Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:02pm

Gintonious wrote: »

Where do you go after you die? The same place you were before you were born.

Can you remember where you were before you were born?

Frank Bullitt · 10-12-2014 8:04pm

The other fella wrote: »

Can you remember where you were before you were born?

Thats my point. You simply didin't exist, and at some point you won't exist again.

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:09pm

Gintonious wrote: »

Thats my point. You simply didin't exist, and at some point you won't exist again.

Do you remember being in your mothers womb?

Frank Bullitt · 10-12-2014 8:13pm

The other fella wrote: »

Do you remember being in your mothers womb?

No, do you?

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:16pm

Gintonious wrote: »

No, do you?

No.I cant remember it but that doesnt mean it never happened.

And if while i was in there someone had told me id be moving to an outside world in 9 months time that i had never seen or heard of, i wouldnt have believed them.

Frank Bullitt · 10-12-2014 8:21pm

The other fella wrote: »

No.I cant remember it but that doesnt mean it never happened.

And if while i was in there someone had told me id be moving to an outside world in 9 months time that i had never seen or heard of, i wouldnt have believed them.

Im not sure if you are serious or joking with this.

Being in the womb is a very observable thing, as is birth, I am sure you mother would remember this very clearly. So you may well not remember being in the womb, very few do remember this, but it did occur. But before that, say if you were to ask your parents what you were like when they were very young, they wouldn't be able to answer that, because you didn't exist then.

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:30pm

Gintonious wrote: »

Im not sure if you are serious or joking with this.

Being in the womb is a very observable thing, as is birth, I am sure you mother would remember this very clearly. So you may well not remember being in the womb, very few do remember this, but it did occur. But before that, say if you were to ask your parents what you were like when they were very young, they wouldn't be able to answer that, because you didn't exist then.

Im quite serious.

Just because you cant remember before you were born, doesnt mean you didnt exist.

Same as being in the womb.You personally dont remember it, but it happened.

The whole womb analogy obviously doesnt prove you existed before you born, but it puts a hole in the logic that if you cant remember it, it didnt happen.

tommy2bad · 10-12-2014 8:34pm

The other fella wrote: »

Thank you for explaining, but with respect, i cant believe in that because of the fact that Adam and Eve were not the first people on earth 6,000 years ago like the bible claims.

People have been on the earth for well over 100,000 years.

Oh dear! another biblical literalist! I'm not sure which is worse, biblical literalists who believe it after reading it literaly or biblical literalists who refuse to believe it because they read it literaly.

Frank Bullitt · 10-12-2014 8:39pm

The other fella wrote: »

Im quite serious.

Just because you cant remember before you were born, doesnt mean you didnt exist.

Same as being in the womb.You personally dont remember it, but it happened.

The whole womb analogy obviously doesnt prove you existed before you born, but it puts a hole in the logic that if you cant remember it, it didnt happen.

Well there is a difference of being in the womb before actual birth and conception. So it does mean that before conception, you didn't exist, you weren't in your mothers womb and you were not a human body in its earliest stage of development.

If you have some form of proof or logic to say that there is something to be said for existence before existence then fire away.

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:39pm

tommy2bad wrote: »

Oh dear! another biblical literalist! I'm not sure which is worse, biblical literalists who believe it after reading it literaly or biblical literalists who refuse to believe it because they read it literaly.

So we should take numbers and figures un - literally?

The other fella · 10-12-2014 8:42pm

Gintonious wrote: »

Well there is a difference of being in the womb before actual birth and conception. So it does mean that before conception, you didn't exist, you weren't in your mothers womb and you were not a human body in its earliest stage of development.

If you have some form of proof or logic to say that there is something to be said for existence before existence then fire away.

Your missing my point! I have no proof whatsoever.

Its a simple analogy. Just because you cant remember something doesnt mean it didnt happen.

Its nothing definitive, just something to ponder on.

