successful, nice debate, you need these two things dearly. Though it seems as though these two flaws in arguments are always in every dispute. To support your side of the argument, you need to know what you're supporting against, as well as presenting that you comprehend your rival party by being civil. So please, everyone, research both sides of the story, I can't urge this enough. Even if your adamantly strict Catholic, or a self-righteous atheist, know what the other argument is, how it is, what it means, and if you can believe it or not. Please.



Yes.

I was trying to stop the conversation. Obviously I would look into each side, but since I was trying to stop the conversation, I had to come up with something, if you get what I mean.

so my intentions were not really to offend anyone and I would still love it if micr2 would reply to my reply to his reply please, I'm interested to hear your response and then argue against you once more

Maybe another time in another place.

 

[NyanCaatt]

I'm just going to say it.. I honestly don't think there's a God.. I have a reason behind it though.. Really is it possible that there's some sort of Man in the sky that makes all of this.. I mean, you choose what you do right? It's not being chosen for you! Basically, I believe in science. Science makes everything basically.. Everything in the ground, things we use every single day, it's all science. Everything is made using science! Like diamonds and stuff are made by science.. You know.. Everything is atoms and stuff.. I think.. That's what my science teacher told me anyway.. But it's all science.. And the thing that there's a man in the sky looking over us? I don't think so.. Honestly, to make that work he would basically need to be in another dimension / alternate universe but that would have to be located somewhere in space because space never ends meaning there's no outside of it. If there's no outside of it then there's no where for another dimension / alternate universe.. right? Anyways, if there were alternate universes it would have to still be in space.. I have no idea what I just wrote.. Literally.. There's also on logical or unlogical proof that God exists.. Really.. That's my side. That makes no sense.. eh.. I don't care..

 

[RC_4777]

I'm just going to say it.. I honestly don't think there's a God.. I have a reason behind it though.. Really is it possible that there's some sort of Man in the sky that makes all of this.. I mean, you choose what you do right? It's not being chosen for you! Basically, I believe in science. Science makes everything basically.. Everything in the ground, things we use every single day, it's all science. Everything is made using science! Like diamonds and stuff are made by science.. You know.. Everything is atoms and stuff.. I think.. That's what my science teacher told me anyway.. But it's all science.. And the thing that there's a man in the sky looking over us? I don't think so.. Honestly, to make that work he would basically need to be in another dimension / alternate universe but that would have to be located somewhere in space because space never ends meaning there's no outside of it. If there's no outside of it then there's no where for another dimension / alternate universe.. right? Anyways, if there were alternate universes it would have to still be in space.. I have no idea what I just wrote.. Literally.. There's also on logical or unlogical proof that God exists.. Really.. That's my side. That makes no sense.. eh.. I don't care..

I believe in God and science. Sure, diamonds and stuff are made through scientific processes, but where do the things needed for the processes come from?

Also, a fundamental Catholic belief is that we have free will to make choices.

 

[NyanCaatt]

I believe in God and science. Sure, diamonds and stuff are made through scientific processes, but where do the things needed for the processes come from?

Also, a fundamental Catholic belief is that we have free will to make choices.

Yo I wasn't trying to change anyones mind, I'm putting my point of view like everyone else.. We all do have a right to believe in whatever.. I choose science.

 

[Voei]

Catholics! Some of you said that you are Christians. Sorry, but if you are Catholic you are not a Christian. A Catholic, like a Jew, is not Protestant. If you don't know what that means, look it up And start paying more attention in church.

Although I disagree with religion and don't believe in God myself, I live in a very Catholic area so I don't exactly understand the quoted part of your post. How are Catholics more Jewish than Christian? The difference between Christianity and Judaism is the New Testament, which is not part of the Jewish Tanakh. The Protestant and Catholic New Testaments are indentical and contain the same 27 books and the beliefs only differ slightly. Christianity is more than just protestantism. The Catholic and Orthodox church are just as Christian as yours is, so maybe you should "start paying more attention in church."

