the "intelligent discussion"

[Ally]

Richard Dawkins pretty much covers every single aspect of religion for me perfectly, I'm looking forward to his new TV prog on C4 covering Darwinism.

If God does exist then he is all powerful and can do anything, if he can do anything can he make something so vast even he can not lift it up. If he can theres something he cant do, if he can theres something he cant do. Thus I submit that if God DOES exist he is NOT all powerful.

I respect peoples beliefs but I myself do not believe.

An interesting prog is on C4 at the minute which I urge people who are posting in this thread to watch called "Make me a Christian" which shows blatent brainwashing and taking peoples comments out of context.

[Zombie Gunn]

I believe he is all powerful, and chooses to do nothing.

And like I said: the tactics, policies and beliefs of christians do not effect whether or not God exists.  They only change the impression people get of God, but not God.

You can't base your beliefs on what others tell you or the attitudes of people that follow a belief system.  That's what you call being led by the pack.  So, you're choosing not to believe in God because those that do are assholes and manipulative... that's the same thing as believing in God because you see non-believers as [insert heathen stereotype here].

[Tim-Æ]

You can't base your beliefs on what others tell you or the attitudes of people that follow a belief system.  That's what you call being led by the pack.  So, you're choosing not to believe in God because those that do are assholes and manipulative... that's the same thing as believing in God because you see non-believers as [insert heathen stereotype here].

I agree. at the same time though, that's basically how all religions begin and how they stay alive. I came to my conclusion through years of questioning, no one ever presented it to me. I was raised Christian, went to church till I was about 14 and then realized that I didn't feel anything when I sat in the pews. I heard these stories preached to me and they didn't make sense, there were too many contradictions and so now I just take them as popular fiction stories that have no bearing. They project a nice set of rules and paint the world in a black and white spectrum when that's not how the world is.

[T Jay]

I have very hypocritical views on god, I'll admit this. One day I may consider the fact that there is a god, while the next I may question. But I'm sure many are the same way. I like to think that in the end whether you believe or don't believe, the point is that you are believing somewhere along the lines.

My biggest problem is the contradiction on the subject.  Personally, I feel that if there is a god that there should only be one. To me that's the idea of a god, one almighty. But some civilizations both past and present worship several gods. If we are all to be his children, how can some of us worship more than just him. That's my biggest problem.

In my honest opinion everyone should have their own views, but I don't believe a person should get so caught up in religion that they spend their life centered around it. I guess some will always do that, but the truth is that we may never really know. I personally would rather focus my life on what I do know at the time, and take it as it goes. If I die and that's it, then that's it. If I die and there are pearly gates, then that is when I will figure out if god is real or not.

[Tritch]

I believe in god, and heaven, and afterlife. But I don't like the idea of religion.

If everything is set as a plan, which I believe, then we don't need to pray to god for guidance, for help, or any of that shit. Everything is already written in stone, so if something happens it's for a reason.

I don't believe in doing certain things to appease god, like offerings, prayer, praise, and all that shit are. I think that's silly.

Religion starts wars, it doesn't strengthen anybody's belief or faith.

[Ally]

I believe he is all powerful, and chooses to do nothing.

That doesn't really answer the question though, he may choose not to do it, but it still leaves the point of CAN he do it...

[Zombie Gunn]

I believe he is all powerful, and chooses to do nothing.

That doesn't really answer the question though, he may choose not to do it, but it still leaves the point of CAN he do it...

It's not a winning logical argument because there's a hidden/missing clause.

Premise 1: God can do anything.
Premise 2: God can create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it.

Seems to caused a problem with the creation of the stone or the lifting of the stone violating the first premise, BUT there's an additional premise that's unfounded:

Premise 3: God cannot engage in paradoxal activity.

Which is not considered. It's also probably not logically supportable due to the first premise.

So, God could create a stone that is so heavy that he cannot lift it AND can then lift it.

But to what end would our argument continue? Testing the omnipotence of God under this situation, cannot be used as an argument for or against the existence of God, because we cannot qualify the result. If God can break any rule or law he wants to, you cannot prove to me he doesn't exist, and I can't prove to you that he does just based upon the omnipotence argument.

You see, what many people don’t consider is that in reality there are some things that God cannot do. And these 'Can nots' do not affect God’s omnipotence.

For example here is a list of things God cannot do:

1. Sin (Lie, Cheat, Steal)
2. Learn (He is all knowing and the source of all wisdom)
3. Force you to love Him
4. Break His own laws, rules and boundaries.

All these items have one common denominator. You see God has himself put boundaries on Himself in how he acts and reacts to the world we live in. Even when He came to earth as a man, he gave up his God hood to feel what it was like to be man. He suffered hunger, temptation, pain, and suffering, and even death… as a man. True he was always God, but none the less he set boundaries for Himself while on earth and did not violate those boundaries. He chose to live as a man and never once violated this.

[Ally]

I believe he is all powerful, and chooses to do nothing.

That doesn't really answer the question though, he may choose not to do it, but it still leaves the point of CAN he do it...

It's not a winning logical argument because there's a hidden/missing clause.

Premise 1: God can do anything.
Premise 2: God can create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it.

Seems to caused a problem with the creation of the stone or the lifting of the stone violating the first premise, BUT there's an additional premise that's unfounded:

Premise 3: God cannot engage in paradoxal activity.

Which is not considered. It's also probably not logically supportable due to the first premise.

So, God could create a stone that is so heavy that he cannot lift it AND can then lift it.

But to what end would our argument continue? Testing the omnipotence of God under this situation, cannot be used as an argument for or against the existence of God, because we cannot qualify the result. If God can break any rule or law he wants to, you cannot prove to me he doesn't exist, and I can't prove to you that he does just based upon the omnipotence argument.

You see, what many people don’t consider is that in reality there are some things that God cannot do. And these 'Can nots' do not affect God’s omnipotence.

For example here is a list of things God cannot do:

1. Sin (Lie, Cheat, Steal)
2. Learn (He is all knowing and the source of all wisdom)
3. Force you to love Him
4. Break His own laws, rules and boundaries.

All these items have one common denominator. You see God has himself put boundaries on Himself in how he acts and reacts to the world we live in. Even when He came to earth as a man, he gave up his God hood to feel what it was like to be man. He suffered hunger, temptation, pain, and suffering, and even death… as a man. True he was always God, but none the less he set boundaries for Himself while on earth and did not violate those boundaries. He chose to live as a man and never once violated this.

I am not using this as proof he is not real, i simply choose to use this as proof he is not all powerful.

The bible, religion, God its all too contridictary to believe in.

Its an argument neither side will ever win or lose because its a subject in which both sides believe in their point too much.

I still don't agree with your answer however as you used semantics to change the question.

[Judge]

The thing that bugs me the most is creationists who put the earth's age at a max of 10,000 years, but that's been dubunked.

[Tim-Æ]

I believe he is all powerful, and chooses to do nothing.

That doesn't really answer the question though, he may choose not to do it, but it still leaves the point of CAN he do it...

It's not a winning logical argument because there's a hidden/missing clause.

Premise 1: God can do anything.
Premise 2: God can create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it.

Seems to caused a problem with the creation of the stone or the lifting of the stone violating the first premise, BUT there's an additional premise that's unfounded:

Premise 3: God cannot engage in paradoxal activity.

Which is not considered. It's also probably not logically supportable due to the first premise.

So, God could create a stone that is so heavy that he cannot lift it AND can then lift it.

But to what end would our argument continue? Testing the omnipotence of God under this situation, cannot be used as an argument for or against the existence of God, because we cannot qualify the result. If God can break any rule or law he wants to, you cannot prove to me he doesn't exist, and I can't prove to you that he does just based upon the omnipotence argument.

You see, what many people don’t consider is that in reality there are some things that God cannot do. And these 'Can nots' do not affect God’s omnipotence.

For example here is a list of things God cannot do:

1. Sin (Lie, Cheat, Steal)
2. Learn (He is all knowing and the source of all wisdom)
3. Force you to love Him
4. Break His own laws, rules and boundaries.

All these items have one common denominator. You see God has himself put boundaries on Himself in how he acts and reacts to the world we live in. Even when He came to earth as a man, he gave up his God hood to feel what it was like to be man. He suffered hunger, temptation, pain, and suffering, and even death… as a man. True he was always God, but none the less he set boundaries for Himself while on earth and did not violate those boundaries. He chose to live as a man and never once violated this.

Everything Christians base their belief off of comes directly from a book that was written by man. Thus it negates everything else because man does break those laws and boundaries by lying. Many portions of that book have been proven false because of science. The Bible is just a collection of stories written to shape the world. It has served its purpose and to me should be put away until its needed again, if ever. People don't need a book to tell them what to do.

[Zombie Gunn]

I agree with half of what you say.  For a long time now, I've known that most of the bible was written with politics in mind.  Hence, the many discrepancies that doesn't seem to make any sense when taken as a whole.  And I also don't go under the belief that it's the word of God, nor is it a symbol for how to live your life.

There are some things we know to be fact.  We know that Jesus existed, that he was persecuted and that he is perceived to have done many miracles.  There are several documented accounts of this, not just in the bible.  There are other accounts that describe Jesus slightly differently, but for the most part everything adds up.

It's possible that there was a setup.  That he didn't really walk on water, make the blind see, cast out demons and feed 5000 with a few loaves and fishes.  However, the overwhelming evidence through multiple historical accounts is that these events happened... it's just a question of whether they were staged.

I believe whole heartedly that the catholic church got together and decided that Jesus was the son of God.  I just happen to think that they got it right.