theyoungdem vs Cnd
Not Politics, Just God
theyoungdem said 06/15, 12:04 PM
Firstly I'd like to say I'm not an athiest, but just confused on what the basis is of people believing in God. Are there truly any logical reasons proving the existence of a God? Did anyone realize that most miracles took place a long time ago, when advances in science were little therefore people were unable to explain the cause of miracles?
Did anyone realize that the story of Adam and Eve does not fit at all with Evolution or Natural selection. Dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible. There is no proof of anything really. People believe the black death was a punishment from God, now that we know more, we realize it was actually caused by diseases carried on the fleas of rats.
The point is what proof is there of a God? A God that all our presidential candidates believe in, a God that we pledge to, a God that "we trust" in. Is there any tangible evidence of any of the claims of his works and doings?
I've been raised a Catholic going to Catholic school, but honestly, people just tell me to believe, but there are no reasons to believe. I could as easily tell someone to believe in a purple hippo which flies around giving out candy without any proof.
Cnd said 06/15, 07:57 PM
The story of adam and eve is not meant to fit evolution or natural selection, it is a completly different viewpoint and a different "option" for people who choose to believe, to them the evidence is their holy book, whether it be the bible, the koran, the tora.....
Before, questioning Religion, why don't we first look at why science hasn't yet explained many of their theories. The fact is, the bible might not fit in with some modern scientific theories, but it all the stories and ideas in the bible fit together perfectly like a puzzle. For me, It is just wierd that somehow the Universe just Happened. I may not believe in Creationism, but I can't see how someone can prove how the Universe was started, ya they will say a big bang, but what caused that, well this did.....but what did that.
It is just so complicated, a little daisy flower has billions of things in it moving a one time. Space, well what is space exactly?
There are so many unanswered and seemingly unanswerable questions out there, I can see why so many people choose to believe in a loving God, who created the Heavens and the Earth.
As for the Hippo, well science has proven that they cant fly, and that is fact.
theyoungdem said 06/15, 10:42 PM
Who said there isn't a special hippo that can fly? Also are you saying just because there are many unanswered questions, we should all just jump to one conclusion that there is a God? I don't see that as a valid reason to believe in a God.
A book being able to "fit together perfectly like a puzzle" is also not another explaination on why there is a God. Harry Potter books fit together too.
Space is still unexplained, but we learned alot in the past 100 years alone, who's to know what else we would learn in the next 100 years. We can't keep rushing to God everytime we reach an unexplained thing.
When you get down to it, it seems foolish to believe in something with no viable evidence to its existence, no?
Cnd said 06/16, 12:47 AM
It is not "foolish" to believe in something with no viable evidence.
Here is a small example: All the evidence showed the Pats would win the Super Bowl, all the proof that sports experts had, was that the Pats would slaughter the Giants, but did that make the fans of the Giants change their allegiance,no, and look at the outcome.
Believing in something like God is not foolish, who knows, maybe he made the Universe and our thinking in a way so he couldn't be proven. The fact is believing in things that may not be physical or seen in front of your eyes is what has moved our societies foward.
In my life i have not seen science that "proves" these emotions we have. Love is there, but does it have physical proof that you can hold in your hand? Can you fill a bucket with "hate". These are things that we believe exist, but can't physically prove.
When people first believe in something there isn't always proof, but that belief was what made them find that proof. You can't dismiss God as an unproven deity when maybe there is no point in proving he exists, just like the love for my father, it is there but can you see it, can you explain it?
Comments
Add Your Comment
That's just my point, why would we believe in something that is a knowledge that can only be gained from within.
theyoungdem | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Because it is still knowledge. for ex: do you love your mom? of course you do. that's not even something you have to think about, but is there any scientific proof to that fact, well no, but does that make it any less real or the effect of that love any less real. of course not. does that make any sense? The knowledge of God isn't something that can be proven, He intended for it to be that way. But knowing He is there opens up a whole new level of possibilities for us. Knowledge is knowledge, no matter whether we get it from outside sources (science) or inner sources (Holy Ghost for ex.)
MorgMcA | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Youngdem, props for raising this one. In terms of E-D votes, this was a suicide (given the religious demographic on this site), but I couldn't agree with your perspective more. And for what it's worth, your expression of your point has been great so far. Very, very well done. And Morg, you can absolutely prove love with science. Love consists of chemical processes in the brain that are fairly easy to quantify and categorize. Youngdem is 100% right, but his is a "losing" argument because there is no way to disprove God. The long and the short of it is: you either buy into the hype or you don't. I could list literally 100 very logical reasons why there is no God, but a believer will just shrug them off and offer some magical response. It's really not worth the effort.