Frank Bullitt · 10-12-2014 8:50pm

The other fella wrote: »

Your missing my point! I have no proof whatsoever.

Its a simple analogy. Just because you cant remember something doesnt mean it didnt happen.

Its nothing definitive, just something to ponder on.

Well I'm not sure its worth pondering on in relation to the topic.

Evidence is evidence in relation to this, before conception you simply did not exist, there was nothing to even slightly identify you as a being, let alone a person.

But as you said, there is no evidence for this, so for me, there is no point in even thinking about it, as it achieves nothing.

Safehands · 10-12-2014 8:59pm

ABC101 wrote: »

For example... if you visited Hell in 1848... you would not see Hitler or Stalin in there. However if you visited Hell in 2001... yeah you most probably would see them there.

It is unfair in that you criticise them for uttering what they have seen. What method would you have preferred them to use?

I am assuming that the Hell witnessed, contained fire which is a physical phenomenon. Hell, I thought, was supposed to be a spiritual place, not on this Earth. So having a fire burn in a spiritual world scorching spirits which have no sense of feeling is a little illogical, (sorry to use that word) but it is. Then again we see that logic plays no part in such beliefs. It's a bit like our Lady being assumed, body and soul into Heaven. That cannot have happened, obviously!
There is far more evidence for the banshee than there is for these "visions". Please don't misunderstand me ABC, I would love to believe in these things, but my logical mind tells me they can no more be true than Leprechauns.

Safehands · 10-12-2014 9:09pm

Gintonious wrote: »

Well there is a difference of being in the womb before actual birth and conception. So it does mean that before conception, you didn't exist, you weren't in your mothers womb and you were not a human body in its earliest stage of development.

If you have some form of proof or logic to say that there is something to be said for existence before existence then fire away.

Actually, the child in the womb is a brilliant analogy for this life and the possible extra dimensions all around us. They are just millimetres away from this world, but know nothing of it. They go through a traumatic experience to be born and can never go back. Maybe we are the same in relation to the next world. But this is for another place, not this particular thread. Sorry moderators, I couldn't let this talk of the child in the womb and the beginnings of life go without mentioning that. Maybe we should start a new thread about it!

RikuoAmero · 10-12-2014 9:18pm

ABC101 wrote:

Your comment that people who are in Hell now.. can at Judgement day make a special case for a transfer... is not going to happen.

Now...can you back up this claim with evidence? About the only thing I imagine you could point to (that I could examine) would be the bible. Thing is, doubtlessly Gerry T would be able to find bible verses that back up his argument.
So then, I, the outsider, would be sitting outside watching two christians of different minds about their bible arguing back and forth, with neither being able to get the leg up on the other.
Do you understand yet my point of view? Both of you could argue back and forth for all eternity about the bible, each convinced he is right and the other is wrong, but as long as the only piece of evidence that the both of you and myself can examine is the bible, the thing that both of you claims validates his claim and invalidates the other guy's claim...then I cannot discern which, if either of you, actually is telling the truth. At best, only one of you could be correct, but both of you can be wrong.

At the moment ... Hell is a very unpleasant place to be

Really? Have you been there? Have you seen photos or videos? If someone tells me "Afghanistan is a very unpleasant place to be [because of the violence]", he can show me strong evidence to back up his claim.

Hang on, you answered that later on

There are witness statements of various visionaries, saints etc, who have been allowed to visit Hell and Heaven, accompanied by a Angel.

Saint Faustina Kowalska being just one example. It is written in her Diary.

Witness statements...from people centuries ago (I am aware of Kowalska having died in 1938). She has a vision...and that's enough to convince you.
Sorry pal, that doesn't work for me. Anyone can write anything, and in the modern age, we are aware of many things that can influence perception. Need I bring up the fact that there have been many people who have had 'divine' visions that don't jell with christian theology?
Now, all those people you point to may have had genuine divine visions and that was enough to convince them...but since I cannot examine those visions, they cannot be accepted by me as evidence of the divine.