 

[RC_4777]

Yo I wasn't trying to change anyones mind, I'm putting my point of view like everyone else.. We all do have a right to believe in whatever.. I choose science.

I was just giving my opinion too.

 

[Chriscgr]

...


...The point of a debate is never to "win" the argument, nor to be proven right. The point of a debate is to come to a conclusion that both viewpoints are satisfied with. In a debate, both parties should be really open to new, "better" ideas, even if they oppose their own or "prove them wrong". Of course, you do stay on track and argue your side, but you have to know when you're actually wrong and accept it. For one point to be wrong is not for your whole argument to be invalid. In many, many debates, neither party is proven to be completely right in all arguments, and this is how debates help. As an example, I could argue my side that Xbox is better than the PlayStation, but the thing is...not everything about the Xbox is better than the PlayStation. The point of this debate in the end is to state my look on it and learn from the opposing one, and if possible, come to a conclusion, something me and the other debater can agree on about both systems, not to win. Maybe, the results of the debate will teach me something, or even teach Microsoft/Sony something for the future, to help better their systems or my ideas.

...If you and the other "debater" don't learn anything new from the other in the debate, it wasn't a debate, it was just differing opinions. This is completely fine, after all, especially when the topic is religion, where trying to prove anything isn't usually going to get you very far...but it really wasn't a debate, nor has either party "won".

Finally, it is never necessary to stray from being civil. That's what slows the process down. Tell me...how is calling the opposing debaters opinions "silly" not slowing down the process, and how would not saying it slow it down? Even if he may seem "misinformed," he at least deserves the right for you to consider them seriously. There is a way to discuss things without being offensive or overly nice...it's called being neutral, and in any type of debate, it's all someone should be, to avoid conflict. Just because you wouldn't be insulted for being called an idiot, doesn't mean others won't be or shouldn't be.

You say the point of a debate is to come to a conclusion that both parties are satisfied with, this is practically impossible in mosts debates as the two parties are unlikely to even shift slightly on their starting opinion. Usually the point of a debate is to convince an audience that your point of view is correct, and your opponents isn't by using evidence and logic. Therefore the 'winner' of the debate is the person who changed more minds.

Your example of comparing this argument to the Xbox PS3 debate isn't totally valid as this debate is a matter of opinion for each individual, The God debate is not.

You then go on to talk about learning stuff from a debate, and yes I'd probably agree with you actually here I will listen to people and maybe change my views when there argument is backed up by strong evidence. HOWEVER when I was debating mrcri he did not offer one factually correct piece of evidence for his view, and he clearly didn't want to listen and learn from what I was saying when he refused to read up on the topic.

You finally speak about how you must always stay civil in a debate, and yes I'd agree with you actually here. I KNOW SHOCKER, I think me calling people 'silly' is just a bad symptom of my approach to a debate. However I do still think that it is wrong in a debate to be afraid of telling your true opinion or only revealing a toned down version of it. In a debate I'd want you to be communicating 100% of what your thinking.

To be totally honest I think Mrcr2 is a completely misguided, misinformed and illogical. All those words are synonyms with being silly or an idiot. We all know I'm thinking it why can't I just say it :L

If I started getting more personal and insulting him on things not so relevant to the debate, then that would be flame in my honest opinion. The content of my posts have been almost entirely relevant, when I stop debating entirely and start only insulting then I'll be properly flaming.

P.S I just reread your comment and saw you should be neutral in debate? THE POINT OF A DEBATE IS TO BE THE OPPOSITE! also I would consider mrcr2 seriously if it were not for his lack of knowledge, lack of effort to do research and for the absolute nonsense he has been talking about rocks.

 

[MiCr2]

You say the point of a debate is to come to a conclusion that both parties are satisfied with, this is practically impossible in mosts debates as the two parties are unlikely to even shift slightly on their starting opinion. Usually the point of a debate is to convince an audience that your point of view is correct, and your opponents isn't by using evidence and logic. Therefore the 'winner' of the debate is the person who changed more minds.