DonkeyDude | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
I'm a believer of God, and go to Church regularly. God is a feeling, youngdem, He's always there, always will be, but never to be explained.
strongleader | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Using the Patriots/Giants loses you some points. That's simply a matter of predicting an outcome. Everyone knows those teams EXIST. Your example is akin to spining a roulette wheel and predicting that the number 34 does not come up. Oops! It did, so there must be a God, because the "evidence" was wrong. Nothing about that is logical. The problem is, logic has no part in this discussion. Nonbelievers want to discuss logic, and believers say "I can feel His presence," "you have to have faith," etc. Why does horrible stuff happen (little girls raped and murdered, etc)? "Satan." Or the incredible "God works in mysterious ways." Perhaps it was "His plan." If the Bible is the word of God, why are there so many inconsistencies and historical inaccuracies? "The Bible was just inspired by God." OK, so was Cat in the Hat.. There's no point debating this, because the God myth has built-in "defenses" (incredibly weak though they are) to every kind of logical attack.
DonkeyDude | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
OK DD, do you know that murder is wrong, of course, is that because that's simply what you were taught and you've come to accept it or because your conscience tells you so. I would vouch that even if you weren't taught that murder is wrong that you would still know. The idea i'm presenting is that knowledge may come from more than one source, but knowledge is knowledge and just because they come from different sources doesn't make either one any less real than the other.
MorgMcA | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Donkeydude, spinning a roullette wheel has nothing to do with "evidence", that is probability, and a random choice is made when you make that guess, the fact is with a football game, people have past stats to look at, they can see how many wins a team had, how many losses a team had, and they usually use that to determine the outcome of the game, but in thise case the turnout was different disproving the majority of the predictions and proofs. One uses real statistics gathered over a period of time, and the other is "OK....I'll go for 20!"
Cnd | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
I'd have to disagree with you there Cnd. I don't think you're comparison is quite right. Beleiving in God is not like believing the Giants could win. Giants have won games before, the same cannot be said about God....Oh dear, I think youngdem is corrupting me with his logic!
strongleader | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
You know what, i'm obviously outnumbered here, i haven't convinced anyone, and this being my first debate, i'm disapointed but i'm going to drop out, congrats to theyoungdem.
Cnd | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
I think you forfeited too early, but you did get undone by your example. The football argument is still based on probability, but the problem is that many of the variables are not possible to actually quantify and so the numerical data that is available (such as form) are subject to such huge uncertainty that neither result (the upset or the favourite winning or even a draw) should be met with much surprise from a statistical point of view. Helpfully even if it were possible to numerically tally all of the variables in a match and determine the probability of each outcome the fact that only a single result is obtained is utterly useless for identifying whether the model is correct, since you cannot repeatedly play a sporting fixture to determine the probability because the variables are in flux (unlike spinning a roulette wheel).
Tickers | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
This is lame, I didn't even use my best argument yet. You should always finish your debates, why lose early? Makes no sense, just like God, lol.
theyoungdem | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
You definitely forfeited too early. Less is more with this argument, though. Attack the juvenile and lame purple hippo analogy next time. Attack the insensitivity. I.e., faith is not foolishness. Faith is wisdom. Believing in the unseen is a strength those who need the crutches of science and logic cannot understand. I am not particularly religious, but I admire those you are for the right and deep reasons. Stick to it.
thurgood | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
The purple hippo isn't a lame argument, it's a simple variation of Russel's teapot or the flying invisible spaghetti monster, it's an argument that you can't disprove since there is no way of doing so, which is what the arguments for the existence of god are.
Tickers | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Lame as in juvenille, trite, and insensitive. I should have used more precise terms. No one was questioning the staid logic.
thurgood | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Well sorry i went early, and thank you Tickers and Thurgood for the advice and the reasonable arguments you presented to me. As for you theyoungdem...you are SOOOOOOOOO funny!! have you ever done stand up? "makes no sense, just like God" HAHA! hillarious! I was expecting "good debate, i guess i convinced more people, but good try" like a reasonable debater would. But who care, what matters right now is ya didn't get to use your BEST argument! Well that's life!
Cnd | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Lame as in juvenille, trite, and insensitive. I should have used more precise terms. No one was questioning the staid logic.
thurgood | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
I'm confused, why did you quite? I didn't even cast my vote, I always save it for the last argument.
strongleader | 06/16/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
CNN TOP POLITICAL STORIES
TOP STORIES on TIME.COM
TIME PHOTO ESSAYS
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th PresidentThe Brazen Pirates of Somalia
This year, close to 90 ships have been seized in and around the Gulf of Aden, more than triple the number of 2007
(Jason R. Zalasky / US Navy / EPA )
YoungDem I don't believe anyone can logically or scientifically prove that God exists, don't get me wrong, I know he does, but it's a knowledge that can only be gained from within.
MorgMcA | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment