And without philosophers asking all their questions and getting the ball rolling, on back through the ages, where would science be? You cannot have logic without philosophy, you cannot have science without philosophy, and you cannot have debate (such as the one you're engaging in right now, friend) without philosophy.

I think that your post was incredibly rude.

Also, I think you need to pay more attention to scientific laws. Lack of proof of a thing's existence does not constitute proof that that thing does not exist. Only proof one way or the other, not lack of proof one way or the other, can answer whether a thing exists or not.

It's like... a cure for cancer. There's no proof that it exists. There are drugs that can make the disease take longer to kill the infected, and there's treatments that can sometimes send it into remission, but there's no actual proof that a 100% failproof cure for cancer, or a vaccine that could get rid of even the threat of cancer, could ever exist.
There is as much proof for the existence of a cure for cancer as there is for the existence of God.
That doesn't mean that that cure isn't out there somewhere, waiting to be discovered. If lack of proof constituted proof of nonexistence, NO ONE would still be looking for the cure for cancer.

I believe in Deity. No one else has to, but in the name of logic and science I think it's more honest and open-minded if those who don't believe try to understand that there is still the possibility.

Everything you said after calling me rude... Why did you say that? Did I say anything to the contrary?

Not to my knowledge, but I also wanted to post on this thread for the general discussion, and the first time I tried, on a different thread, to make two separate posts in a row, an admin edited them into one post with a note saying not to double post.

So I figured I'd respond to you AND to the general discussion in the same post. Sorry for the confusion.

Also, I think I need to clarify the distinction between saying that something which you said is rude, and saying that you are rude. For all I know you're generally polite, barring that post of yours which I quoted.

True.
But, the point I was trying to make is that anyone who claims to be able to prove God's existence is actually disproving his existence.

According to whom? The Christians?

The first thing I think we need to clarify is that not everyone who believes in the Divine is a Christian, and your argument is only valid if you're addressing a Christian who believes that the Bible has to be taken literally (and they don't ALL believe that). So your argument doesn't disprove God, it merely pokes holes in Biblical logic -- and considering that the Bible was written by human beings who weren't Divine, merely had Divine Inspiration, it's not so surprising if there are some logical loopholes in there.

The Divine exists independently of religion. Deity came first. Religion came second. Deity created humanity, humanity created religion. So really, when it comes down to it, religions are capable of being wrong.

"Without faith I am nothing" does not mean literally nothing, by the way. It means: What is the point of faith and religion, of loving God because your soul feels that He's there, trusting Him because He's in your heart and part of you, if there's scientific, irrefutable proof of God's existence? Science would take the belief part out of religion, and eventually it would take the love and trust away too, and turn religion into something cold and mechanical. "Take your vitamins because science has proven that they make you healthier, and accept Christ as your Savior because science has proven that Heaven and Hell exist." That's not what the Christian God wants. He wants you to accept Christ as Savior because you love Christ and God.

I think the biggest mistake that some Christians (and in this case also you) make is reading the Bible literally. I think some Christians lose so much meaning and importance when you don't allow yourself to read into it rather than just to read it, and I think you misunderstand and try to make a point which is refutable when you don't allow yourself to read into it.

And finally, no one in this thread has claimed to be able to prove that God exists, so no one here has, even by your illogical and misinterpretation-based argument. All that anyone here has said is that there's no proof that God DOESN'T exist. There's no proof either way. That's why it comes down to faith and belief.

Also, Douglas Adams was a great writer and extremely hilarious, and obviously not only witty but also intelligent as well. But he wasn't a Biblical scholar nor a religious expert. He was a fiction writer. Trying to use his writing to disprove God is just plain silly.

For the record, I have read the bible through and through, and being active in the catholic church, I think I understand the meaning thank you very much. But to be honest, the only thing I see it as is a very nice storybook.

If you understand the meaning, then you understand why the babelfish reference is irrelevant.

What I meant was, I understand what they were trying to convey.

God is a human construct that we like to believe in, if you want to, be my guest.

Bingo.

Then you purposely created a flawed argument?


Can you prove that?

^ It has already been throughly discussed that the existence of God cannot be proven as well as the non-existence of God cannot be proven. Leaving only desire to dictate whether or not God exists or doesn't exist. So as... the douche... said, if you wish to believe in God(s) or not believe in God(s), go ahead.

^ That was my point. That person stated as fact something that cannot possibly be proven as fact, and I was trying to point that out to him.

"I think that..." would have been more appropriate.

Yes.
Christianity is a flawed religion, why not use a flawed argument?

Pyro, this is not the place to be purposefully inflammatory. We get it, you don't like Christianity. You could pretend to be mature about it, though.

Thank you, Fwip.

1 - No religion has it completely right. That doesn't mean that there is no Deity.

2 - This isn't called the "Obligatory 'Correctness of Christianity' Thread," it's the "Obligatory 'Existence of God' Thread." So if you want to debate about the principles and beliefs of Christianity specifically, then create a thread for that, and do so there. This thread is for debating the existence of the Divine, which includes but is not limited to the Christian idea of God.

3 - If you can't have a conversation like an adult, and be respectful, then I'm pretty sure I can assume I'm right in saying that not only I, but probably the other people in this thread, don't want to debate with you. If you can make your points in a well-reasoned and respectful way, then we'll welcome engaging you in our conversation. (Fwip summed it up pretty well, I think.)

Pyro gives us atheists (us is me and anyone else who is an atheist) a bad name.

I'm sorry, all. I've been in a bad mood and I think I've been taking it out on this thread. I apologize to everyone I may have offended in my mini-rampage of anti-Christianity.
Edit: also, I do not hate the religion, or anyone that participates in it. I simply have different beliefs.

Apology accepted, on my part. Thank you.

Thank you, pyro. Apology also accepted on my part. No hard feelings, yeah?

Of course.
Would you like to explain more about your pagan religion?

Sure, pyro. I'm re-posting this from another thread about beliefs and reasons for one's beliefs (anything in italics are things that I am adding to this post, that are not in the other thread):

I believe that God or Goddess or whatever you call Him / Her / It, exists. I believe that with all of my heart and soul because I've felt the divine presence and that presence is such a force of love and power that it takes my breath away whenever I'm lucky enough to experience it.

I believe that Deity is one. Human beings are fallible, even the scribes who copied the holy texts (of any religion) by divine inspiration were human beings, and so their copies are imperfect because they are imperfect. I believe that no one religion has it entirely right, but some are close, and if you look at their core, where almost every religion has rules for treating other people well, you can see that they all have the same inspiration.

The only reason that we see the Deity in so many different forms, as the Christian God, or Allah, Yahweh, the ancient Greek Gods, the Celtic Gods (I could literally be typing this list for hours, so I'm cutting it short here), all of them, is because the human mind needs to be able to relate to something to love it, so we anthropomorphize Deity (which the ancients did to a far greater degree than most monotheistic religions today do), or we have a bridge between man and God like Moses, the Buddha, Muhammad, or Jesus. The faces of the deity which I relate to and worship are Gods and Goddesses of paganism. I study pagan mythology and practice the pagan holidays. I don't actually follow any set denomination within paganism -- for example, I wouldn't define myself as "Wiccan" -- and the Gods and Goddesses I pray to or worship are the ones that I relate to the most at the time when I am praying or worshiping, or the ones that relate best to the holiday I'm celebrating. I feel comfortable doing this because of my belief that all Deities are One.

I believe that Deity doesn't actually care what name He / She / It gets called; it's what you do or don't do in the name of your Deity, and the love, that matters to it.

I was raised without any religion at all. I consider myself a solitary eclectic pagan now. My biggest influences growing up, so far as religion is concerned, were two passages from two separate books.
"I never knowed it by that name, but what does the name matter? ...The same thing as set the seeds swelling and the sun shining made thee a well lad and it's the Good Thing. It isn't like us poor fools as think it matters if us is called out of our names. Th' Big Good Thing doesn't stop to worry... It goes on making worlds by the million—worlds like us. Never thee stop believing in the Big Good Thing and knowing the world's full of it...The Magic listened when tha sung the Doxology. It would have listened to anything tha'd sung. It was the joy that mattered."
~The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett (abridged quote provided by SparkNotes)

"Then I fell at his feet and thought, Surely this is the hour of death, for the Lion (who is worthy of all honour) will know that I have served Tash all my days and not him. Nevertheless, it is better to see the Lion and die than to be Tisroc of the world and live and not to have seen him. But the Glorious One bent down his golden head and touched my forehead with his tongue and said, 'Son, thou art welcome.' But I said, 'Alas, Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash.' He answered, 'Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me.' Then by reason of my great desire for wisdom and understanding, I overcame my fear and questioned the Glorious One and said, 'Lord, is it then true, as the Ape said, that thou and Tash are one?' The Lion growled so that the earth shook (but his wrath was not against me) and said, 'It is false. Not because he and I are one, but because we are opposites -- I take to me the services which thou hast done to him. For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him. Therefore, if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath's sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted. Dost thou understand, Child?' I said, 'Lord, thou knowest how much I understand.' But I said also (for truth constrained me), 'Yet I have been seeking Tash all my days.' 'Beloved,' said the Glorious One, 'unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek.'"
~The Last Battle by CS Lewis (This is the final Narnia books, which are all Biblical allegories. Aslan himself, Son of the Emperor Over the Sea, represents Jesus Christ.)

There, what I believe, and why.

ok i know i am way late to be commenting on this but i must point this out: not all people who believe in the divine are christians because the word "christian" is made from the last name of Jesus Christ and therefore is strictly and directly related to beleiving in Jesus Christ as being God and while there are many variations on this such as babtists, catholics, etc. none of them beleive in any god other than Jesus Christ. i myself am a christian and so that is why i am saying this because i dont want to be considered of the same religion or beleiving in the same god as well any other releigion does so please dont use the term christian insted try creationist much more broad and includes all people who beleive that a intelligent being created the universe.

also a side note: the problem with what u beleive is that most religions say that the god they refer to is the only true god and they vary so much in what they beleive the god is like and what he does that it is impossible for it to be all one god also it is said in the Bible (which even if u dont beleive is true still has relevance here) "thou shalt have no other gods before me" basicly being a message from God saying to not worship any other gods such as buddha or zues or whatever but if this were the same god wouldnt he be ok with them worshipping him in his other forms but rather he forbids them from it at all