Comment on this ReligiFake
THIS MAY BE TRUEBut the people who made up "god" sure as hell do, their first was making up a deity ...Creator: Budog
|
 Comment using Facebook
|
ipaprime - May 4, 2012, 10:05 pm, #152| can you support your statement about god being "made up" with any facts facts |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 5:09 am, #155 
| The jersey shore. Clearly there is no god. Fin. |
Budog - May 6, 2012, 7:16 pm, #249| Can you prove with verifiable and repeatable scientific truths that I am wrong? Just like evolution, it is scientific fact not a theory... |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 9:16 pm, #257| evolution is still only a theory. and as i have said in other posts science can neither prove nor disprove god. so lets debate it! |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:50 am, #315| Evolution is fact? Point to a single recorded instance of matter that was previously inanimate springing to life and self replicating. |
crankyhead - May 8, 2012, 10:16 am, #318| Evolution is not the study of inanimate objects springing to life, it is the study of adaptation among entities that are already living. |
LooseCannon80 - May 9, 2012, 5:05 am, #343| That's my point. Evolution theory doesn't account for creation. So why is it constantly used to argue against creation theory or intelligent design? |
crankyhead - May 9, 2012, 3:56 pm, #349| It's probably because creation theory does not account for anything existing more than 6000 years ago, and completely ignores the fossil record, verifiable truths and scientific facts. |
crankyhead - May 9, 2012, 3:58 pm, #350| But I'm pretty sure that it's the creationists who have bigger issues with evolutionists, than the other way around. That's just my personal perspective though, personally, I find creationists adorable, like "kids who still believe in Santa" adorable. =) |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:28 am, #359| You are using the most extreme and obviously wrong example of creation theory and to support your position. Basically saying that because that view is wrong, your position has to be correct. As if the origin of life is simply a process of elimination... |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:29 am, #360| among the available theories while excluding all but the most extreme opposing views from contention. |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:35 am, #361| I am not interested in what you are "pretty sure" of or your "personal perspective." I am interested in these fossil records that show nothing more that some species were here before and are not here now. |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:37 am, #362| That may have been ground breaking science a few hundred years ago, but hasn't offered much to the debate since then. Also, that our chemical make-up is 98% the same as primates is not outstanding. We are made up of the most common elements... |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:41 am, #363| in the universe. We are chemically similar to dirt as well. In fact, our bodies decay into dust and ash. Just because a few people present the most literal biblical meanings does not mean that all theists do. |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:50 am, #364| The fact that modern man still has such a poor understanding of how the universe works makes it even more believable that early man had an even poorer understanding. That God told Adam he was created from dust is scientifically true... |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:52 am, #365| That God did not explain to Adam the entire process, a process that we don't fully understand today, does not make it less true that we are created from dust and ash and will return to dust and ash. That humans understood this over 6000 years ago... |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:54 am, #366| IS utterly amazing to me. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 1:24 pm, #160| proof god has a sense of humor. not finished |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 9:30 am, #157| If you claim an intangible, invisible, unquantifiable, and immeasurable being exists, the burden of proof is on you, not those who disagree. Atheists don't need to disprove that which has never once been proven in the first place. |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 10:19 am, #158
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 1:29 pm, #162| prove infinity, prove evolution. both held to exist, neither proven. your turn to prove what truly exists |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 9:19 pm, #258| this is why i love trying to get atheists to prove their position. its becausethey seem to be unwilling to give their reasons why they dont believe in god and say its the other person responsablity to prove god exisits |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 9:20 pm, #259| it is like a child going i'm right and you are wrong so there |
Preacher Man - May 6, 2012, 9:50 pm, #261| Atheists do not believe in God because there is no hard evidence for such an entity. If you point to an empty space and say something is actually there, it's not up to us to prove you wrong. It's a question of quantifiable, measurable evidence. |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:04 pm, #262| yet there is no hard evidence that god does not exist. which is my point in all discussions with atheists. |
Preacher Man - May 6, 2012, 11:09 pm, #263| Fine. I say there is a Giant Purple Snorklewacker hiding in your closet. Show me hard evidence there is no Giant Purple Snorklewacker in your closet. |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:11 pm, #264