Your example of comparing this argument to the Xbox PS3 debate isn't totally valid as this debate is a matter of opinion for each individual, The God debate is not.

You then go on to talk about learning stuff from a debate, and yes I'd probably agree with you actually here I will listen to people and maybe change my views when there argument is backed up by strong evidence. HOWEVER when I was debating mrcri he did not offer one factually correct piece of evidence for his view, and he clearly didn't want to listen and learn from what I was saying when he refused to read up on the topic.

You finally speak about how you must always stay civil in a debate, and yes I'd agree with you actually here. I KNOW SHOCKER, I think me calling people 'silly' is just a bad symptom of my approach to a debate. However I do still think that it is wrong in a debate to be afraid of telling your true opinion or only revealing a toned down version of it. In a debate I'd want you to be communicating 100% of what your thinking.

To be totally honest I think Mrcr2 is a completely misguided, misinformed and illogical. All those words are synonyms with being silly or an idiot. We all know I'm thinking it why can't I just say it :L

If I started getting more personal and insulting him on things not so relevant to the debate, then that would be flame in my honest opinion. The content of my posts have been almost entirely relevant, when I stop debating entirely and start only insulting then I'll be properly flaming.

P.S I just reread your comment and saw you should be neutral in debate? THE POINT OF A DEBATE IS TO BE THE OPPOSITE! also I would consider mrcr2 seriously if it were not for his lack of knowledge, lack of effort to do research and for the absolute nonsense he has been talking about rocks.

Since I am constantly being dragged into these conversations, I have to reply.

Congratulations, you failed to spell my name correct every single time.

The thing with the Big Bang theory is that new ideas are constantly coming in and going out and the thing with the rocks was one of the things that came up in that particular year. I believed in creation long before that theory came up.

When I have the time, I will re-fresh myself about the Big Bang and discuss it further, I have given my logical idea of how the Big Bang could not have happened, I will leave it at that till another time. I've already said I am going to drop this conversation and I hope you will also.

Everyone has told you to stop, and yet you continue to go on about it. Learn to stop. Its a useful skill.

I like to get away from debates due to my lack of being able to explain stuff correctly/understandably, no this is not just a stupid excuse and me "loosing" or however you want to put it. I would love to be able to talk and explain, to debate etc, but I lack this skill of communication so I just back out.
I give in my ideas, I try to stay in as long as I go, then if I feel its out of my capabilities, I back out.

The conversation would eventually turn into a flame war, and I'm not the only one who had this feeling. I backed out for 2 good reasons.

Conversation over.

P.S. Do you really have to always bring up the stupid rocks? I said I don't believe it, why keep bringing it up like as if I believe it?

 

[G33ke]

Your example of comparing this argument to the Xbox PS3 debate isn't totally valid as this debate is a matter of opinion for each individual, The God debate is not.

...Wait, I'm sorry...but...what?

We can know about every part of each system, how they operate, look at their game lineups, research the scores of said game lineups, their faults in the past of the system... (security stuff online has had it's problems for some.) We can nitpick every little thing down to the smallest detail, it's all fact...but how does arguing one religion is more right than the other not include some opinion in almost all instances? At least arguing the systems allows for each party to be factually right, even if they are more "wrong" about how the system is better in the end...but discussing the existence of a God is far, far harder to get 100% factual information, especially since it usually stems from differing religions...and let's be honest here, religions that differ so much cannot both be the "correct" religion. (Assuming there is one - I won't argue there is or isn't, that's not going to get anyone anywhere.)


...anyway:

You say the point of a debate is to come to a conclusion that both parties are satisfied with, this is practically impossible in mosts debates as the two parties are unlikely to even shift slightly on their starting opinion. Usually the point of a debate is to convince an audience that your point of view is correct, and your opponents isn't by using evidence and logic. Therefore the 'winner' of the debate is the person who changed more minds.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/debate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_writing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/argument?s=t

To debate is to discuss, to show and hear differing opinions. It is also to consider, in other words, to be open to new ideas and opposing arguments. Often, the word debate is used in instances where a group of people are trying to find a solution to a problem, thus me saying to "come to a conclusion."
Persuasive writing is what you do when you are simply trying to persuade someone to see and agree with your viewpoint, which is what you're doing.
An argument kind of varies. It can mean several things, really, it heavily depends on the way the word is used. In this case, I'm referring to the point where an argument is an attempt to persuade.

Yes, you can argue with someone - in other words, attempt to persuade them, and it can still be a debate, but unless you are also open to new ideas and willing to come to a middle point, a solution, it's just classified as persuasive writing, or that definition of argument.

You then go on to talk about learning stuff from a debate, and yes I'd probably agree with you actually here I will listen to people and maybe change my views when there argument is backed up by strong evidence. HOWEVER when I was debating mrcri he did not offer one factually correct piece of evidence for his view, and he clearly didn't want to listen and learn from what I was saying when he refused to read up on the topic.

Fair enough I guess, if this is the case. I didn't read your whole "argument", I was just trying to make a point.

You finally speak about how you must always stay civil in a debate, and yes I'd agree with you actually here. I KNOW SHOCKER, I think me calling people 'silly' is just a bad symptom of my approach to a debate. However I do still think that it is wrong in a debate to be afraid of telling your true opinion or only revealing a toned down version of it. In a debate I'd want you to be communicating 100% of what your thinking.

Well, this is a more complicated thing. Theoretically, yes, someone could state every little thing on their mind, but the thing is, we're only human, and as such, many things that cross your mind about the subject might be unneeded. I mean, if you tell me you thing I'm some disgusting hobo or something, maybe I won't be offended, and maybe I did want to know how little you thought of me...but it still isn't contributing to the discussion, and in fact encourages it to go off course, as has been seen in this thread. It's only human for the initial thought in someones mind to be "this guy is an idiot" when the reality is that he isn't. I may think a lot of negative thoughts at first, but after logical thinking, it becomes clear I'm not really giving the person a fair chance. (A lot of people seem to judge others by their knowledge in a specific subject. I could be the dumbest person in the world when it comes to any history subject school has ever thrown at me, but I am by no means dumb in everything else just because of that.)

P.S I just reread your comment and saw you should be neutral in debate? THE POINT OF A DEBATE IS TO BE THE OPPOSITE!

I see how you may have been confused by my use of neutral. You're right, in a debate, you generally are in favor of a side, you usually are on a side and argue it's the "better way" or whatever. Maybe I used the word a bit inappropriately.
What I meant was that you would talk as if you neither were really fond of the person, nor had any hatred towards him. In other words, as if he was someone you knew nothing about and had no reason to like or dislike, like some guy walking down the street you saw for only a few seconds. You know nothing about him, and have no reason to judge him, so you're "neutral" towards him.


I apologize if this post is a bit disjointed, I had to attend a few things between paragraphs here, so there were several 5-10 minute intervals of writing spread a half an hour apart. lol.

 

[Boboaluitz]

G33ke just made a more detailed account of what I've been trying to say this entire time. You don't necessarily need to be hostile and adamant in your ways in a debate. Heck, I debate about things that I don't exactly agree with, but it is a way to learn more. In debate clubs, you're given a side to argue for, you speak for that side to try to get its point across while intaking other material.

Also, have you guys heard about Zoroastrianism? I hear it was one of the religions that had very similar concepts to Judaism, Christianity, and most other monotheistic religions.

To the atheists who have been using the unlikelihood of a man in the sky as a basis for their atheism: Quite a few branches of Christianity don't believe in a literal man in the sky, but a force of positive action. Also, even though god is viewed heavily as masculine, most often 'He' is genderless (contradiction, but whatever). Or in modern times it is attempted to be made so.

I personally do not believe in the Bible literally, I believe in it as a guideline to human ethics. I don't follow those guidelines directly, I know my ethics as a human and what is and isn't evil. I have a lot to say about religion and what it means and how it exists. I won't say much unless there is something specific to say.

