Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/16/2003 11:24:32 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:28:43 AM EDT
4, 5, and 6: Was the USS Liberty attacked by Israeli homosexuals on purpose or was it an accident?
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:29:17 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: IF (please note the word "if") science proved conclusively (in other words fact not theory) that God did NOT exist, would you still adhere to your religion/faith? And if so why?
View Quote
Tough call. I revere scientific knowledge (tho many think I don't) Yet, I see IMMENSE benefit to mankind when they obey the tenets that I beleive to be delivered by God. Would God be proven a false notion, I still see benefit to mankind in obeying "God's" tenets and teachings. (For lengths sake, I'll forego giving examples of "God's" tenets that benefit mankind)
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:29:50 AM EDT
nope. but then God exists outside our understanding of quantum space time. so it's a moot point. science can't disprove what exists outside it's matrix. it's kind of like asking to prove the existance of an orange by looking only at a basket of apples.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:29:50 AM EDT
You just love making baby Jesus cry don't you!? [:(!]
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:31:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:32:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/16/2003 11:37:54 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: IF (please note the word "if") science proved conclusively (in other words fact not theory) that God did NOT exist, would you still adhere to your religion/faith? And if so why?
View Quote
I would still question the "science" behind the proof more than I'd accept it's conclusion. If it could be "scientifically" proven that gun-ownership was directly responsible for crime, tyranny, poverty and halitosis, I would STILL not give up my firearms and reject the RKBA. Would you? EDITED TO ADD: But if science "proved" God DID exist, I wouldn't have any stronger belief in God than I do now. In fact, I'd doubt very much that it was really "God" that was proven to exist. (damn I hate typing faster than I think. [BD])
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:37:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:41:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:43:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 308wood: nope. but then God exists outside our understanding of quantum space time. so it's a moot point. science can't disprove what exists outside it's matrix. it's kind of like asking to prove the existance of an orange by looking only at a basket of apples.
View Quote
THANK YOU. You may be the first person on this site, that I have ever seen use the word moot instead of (the incorrect) mute. There is a God.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:45:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: If it could be "scientifically" proven that gun-ownership was directly responsible for crime, tyranny, poverty and halitosis, I would STILL not give up my firearms and reject the RKBA. Would you?
View Quote
IF the actual data (not jumbled numbers which include 21 year old gang members) proved conclusively that gun ownership contributes to crime I would absolutely accept the truth of the data. However, the fact that other people guns contribute to crime does not mean mine do, even if I am the ONLY person whose guns didn't contribute to the problem and as a result would not want to be regulated by the masses. That is mob rule and that is why we have a Cosntitutionally protected Democratic Republic to prevent us from being ruled by the whim of pure Democracy.
View Quote
Ah, but I was actually leaning more towards a hypothetical scientific proof that you, yes YOU - [b]SteyrAUG[/b] - simply by owning firearms was the CAUSE of poverty and crime through some complex, yet entirely provable "psychological chaos theory" phenomenon. Would you reject the RKBA and give up your belief that you need firearms for protection? Back to your hypothetical, personally, to imagine science proving for a fact that God did NOT exist would be like proving that 3=5. So I would continue to doubt that specfic aspect of scientific research that came to that conclusion rather than accept the conclusion itself because I see it as a contradiction of science itself.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:45:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: According to the OT God used to hang out with us and talk to us all the time in a real sense. I can think of nothing more that would difinitivly PROVE his existence. So how come the big guy don't rap with us anymore?
View Quote
Still happens, we just lock those people up.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:46:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/16/2003 11:48:17 AM EDT by HardShell]
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: I would still question the "science" behind the proof more than I'd accept it's conclusion...
View Quote
I'm with [b]The_Macallan[/b] on this one...
Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;...
View Quote
... I would doubt the scientists/science before doubting my God, regardless of how convincing the "proof" was.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:49:59 AM EDT
I am a secualarist. I would be a secular humanist, but I am told that the humanist part has a bit in it about believing that people are inherently good, and I dont believe that.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:56:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: According to the OT God used to hang out with us and talk to us all the time in a real sense. I can think of nothing more that would difinitivly PROVE his existence. So how come the big guy don't rap with us anymore? And before anyone offers the "it's about faith" response, there were quite a few doubters in the OT.
View Quote
These doubters were caught up in their own religious practices, so it's not the existance of a god or gods that they doubted, just the Hebrew one... If the existance or nonexistance of a god was easy to prove, this argument would have been settled long ago. I became an Athiest within a couple of weeks of starting to question 'the things one shouldn't question'. I quickly realized how strong and deep the powers of human cultural, and individual self-deception were. Logically, you can say that I am suffereing from the same thing I say that you are, in that I'm fooling myself into believing that there is no god. Hence, each argument has a probability assigned. We each assign differing weights to our theories, which transforms them into beliefs. The 'religion' side simply has a cop out that I don't have, in that their fallback position is that god is all powerful and we are mere mortals, so we shouldn't expect to understand.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 11:57:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/16/2003 11:58:57 AM EDT by SteyrAUG]
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 12:00:00 PM EDT
If we are deciding that this is a phrontistery and we are going to have have a discussion that is not going to sink to the level of bombastry, we are going to have to decide on which factors can be acceptable in the proof of the absentaneous nature of g*d. It may be argued that the entity in question is drogulus and the existince or not of the same may not be verifiable in our current situation. so there.....
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 12:06:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By hound: If we are deciding that this is a phrontistery and we are going to have have a discussion that is not going to sink to the level of bombastry, we are going to have to decide on which factors can be acceptable in the proof of the absentaneous nature of g*d. It may be argued that the entity in question is drogulus and the existince or not of the same may not be verifiable in our current situation. so there.....
View Quote
[LOLabove] [LOL] [ROFL2]
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 12:13:46 PM EDT
hownd - Plesae dont prink and dost. [booze]
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 1:07:21 PM EDT
Steyr..to answer your question...My own personal belief is that I do not have enough info on the subject at hand to believe or dis-believe in the deity. Therefore, the results from scientists about that would not really effect my personal beliefs. I will continue my life as I have, remaining true to myself and my honour.
Top Top