Festus wrote:

And we do know of at least one thing that does last forever for if it didn't it would violate the laws of physics given the universe is a closed system.

You're going to have to show me your work on that, plus how it relates to the topic of this thread. Last I checked, there wasn't a scientific consensus on that.

tommy2bad wrote:

When I watch or read a batman comic or movie, I believe batman is real.

...how do I say this politely? You seem to not have the ability to tell fiction from non-fiction. You're going to have to explain to me that either English isn't your first language and you mean something else entirely, or that you didn't think through what you were writing.

God belongs in a different category of things.

And isn't it just convenient that the very thing we're debating here (existence of God) is defined in such a way as to preclude evidence?

It's why we don't appreciate music for the mathematical precision of it scale

Really? I remember listening to a piece of music that was designed, mathematically, to not be pleasant to listen to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RENk9PK06AQ
(Skip to 7:40 for the actual piece of music)
If you watch the whole video, the guy explains how this ugly piece of music was mathematically designed as such, giving the implication that most other music is enjoyed because of its mathematics.

ABC101 wrote:

The risk of going to Hell for you .... is equally the same for me. Just because I believe... does not mean I will be saved.

As I said before... it is love of God, Faith and Good works which will increase your chances of meeting the standard to get into Heaven.

Then this raises the question of why I should even bother with the belief at all, if it actually doesn't 'guarantee' 'saving'. Also, as I've said before, there are other branches of christianity who disagree with you. Which branch am I supposed to believe? Yours or theirs? Can you back up your arguments with evidence? Can they?

I am not under any obligation to produce any evidence to you...

Yes...you kinda are. This is the atheism/existence of God thread, where these things are debated. In a debate, you're supposed to make a claim...and then bring in evidence, data, facts, reasoning, arguments in support of your claim.
If you refuse to (for whatever reason), then I have to wonder why you bothered joining this thread at all.

Jesus died for the Original Sin of Mankind, i.e. the sin that was caused when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge in the garden of Eden. Each human being born since Adam & Eve is marked with Original Sin on their soul.

Since I have never been presented with sound evidence for the genesis story, then I don't believe that either. You're going to have to do better than that. (Plus, I can write a feckin' paper on the many, MANY ways that none of that makes any kind of sense, at least in terms of convincing someone that the big guy behind it all is a nice dude)

The Bible is a Spiritual book. It is meant to be read in a spiritual manner, it contains a lot of symbolism.

Remember God is a Spiritual being... God's rules of logic are not necessarily the same as a humans!!

Saying that is essentially the same as throwing your hands up in the air and giving up. I won't accept that. Especially since many of the things I have been told about here are about things God is or has done. That means logic and reasoning are involved; he either is/has done them or he isn't/hasn't done them, and we can use logic and reasoning to find out which.

ABC101 · 11-12-2014 1:01am

Safehands wrote: »

I am assuming that the Hell witnessed, contained fire which is a physical phenomenon. Hell, I thought, was supposed to be a spiritual place, not on this Earth. So having a fire burn in a spiritual world scorching spirits which have no sense of feeling is a little illogical, (sorry to use that word) but it is. Then again we see that logic plays no part in such beliefs. It's a bit like our Lady being assumed, body and soul into Heaven. That cannot have happened, obviously!
There is far more evidence for the banshee than there is for these "visions". Please don't misunderstand me ABC, I would love to believe in these things, but my logical mind tells me they can no more be true than Leprechauns.

Well spotted!!

The fire in Hell is a special type of fire, while it looks physically like the fire on Earth. It is able to penetrate the soul and burn it. It is also able to burn human flesh, but without destroying it.

I suppose one way to describe it is like a needle of a vinyl record stuck in a groove. It keeps repeating the same music every 2 seconds etc. So it is with the fire in Hell, it is like the same pain still being inflicted.

But possibly the greatest pain which is experienced, is the total absense of God in Hell. In Hell the soul is completely cut off from God. This causes immense pain, as the soul was created by God, and the soul wants / desires to return to God. But it cannot.

It's a bit like our Lady being assumed, body and soul into Heaven. That cannot have happened, obviously!

Because God is God, nothing is impossible to him. If God desires our Lady to be body and soul in Heaven, then she will be body and soul in heaven.

Remember too... on Judgement Day... your pyhsical body will be returned to life...it will come back to the soul. So your body and soul will be reunited.

So if we know this... i.e. your body and my body will be reunited with our respective souls on Judgement Day... then why is it so impossible to believe that our Lady (who never had Original Sin on her soul) not be in Heaven right now... or for the last 2000 years?

Now come on.... what do you mean there is more evidence for the banshee???? There is no organised religion like R.C. which believes in the Banshee!!!! Probably a figure of speach used on your part... but seriously???? Com'on man...... you are better than that!!

Safehands · 11-12-2014 9:25am

ABC101 wrote: »

Well spotted!! The fire in Hell is a special type of fire, while it looks physically like the fire on Earth. It is able to penetrate the soul and burn it. It is also able to burn human flesh, but without destroying it.

I suppose one way to describe it is like a needle of a vinyl record stuck in a groove. It keeps repeating the same music every 2 seconds etc. So it is with the fire in Hell, it is like the same pain still being inflicted.

But possibly the greatest pain which is experienced, is the total absense of God in Hell. In Hell the soul is completely cut off from God. This causes immense pain, as the soul was created by God, and the soul wants / desires to return to God. But it cannot.

All that analysis from a couple of viionaries who had a brief look at Hell? As a matter of interest where did they give you this information about the type of fire in Hell?

ABC101 · 11-12-2014 11:57am

Safehands wrote: »

All that analysis from a couple of viionaries who had a brief look at Hell? As a matter of interest where did they give you this information about the type of fire in Hell?

Well they did not give it to me personally.

Many visionaries have been allowed to see Hell. The visionaries in Medjugorge being just recently. And in fact they are still occuring, our Lady visits the visionaries, some daily, others yearly etc.

Think about it..... if the fire is supposed to burn / cause pain / torment etc etc... and there are peoples SOULS in Hell. Then it must be a fire which is able to burn / torment the soul. Otherwise it would not work.

Harika · 11-12-2014 12:11pm

ABC101 wrote: »

Well they did not give it to me personally.

Many visionaries have been allowed to see Hell. The visionaries in Medjugorge being just recently. And in fact they are still occuring, our Lady visits the visionaries, some daily, others yearly etc.

Think about it..... if the fire is supposed to burn / cause pain / torment etc etc... and there are peoples SOULS in Hell. Then it must be a fire which is able to burn / torment the soul. Otherwise it would not work.

Yeah the visionaries of Medjugorje that promised to come on specific days at a specific time again and at this day and time they did not show up. When the crowd moved away it suddenly appeared to only one person. Yes sounds totally legit. In Austria there is a TV Series where a small village creates such a vision to attract tourists.
And finally you use logic for the point why hellfire will inflict pain to the soul while every other logical fallacy is blocked by pointing that religion is spiritual so god does not need to follow our logic.

Festus · 11-12-2014 12:26pm

Originally Posted by Festus
And we do know of at least one thing that does last forever for if it didn't it would violate the laws of physics given the universe is a closed system.

Harika wrote: »

That sounds interesting, what is it? Dark Matter, Dark Energy or the Universe itself?

You're going to have to show me your work on that, plus how it relates to the topic of this thread. Last I checked, there wasn't a scientific consensus on that.

That's two of you who do not know the laws of physics.

I've bolded the clues and here's another one. It's one of the laws of thermodynamics.

Harika · 11-12-2014 12:32pm

Festus wrote: »

I've bolded the clues and here's another one. It's one of the laws of thermodynamics.

Weren't you one of the guys who claimed to have a list of millions of scientists that support creation over evolution but failed so far to provide the list?