 

[Lululioness]

I am raised to be Christian, this is just something for you to think about.

zeit·geist
/ˈtsītˌgīst/

Noun
The defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.

I watched a documentary/art piece called 'Zeitgeist' and it said a lot about religion which may or may not be true. If you've seen it you're probably like, 'WTF IS A 12 YEAR OLD DOING WATCHING THAT?' but honestly it taught me a lot and I found it very interesting. Sources were not cited by the creator of the film, which sparked many questions since the video had essentially told people to open their eyes to what the big picture is. It encouraged people to think- what are they actually doing?

You can believe in religion- it's there to answer some people's questions, but at the same time it has began many terrible, terrible wars. It's not in my right to say what's right or wrong and please don't be offended by what I'm saying as it may be untrue but what I'm trying to do is encourage you to think about what is really happening, what it really is.

"The more you begin to investigate what we think we understand, where we came from, what we think we're doing, the more you begin to see we've been lied to. We've been lied to by every institution.

Ok, so here's my point here. Think about it- is there really gonna be a man up in the sky deciding our path and looking at all 7 billion people in the world and saying 'Hmm... that girl was really bad, she's not coming to heaven" or "That boy did lots of good in his life he's going to heaven to dance with Jesus and my three spirits" (Jah, I know all about Christianity- I've been raised to be one but then as I got older I began to think about it. I also kinda hated going to Church because I liked sleeping in on Sunday).

"Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

"But He loves you"

"What makes you think that the religious institution is the only one that's never been touched? The religious institutions of this world are at the bottom of the dirt. The religious institutions in this world are put there by the same people who gave you your government, your corrupt education, who set up your international banking cartels. Because our masters don't give a damn about you or your family. All they care about is what they have always cared about and that's controlling the whole damn world"

I don't know, there is no solid proof with God/s existing, no solid proof that we evolved from apes, but if we're questioning the past on how we came into being- why don't we question the future.

Could religion/god just be one of those things to manipulate us, distract us from real problems? Religion is the base of most wars. And wanting power.

If religion is put there by the same people who gave you the corrupt education and your crazy government of power-hungry people, then is it really true?

What are they exactly trying to do?


Other points-
Attis, of Phyrigia, born of the virgin Nana on December 25th, crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days, was resurrected.

Krishna, of India, born of the virgin Devaki with a star in the east signaling his coming, performed miracles with his disciples, and upon his death was resurrected.

Dionysus of Greece, born of a virgin on December 25th, was a traveling teacher who performed miracles such as turning water into wine, he was referred to as the "King of Kings," "God's Only Begotten Son," "The Alpha and Omega," and many others, and upon his death, he was resurrected.

Mithra, of Persia, born of a virgin on December 25th, he had 12 disciples and performed miracles, and upon his death was buried for 3 days and thus resurrected, he was also referred to as "The Truth," "The Light," and many others. Interestingly, the sacred day of worship of Mithra was Sunday.

Jesus Christ was born of the virgin Mary on December 25th in Bethlehem, his birth was announced by a star in the east, which three kings or magi followed to locate and adorn the new savior. He was a child teacher at 12, at the age of 30 he was baptized by John the Baptist, and thus began his ministry. Jesus had 12 disciples which he traveled about with performing miracles such as healing the sick, walking on water, raising the dead, he was also known as the "King of Kings," the "Son of God," the "Light of the World," the "Alpha and Omega," the "Lamb of God," and many others. After being betrayed by his disciple Judas and sold for 30 pieces of silver, he was crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days was resurrected and ascended into Heaven.


This is just weird stuff and it's like

Mind= Blown.

To understand it better and find out more- do some research or watch Zeitgeist.
Anyways this is just some stuff from the documentary and you can watch it on YouTube (just look up Zeitgeist: The Movie) or read this transcript.

JustreadwhatI'mtryingtosayanditmakesnosensemaybejustwatchZeitgeistguysoksobyeyeahbye.

