Athiests are soo BLIND, IGNORANT, DUMB AND STUPID

[Spartacus Sully]

this is my cousin??

im pretty sure monkeys arnt apes though im not positive

[baCCaT]

this is my cousin??

thats an ape

Humans and chimps can have 95% or >98.5% similar DNA depending on which nucleotides are counted and which are excluded. Modern humans can have a single recent ancestor <10,000 or 100,000-200,000 years ago depending on whether a relationship with chimpanzees is assumed and which types of mutations are considered.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/DNA.asp

[Spartacus Sully]

thats an ape

Humans and chimps can have 95% or >98.5% similar DNA depending on which nucleotides are counted and which are excluded. Modern humans can have a single recent ancestor <10,000 or 100,000-200,000 years ago depending on whether a relationship with chimpanzees is assumed and which types of mutations are considered.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i1/DNA.asp

thats a monkey as the picture is titled monkey and monkeys have tails as apes do not. so that is not an ape and has nothing to do with humans where as chimps do not have tails and are part of the the ape family.

this is your cousin

[MindBat]

My cousin's an OG







My hot cousin

[The Noose]

But lets define what one of the most important purposes of a God is. Its to explain point of origin.

I was talking to a professor a while ago, according to the Big Bang theory the universe exploded into being from, not nothing, but a little particle, infinitely small, that was a universe in and of itself, just more condensed. Inter-dimensional hyperbole? I do not know.

So.. I asked him, well where did the "particle" come from? and he says, It had always been there.

This introduces your concept of infinity quite nicely.

Now lets define another aspect of God: the unfathomable. Man cannot wrap his mind around what God's awareness would even be like, much the same as man cannot wrap their mind around the concept of infinity. You cannot possibly imagine how time never had a beginning.. how its just always been. If you even tried to imagine all the possibilities derived from such a scenario, your primitive brain (not an insult, all of our brains are too primitive too comprehend the greater mysteries) would overload from too much input.

So.. you just put it all in one word: Infinity. Much the same as religious types put theirs in all one word: God.

I think the usual definition of God isnt somthing which is merely infinite and unfathomable.
God is seen as an all powerful creator. If the singularity had no origin then it eliminates the need for a creator.

And to see the unfathomable as God doesnt make sense to me.
U cant believe in somthing which u cant fathom. It is by its very definition beyond our imaginations and therefore doesnt explain or define God at all.

Interesting points..

To me, science basically depersonalized God, but all the awesome and infinite power is still there, if you go back far enough, or just pause to look around for once, or look up at the night sky.

I've heard a couple of arguments about why God lets people suffer. One is that he's left, that we broke his heart or whatever, and so has left us to our own devices. The other is that life is merely an eyeblink compared to the eternity our souls will endure. That all our suffering is basically meaningless in the grand scheme.

I tend to believe the second one, though it is of course oversimplified.. Who can really know why, anyway? Eventually you just gotta choose a belief and stick with it. Nothing is certain if you seek only what you can touch and see, because you will always be second guessing it. Whereas, if you just choose to believe, that is stronger.

What if the believe is false? Or does that even matter?
I find most religious people dont ever discuss the existence of God, as it is ironically irrelevant to their faith. Their belief is all that matters to them. It helps them in their daily lives, so whats the point of analyzing whether its true or not?

To me human suffering and the chaos and violence of the universe are simply understood without evoking a God.
It all makes perfect sense without God.

Yet the feelings of loneliness, helplessness and our mortality cause us to project our desire for immortality, companionship, justice etc into the cosmos and create a God.

Only then is human suffering a philosophical problem. With nature there is no need to ask "why?".
It is more practical to ask "how?"

[Syf]

I think the usual definition of God isnt somthing which is merely infinite and unfathomable.
God is seen as an all powerful creator. If the singularity had no origin then it eliminates the need for a creator.

And to see the unfathomable as God doesnt make sense to me.
U cant believe in somthing which u cant fathom. It is by its very definition beyond our imaginations and therefore doesnt explain or define God at all.

"merely infinite and unfathomable" is a contradiction in terms. Infinity is everything. It includes all possibilities and scenarios. How you can use the word mere before it is beyond me.

As for unfathomable. Well think about. Our definition of God is surely a simplification. Remember, just one facet of God's domain, knowing all of our thoughts, motivations, and trials and tribulations at the same time, is staggering to even imagine. I have trouble enough with my own thoughts thank you very much, let alone billions, and trillions (and ultimately probably unnumbered) of different lives spanned across the universe. That my friend, is unfathomable. I can't define it, nor understand it. I can only loosely describe it, in a very flawed way. Then you have to think about the thought required for the infinite vast reaches of creation itself. How you cannot view this as unfathomable is beyond me as well.

And, what I meant about that particular definition of God, is that he's always existed. Similar to infinity. No existing point of origin for either.

What if the believe is false? Or does that even matter?
I find most religious people dont ever discuss the existence of God, as it is ironically irrelevant to their faith. Their belief is all that matters to them. It helps them in their daily lives, so whats the point of analyzing whether its true or not?

To me human suffering and the chaos and violence of the universe are simply understood without evoking a God.
It all makes perfect sense without God.