Preacher Man - May 6, 2012, 11:14 pm, #265| This could go on forever. OK, prove there is no Giant Purple Snorklewacker in your bathroom. |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:16 pm, #266| what is its description and i will let you know one way or the other |
Preacher Man - May 6, 2012, 11:33 pm, #267| Forget the Snorklewacker. My point is you are claiming the existence of a being that cannot be detected with the five senses, or any machine ever built, yet saying it exists because we can’t prove otherwise. There's no logic to that argument. |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:35 pm, #268| and there is no logic to the reverse of the argument |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:36 pm, #269| oh and i never claimed god exists |
Preacher Man - May 6, 2012, 11:43 pm, #270| So you can’t prove your argument, because there is not one shred of quantifiable evidence. And because of that lack of proof, I can’t disprove it. Science meets Philosophy. The Unstoppable Force meets the Immovable Object. |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:45 pm, #271| no we encounter a challenge that must be overcome if there is to be true intelecual advancement |
ipaprime - May 6, 2012, 11:51 pm, #272| piece of advice go to the forum and look me up on the intro thread and you will get an idea of where i am coming from and going to. |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 12:10 am, #273
Preacher Man - May 7, 2012, 12:16 am, #274| You're arguing just to argue. I get enough of that from my kids. |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 12:20 am, #275| no i argue to find the truth |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 12:28 am, #276| for i have found the name of god and it is TRUTH. as we can not know its completeness we must content ourselves with finding it in our own lives and in our own ways |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 12:41 am, #277| for i have found the name of god and it is TRUTH.and as we will never know it completly we must be content to find it in our own lives and in our own way. |
falloutghoul - May 8, 2012, 1:11 pm, #321| (I'm going to kick myself for getting into this.) So, according to this (not saying I'm right, just my interpretation), "God" is a concept of personal happiness and contentment, meaning that "Finding God" is actually finding personal happiness in oneself. |
ipaprime - May 8, 2012, 1:21 pm, #322| for a start. but it can be as much as any wants it to be for them. tho that is greatly simplified |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 1:38 pm, #163| Infinity: Start counting up from zero, (1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) let us know when you get to the end. Evolution: the fossil record. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 1:44 pm, #164| crank we had that one before and as i said then. it has to many holes in it to be definitive |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 1:47 pm, #166| is space infinite. hmm why dont you find 1 edge of the universe, start walking and call me when you reach the other side |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:06 pm, #168| If you find an edge, space isn't infinite. We haven't found an edge or boundry, ergo, by our observations, space is infinite. If you want to challenge that notion, YOU have to provide proof of a boundry. |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 2:06 pm, #169| Well that's your opinion ipa, and you're entitled to it. There are far less holes in the evolution theory than there are in the creationist theory though, just sayin. |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:17 am, #309| Try not to think of the universe as having an edge, but rather a beginning and an end. Time and space being relative, we believe the that the universe has expanded as it has gotten older. 13.7 billion years ago the universe began with the big bang... |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:19 am, #310| So far, anything that has a beginning has had an end. Will the universe end? I think that is the proper appliance of infinity here. |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:31 am, #311| 13.7 billion years ago all of time and space was compressed into an infinitely small point which for some reason exploded. How did it get there, and what caused it to explode? I don't know, but I can say that time does not exist with out space... |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:34 am, #312| and space does not exist with out time. The laws of physics and relativity demand that the answer to those questions be a force that exists beyond time and space, that there was no time until it created the space. |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:38 am, #313| I always find it amusing that the same people who claim to know these things and be able to prove them also claim that a being that transcends time and space to create the universe does not exist because there is no proof... |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:44 am, #314| I could call that a man made number system to quantify a made up concept. Try this one. Start at 1/2 count by half, (1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16...)and let me know when you reach zero. Infinity can be large or small and move in many directions. |
crankyhead - May 8, 2012, 10:20 am, #319| You could call time a man made number system as well. |
ipaprime - May 9, 2012, 12:43 am, #341| unless you take into consideration dr. hawking's contiuous creation theory |