ABC101 · 11-12-2014 1:19pm

Harika wrote: »

Yeah the visionaries of Medjugorje that promised to come on specific days at a specific time again and at this day and time they did not show up. When the crowd moved away it suddenly appeared to only one person. Yes sounds totally legit. In Austria there is a TV Series where a small village creates such a vision to attract tourists.
And finally you use logic for the point why hellfire will inflict pain to the soul while every other logical fallacy is blocked by pointing that religion is spiritual so god does not need to follow our logic.

Harika,.... there is no need to be condescending!!

If you don't want to believe... fair enough.... its your life etc etc.

On another point...

I don't know why Athiests are attracted to a Christianity Forum... it is like athiests are unhappy in their lack of belief?

For example... I don't practice / believe in various other religions... and because of that.... I am not blogging on a forum dedicated to those other religions.

I don't play golf, I don't practise golf... and guess what... I am not online blogging on a golf thread! Simiarly... there are lots of other things I have no interest in...and I do not spend time blogging on those forums. I am sure it is the same with you... but why do you think you are here?

If athiests don't practise any form of belief, why would some of them be here blogging?

No.. I am not being sarcastic.... I am being genuine with you. Could you answer me this question... just give me your opinion! I don't care if your opinion is right or wrong... I'm just curious! So shoot!!

Why are their athiests debating on this thread, if they do not believe in a afterlife?

Festus · 11-12-2014 1:19pm

Harika wrote: »

Weren't you one of the guys who claimed to have a list of millions of scientists that support creation over evolution but failed so far to provide the list?

Nope. You are misrepresenting what I said. Setting up another strawman perhaps???

What I said was there are a number of scientists many with PhDs in scientific fields who are Christians and who can see the evidence for God in science.
Many post on the internet as apologists on various websites and for some there are YouTube postings.

I am not going to post a list here because there are few, if any, non-Christians here who are genuinely interested in finding God or actually try to explore faith in a dispassionate manner, open and objective manner. and for those few any genuine Christian posting runs the risk of falling foul of one of Dawkins' many bigoted fans.

Nor did I suggest that any of the scientists who believe in God support creation over evolution. There probably are some but I am not aware of them as the ones I read support evolution as far as we understand it, and by that I mean they support evolution where there is scientific evidence for it and leave the theoretical bits as theory.

If you use Google you can even find atheist scientists, many working in the field of evolutionary biology, who are coming to the conclusion that the theory of evolution may not be the answer to the origin of life for the simple reason that for them the science no longer adds up. Some gave up being atheists because of this, skipped agnosticism and went straight to Christianity.

I have also said, and reiterated, that the best way to learn is to do your own research. It would seem that for some atheists Google is their enemy as there is a risk you may discover something that might actually get you thinking.

Harika · 11-12-2014 1:41pm

ABC101 wrote: »

I don't know why Athiests are attracted to a Christianity Forum... it is like athiests are unhappy in their lack of belief?

For example... I don't practice / believe in various other religions... and because of that.... I am not blogging on a forum dedicated to those other religions.

I don't play golf, I don't practise golf... and guess what... I am not online blogging on a golf thread! Simiarly... there are lots of other things I have no interest in...and I do not spend time blogging on those forums. I am sure it is the same with you... but why do you think you are here?

If athiests don't practise any form of belief, why would some of them be here blogging?

No.. I am not being sarcastic.... I am being genuine with you. Could you answer me this question... just give me your opinion! I don't care if your opinion is right or wrong... I'm just curious! So shoot!!

Why are their athiests debating on this thread, if they do not believe in a afterlife?

I would be super happy not to be posting in this forum, but you will realize that I am not posting in golf, Buddhism or spiritualism either. But why am I posting here? Quite simple, because christian policies are forced on people and religion imposes it's standard on others, what would be fine if only Christians would be affected by it. But my life and the life of others are influenced in a negative way by those policies and the only reason given to justify them is: "God said so" That's why I am posting here.
I wanna make the world a better place, even for after my time, and as long religion stands in the way of happiness of other people or tries to influence the life of non-believers I will post here. I am aware that I won't convert anyone here, but people in doubt might get the help or information.
As said before I am happy with whatever religion you choose, if one at all, you have the freedom to do so, but as famously said "One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins".