Yet the feelings of loneliness, helplessness and our mortality cause us to project our desire for immortality, companionship, justice etc into the cosmos and create a God.

Only then is human suffering a philosophical problem. With nature there is no need to ask "why?".
It is more practical to ask "how?"

I don't mean to challenge your foundation of life, but I simply disagree. To me, the world makes no sense at all without God. But thats neither here nor there.

Belief to me is important. Because, who's to say there is only one answer? Hasn't nature and math proven there is often more than one way to reach the same solution? I have a feeling that the universe's nature is thus. A paradox. So, if you lock yourself down with only seeking the ONE true answer, unequivocally, to me, that is a paralyzing enterprise.

The chinese have ways of describing the unfathomable as well, in their training. Move without moving. See without seeing.. Know without knowing. Your average Westerner will say that is just a bunch of gibberish, but the more wise see that it shows a different layer than those who are stuck in viewing the world so linearly.

[The Noose]

"merely infinite and unfathomable" is a contradiction in terms. Infinity is everything. It includes all possibilities and scenarios. How you can use the word mere before it is beyond me.

As for unfathomable. Well think about. Our definition of God is surely a simplification. Remember, just one facet of God's domain, knowing all of our thoughts, motivations, and trials and tribulations at the same time, is staggering to even imagine. I have trouble enough with my own thoughts thank you very much, let alone billions, and trillions (and ultimately probably unnumbered) of different lives spanned across the universe. That my friend, is unfathomable. I can't define it, nor understand it. I can only loosely describe it, in a very flawed way. Then you have to think about the thought required for the infinite vast reaches of creation itself. How you cannot view this as unfathomable is beyond me as well.

And, what I meant about that particular definition of God, is that he's always existed. Similar to infinity. No existing point of origin for either.

My point was defining God as infinite and unfathomable seems pointless. It is almost an abstract construct. Something which explains nothing and is based on very little.
To then project the notion of omnipotence and omnipresence onto this hypothetical being seems to only make it more fantastical and diluted as a belief.
God is all things yet nowhere, undetectable yet all powerful, all knowing yet not known, beyond reality, outside of space and time, yet the cause of all nature etc etc.....Gods definition seems a patchwork of things we cannot grasp. And to me thats a pointless exercise in personifying the physical universe.

I don't mean to challenge your foundation of life, but I simply disagree. To me, the world makes no sense at all without God. But thats neither here nor there.

Belief to me is important. Because, who's to say there is only one answer? Hasn't nature and math proven there is often more than one way to reach the same solution? I have a feeling that the universe's nature is thus. A paradox. So, if you lock yourself down with only seeking the ONE true answer, unequivocally, to me, that is a paralyzing enterprise.

The chinese have ways of describing the unfathomable as well, in their training. Move without moving. See without seeing.. Know without knowing. Your average Westerner will say that is just a bunch of gibberish, but the more wise see that it shows a different layer than those who are stuck in viewing the world so linearly.

Im not sure if i have a foundation of life.
But i certainly dont believe there is one truth or one answer. I understand people can see the same thing from different angles. I just dont agree that there is enough for a solid belief in a God.
Like i said, i understand how effective faith can be and how people achieve it without delving into debates about gods existence.
Ive found that often people with the most sturdy faith are those which dont really examine it.
Like a scientist once said, that to quantify a religious experience is to obliterate it.

[Mares]

The theory of god is meant to explain everything but so far for like 100,000 years since its idea was possibly founded or concieved "IT HAS EXPLAINED NOTHING".

[*God*]

Fine points shen and witch king, you have defended your points well.
It is a shame that my papa is not here to join your little debate, for he would have slain your pagan arguments, discredit your manmade theories, and let you see the light with his copy-paste doctrines, assuring pwnage of epic proportions!!!

But alas, it will not happen as he does not understand english.


Allow me to post queries. In rewinding the big bang into the point of which there is the singularity from whence it all came from, how do the theorists describe what came before the singularity, when in that singularity, the known laws of physics are not in play, with most forces not having decoupled yet?

Another query: If the current evidence of expansion of the universe points to a freeze-death and not a crunch, is it safe to say that this universe will not give birth to another singularity seen at the start of the big bang?

I also read in a book that Hawking also suggested that there might have not been a big bang at all, and we may be looking at this in the wrong way. What of this theory? was it a simple suggestion? did he abandon it or did he go on to develop it?

Pardon my lack of information, my papa forbids me to read any such material.

[Vladimir303]

I don't mean to challenge your foundation of life, but I simply disagree. To me, the world makes no sense at all without God. But thats neither here nor there.

I'd respect guys like yours opinion or better yet faith, more if you guys believed in god without believing in afterlife.

that self-centered, trying to make yourself seem more important than you really are ideology, that you get to live beyond the 60+ somewhat years here on earth, while conveniently telling yourself that the weaker, less intelligent animals on this planet are just here for our amusement and as food...with no souls.

It's ok if you believe there is a god, a creator and that it couldn't be that from nothing came something...just forget about internal life. You're not that imporant, this planet in the grand scheme of things couldn't be that imporant in the Universe. But because we as a race haven't encountered any aliens from another galaxy, we've made it so we have our own little heaven after earth. Where do the other possible life forms beyond earth fit into religious peoples world of afterlife?