LooseCannon80 - May 9, 2012, 5:11 am, #344| You could, if you have a very poor understanding of the concept. Time is the measure of distance between any two events. We use numbers to quantify it, but time exists regardless of how we choose to measure it. |
crankyhead - May 9, 2012, 4:08 pm, #351| I'm paraphrasing Einstein, sir. I'm not of the opinion that ol' Albert had a 'very poor understanding of the concept'. He argued that 'time' is not a universal constant in general relativity theory. http://www.ws5.com/spacetime/ |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:13 am, #356| Einstein argued that an event could be measured at different times relative to the position and velocity of the observer. He never argued that the event actually occurred at different times. |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:15 am, #357| Time is still the measure between two events. The fact that time is relative to the observer does not change the fact that time is also relative to the events. |
LooseCannon80 - May 10, 2012, 5:16 am, #358| Like I said, time exists regardless of how you choose to measure it. |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 1:19 pm, #159
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 1:45 pm, #165| and to all atheists you can thank religion for your having civillazation |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:03 pm, #167| Which God helped primitive humans harness fire? Which God told mankind how to herd animals and plant crops? We give deified explanations for these things after the fact. Religion may be part of civilization, but we'd have gotten here without it. |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 2:08 pm, #171| ipa, man can survive without god, but god cannot survive without man. So really, god should be thanking civilization, not the other way around. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:07 pm, #170| religon gave us cities and nations, religon gave us writing and preserved knowlege during time of war and disaster,and religon set forth the basics of math and astronomy. and who knows how many other of the sciences |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 2:09 pm, #172| religion created cities and nations, writing, math and astronomy? Care to prove any of those claims? |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:15 pm, #175| earliest known civilazaton sumaria, credited with the creation of cuniform writing, said civ was a theocarcy. cities grew up around temples. basics of math used by theocratic govs to do cencus and record taxes. for more proof read a history book |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 2:38 pm, #188| I disagree about cities growing around temples. Cities are founded because of the proximity and availability of water. Temples arrived long after cities did. As far as theocratic govs inventing math to do taxes... |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 2:40 pm, #192| ... I'd like to point out that in order to begin collecting taxes, your population already has to be using a currency, and if they're already using a currency, then they're also already using math. So, I don't see how you're making that correlation. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 6:39 pm, #197| craky your mistake is that taxes then were primarily goods like grain, cattle and the like, not currancy |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 7:31 pm, #201| Before theree was paper money, the currencies of the time, were toe goods produced, or, if you didn't have any goods, you could pay your taxes with your labor. But the point remains, if you are collecting taxes, you need to be able to account for how... |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 7:33 pm, #202| much grain, or how many cows, etc... a person had given. Therefore, before people were paying taxes, people were already using mathematics. |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 7:34 pm, #203| So your a**ertion that mathematics was created by a religious institution for the purposes of collecting taxes, is erroneous. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 7:48 pm, #205| again i refer you to sumaria, it is ther that the realazation came that you did not have to make note of every item independantly, but that you could use variouse symbols to indicate different amount. i.e numbers |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 7:51 pm, #206| also vedic scholors came up with the theary and rational for useing the symbol 0, therein simplifying the matmatical fomulas |
crankyhead - May 5, 2012, 7:53 pm, #208| I'm not suggesting that ancient civilizations were doing calculus, I'm saying they were doing simple math, long before they were doing taxes. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 8:00 pm, #213| true, but it was only basic,it was religon that advanced it and made it more useful to everyone |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 7:52 pm, #207| and fialy it was islamic scholors who came up with algebra and there by began the true math renesance |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:38 pm, #189| You're saying without belief in Deity, we'd never have made those advancements. I disagree. Civilization rose as we became more intelligent and organized. A codified belief in Deity is the form that organization took. |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:39 pm, #190| In other words, religion did not form civilization, civilization formed religion. |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:09 pm, #173 | Personally I think we'd have a much better civilization without religion. Religion has given us hatred and pointless wars. It has held us back for centuries. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:16 pm, #177| more wars have come to be because of politics and greed than religon |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:20 pm, #179 | I disagree. most Modern wars may have been about politics. But historically they have been about religion. I'm glad you're enjoying yourself. Please visit the introduction thread in the forum and consider making some pro-religion posters. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:23 pm, #181| the wars of egypt were for mony and power not to convert. rome fought for land and power not the gods. there have been very few wars that have been purley religous, tho i must admit many have used religon in the justifications |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:25 pm, #182 | That's a fair point. I'd never looked at it quite that way. |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:12 pm, #174| An opposable thumb and the ability to adapt to adverse circumstances gave us the knowledge to create all these things, not a belief in an invisible, unprovable being who lives in the clouds. Religion makes up myths after the fact to take credit for them. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:20 pm, #180| the basis of all religons has allways been the wise one, the keeper ok knowledge and wisdom. as humanity has grown so has our knowledge. and as any one with a passing knowledge of history can tell for the longest time it was the religous that did all the |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:26 pm, #183| research and inovation. the basic work on genetics was done by a catholic monk. did you know that |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:28 pm, #184 | Are you saying that it was his religion that inspired him to research genetics? To what end? |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 6:38 pm, #196| he was trying to make better plats to grow food with |
LooseCannon80 - May 8, 2012, 1:10 am, #308| After eating from the tree of knowledge, man would seek the tree of life in order to gain immortality and become gods themselves... |
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:32 pm, #187| Yes, I know that. This was during the time when all education and information was controlled by the Church. Nobody did anything without Church approval. I also note that modern advancements in genetics are being opposed by religion. |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:39 pm, #191 | Makes me think that when they didn't find what they were looking for they just started calling it heresy. That definitely seems to be a theme in Catholicism. |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:15 pm, #176 | Please don't get frustrated because we disagree with you ipa. This is exactly the kind of debate I was hoping for when I founded this site. Your opinions are valid and wanted. |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:17 pm, #178| not frustrated. am having a blast |
ipaprime - May 5, 2012, 2:28 pm, #185| well time for work will get back later to see if anything needs a reply. its been fun and thanks for the disscussion |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:30 pm, #186
Preacher Man - May 5, 2012, 2:41 pm, #193| Have a good day at work. Always enjoy debating with someone like you; we disagree, but you actually make good, challenging points rather than descending to insult. Very refreshing, this being the Internet. :) |
mooooooooooooooooooo - May 5, 2012, 2:45 pm, #194 | I was thinking the same thing. I'd also like to invite you to visit the forum as well preacher man. You make some excellent points. |
Budog - May 6, 2012, 7:14 pm, #248| Wow, this one stirred up some lively debate. Don't worry I'll have more for you in the future... |
Hawamleh - May 7, 2012, 10:15 am, #285 | you're all looking at it wrong, you can't diminish spirituality into sensuality, god is the precepts that guide your life, not a solid being, that is why he is all mighty, because nothing is impossible to believe in.
food for thought. |
crankyhead - May 7, 2012, 11:03 am, #287| IPA, two things: 1) evolution isn't a theory, it's a scientific theory. Until you understand the difference, there is no debate to be had with you. 2) Can you point to some evidence that proves that 'truth' exists? |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 1:20 pm, #288
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 1:22 pm, #289| cranny truth comes in 2 flavors, hard, cold, fact. and soft, mushy temporay interpretations |
ipaprime - May 7, 2012, 1:47 pm, #290| and i am sorry if i offend you with my termanology. but i go with what i learned in school long ago, that in science there are proven facts and there are theories. i will try to do some research in to the new distinctions |
crankyhead - May 7, 2012, 2:17 pm, #291| I'm not offended at all IPA. I'm only trying to help steer you to the truth, and only because you're seeking it. =) |
crankyhead - May 16, 2012, 10:02 am, #460| Yeah IPAPRIME, you did say you would look into it, almost a week ago. Right here, comment #290. |
crankyhead - May 16, 2012, 10:02 am, #461| Yeah IPAPRIME, you did say you would look into it, almost a week ago. Right here, comment #290. |
Budog - May 8, 2012, 12:46 am, #306| Never do battle with an unarmed man... |
falloutghoul - May 8, 2012, 1:23 pm, #323| Because how could you fight someone with no arms? |
ipaprime - May 8, 2012, 11:20 pm, #335
Budog - May 9, 2012, 12:55 am, #342| Tis just a flesh wound !!! |
Budog - May 10, 2012, 6:52 am, #367| Let's keep flogging that dead horse boys. I mean it worked for that Nazarene they flogged the **** out of... |