Harika · 11-12-2014 1:49pm

Festus wrote: »

<-snip->
If you use Google you can even find atheist scientists, many working in the field of evolutionary biology, who are coming to the conclusion that the theory of evolution may not be the answer to the origin of life for the simple reason that for them the science no longer adds up. Some gave up being atheists because of this, skipped agnosticism and went straight to Christianity.

I have also said, and reiterated, that the best way to learn is to do your own research. It would seem that for some atheists Google is their enemy as there is a risk you may discover something that might actually get you thinking.

I am aware of some anecdotes were people were brought from Christians to atheists and back to Christians or others from Christians to atheists and then to Buddhists. But what does this proof? People are looking for answers, cool! There is still the overwhelming majority of people in the scientific fields with PhD that are non believers.
And for finding the right answers "The universe", "dark matter" and "dark energy" are three perfectly legit answers, use google.

ABC101 · 11-12-2014 2:09pm

Harika wrote: »

I would be super happy not to be posting in this forum, but you will realize that I am not posting in golf, Buddhism or spiritualism either. But why am I posting here? Quite simple, because christian policies are forced on people and religion imposes it's standard on others, what would be fine if only Christians would be affected by it. But my life and the life of others are influenced in a negative way by those policies and the only reason given to justify them is: "God said so" That's why I am posting here.
I wanna make the world a better place, even for after my time, and as long religion stands in the way of happiness of other people or tries to influence the life of non-believers I will post here. I am aware that I won't convert anyone here, but people in doubt might get the help or information.
As said before I am happy with whatever religion you choose, if one at all, you have the freedom to do so, but as famously said "One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins".

If it was not for religious orders in Ireland.... this country would be still in the dark ages.

I notice that a bunch of Athiests did not come along and set up a educational system back in 1802.

The other fella · 11-12-2014 2:19pm

[QUOTE=ABC101;93400605 If it was not for religious orders in Ireland.... this country would be still in the dark ages.

I notice that a bunch of Athiests did not come along and set up a educational system back in 1802.[/QUOTE]

Please stop.

PopePalpatine · 11-12-2014 2:33pm

ABC101 wrote: »

If it was not for religious orders in Ireland.... this country would be still in the dark ages.

I notice that a bunch of Athiests did not come along and set up a educational system back in 1802.

Nope, that was the British state.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Catherine_McAuley founded the Sisters of Mercy in 1831. By which point Westminster had established a Free National school system.

Given the recent revelations about the Christian Brother's I am amazed you are using them to demonstrate how much the State owes the religious orders....

I see your wikipedia and raise you by actual Sources.

http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/exhibition/dublin/education.html

Convent Schools and National Education in Nineteenth-Century Ireland: Negotiating a Place within a Non-Denominational System

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ763442&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ763442

Any chance you could address this in light of your statement that we 'owe' them for 250 (later reduced to 200) years of work on our behalf:

You might also be good enough to answer my question as to what relevance events in previous incarnations of the State has to do with policy in the current incarnation.

ABC101 · 11-12-2014 2:40pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Nope, that was the British state.

The Christian Brothers, as they are commonly known, chiefly work for the evangelisation and education of youth, but are involved in many ministries, especially with the poor. Their first school was opened in Waterford, Ireland, in 1802

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_of_Christian_Brothers

Harika · 11-12-2014 2:43pm

ABC101 wrote: »

The Christian Brothers, as they are commonly known, chiefly work for the evangelisation and education of youth, but are involved in many ministries, especially with the poor. Their first school was opened in Waterford, Ireland, in 1802

Anyway why does this justify the influence today?

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

Comments