 

[DJ Kitty]

I am raised to be Christian, this is just something for you to think about.

zeit·geist
/ˈtsītˌgīst/

Noun
The defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.

I watched a documentary/art piece called 'Zeitgeist' and it said a lot about religion which may or may not be true. If you've seen it you're probably like, 'WTF IS A 12 YEAR OLD DOING WATCHING THAT?' but honestly it taught me a lot and I found it very interesting. Sources were not cited by the creator of the film, which sparked many questions since the video had essentially told people to open their eyes to what the big picture is. It encouraged people to think- what are they actually doing?

You can believe in religion- it's there to answer some people's questions, but at the same time it has began many terrible, terrible wars. It's not in my right to say what's right or wrong and please don't be offended by what I'm saying as it may be untrue but what I'm trying to do is encourage you to think about what is really happening, what it really is.

"The more you begin to investigate what we think we understand, where we came from, what we think we're doing, the more you begin to see we've been lied to. We've been lied to by every institution.

Ok, so here's my point here. Think about it- is there really gonna be a man up in the sky deciding our path and looking at all 7 billion people in the world and saying 'Hmm... that girl was really bad, she's not coming to heaven" or "That boy did lots of good in his life he's going to heaven to dance with Jesus and my three spirits" (Jah, I know all about Christianity- I've been raised to be one but then as I got older I began to think about it. I also kinda hated going to Church because I liked sleeping in on Sunday).

"Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

"But He loves you"

"What makes you think that the religious institution is the only one that's never been touched? The religious institutions of this world are at the bottom of the dirt. The religious institutions in this world are put there by the same people who gave you your government, your corrupt education, who set up your international banking cartels. Because our masters don't give a damn about you or your family. All they care about is what they have always cared about and that's controlling the whole damn world"

I don't know, there is no solid proof with God/s existing, no solid proof that we evolved from apes, but if we're questioning the past on how we came into being- why don't we question the future.

Could religion/god just be one of those things to manipulate us, distract us from real problems? Religion is the base of most wars. And wanting power.

If religion is put there by the same people who gave you the corrupt education and your crazy government of power-hungry people, then is it really true?

What are they exactly trying to do?


Other points-
Attis, of Phyrigia, born of the virgin Nana on December 25th, crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days, was resurrected.

Krishna, of India, born of the virgin Devaki with a star in the east signaling his coming, performed miracles with his disciples, and upon his death was resurrected.

Dionysus of Greece, born of a virgin on December 25th, was a traveling teacher who performed miracles such as turning water into wine, he was referred to as the "King of Kings," "God's Only Begotten Son," "The Alpha and Omega," and many others, and upon his death, he was resurrected.

Mithra, of Persia, born of a virgin on December 25th, he had 12 disciples and performed miracles, and upon his death was buried for 3 days and thus resurrected, he was also referred to as "The Truth," "The Light," and many others. Interestingly, the sacred day of worship of Mithra was Sunday.

Jesus Christ was born of the virgin Mary on December 25th in Bethlehem, his birth was announced by a star in the east, which three kings or magi followed to locate and adorn the new savior. He was a child teacher at 12, at the age of 30 he was baptized by John the Baptist, and thus began his ministry. Jesus had 12 disciples which he traveled about with performing miracles such as healing the sick, walking on water, raising the dead, he was also known as the "King of Kings," the "Son of God," the "Light of the World," the "Alpha and Omega," the "Lamb of God," and many others. After being betrayed by his disciple Judas and sold for 30 pieces of silver, he was crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days was resurrected and ascended into Heaven.


This is just weird stuff and it's like

Mind= Blown.

To understand it better and find out more- do some research or watch Zeitgeist.
Anyways this is just some stuff from the documentary and you can watch it on YouTube (just look up Zeitgeist: The Movie) or read this transcript.

JustreadwhatI'mtryingtosayanditmakesnosensemaybejustwatchZeitgeistguysoksobyeyeahbye.

yes