Is Memory the Key to Disproving the Existence of God?

[franznietzsche]

actually there are constantly being discoveries made that only the christian bible can explain - i.e. several years back group of archeologists found a set of scrolls - they later found out only way to explain them was that they were the scrolls of the red sea or sommit - which is mentioned in the bible and would explain how they got to where they were found

Finding archeological evidence that Sodom and Gomorrah is a little bit different than finding archeological evidence of God coming down and taking the prohpet away in "a chariot of fire".

Show me that, then i'll be convinced by archeology.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

Its Fairly Obvious no one is going to change anyone's minds here.

Though it one thing has been proven in the bible i think its safe to assume that the rest is true.

Anyway, what's wrong living a morally correct life?

 

[shrumeo]

Dumb Asses

Look, you are talking very illogical. Can you please give me about five reasons to prove that God doesn't exists.

Jesus Christ! Jumping Jehova! I can't believe this "discussion" is happening here. There is obviously no way one can prove or disprove the existence of something outside of nature (supernatural beings like gods and devils) through "logic" or otherwise. So there is no way that you would EVER know whether something like that exists.

I don't know what any of your professions are, but any of you taking one side or another cannot honestly call himself a scientist (or even a rational thinker).

I'm just a poster on this board, but can someone please direct this crap to some other forum??

 

[shrumeo]

Its Fairly Obvious no one is going to change anyone's minds here.

Though it one thing has been proven in the bible i think its safe to assume that the rest is true.

Statement ONE: The smartest thing said on this thread.

Statement TWO: The absolute stupidest thing I've seen in this forum.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

See what I mean?

 

[europium]

oh no

What do you mean, if one thing in the bible is true then the rest is true? so you are also saying then, if this applies to other theories, that because we have discovered the proton, then the universe started in a big bang, white holes exist, the higgs boson doesn't need searching for because it definitely exists. You have just thrown your own argument out of the window. Well done, another illogical statement from a creationist. Oh well.

K_

 

[Pet Zepi]

Are you all trying to play God?. The meaning of God is what is in question. Not the definition. God as an idea was created to represent the creator of things we cannot understand. The moment we learn how anything works, it is not an event made by God anymore but the result of some force that must be created by God. In other words, God by definition is the creator of anything we are too ignorant to know yet. Trying to explaing God or attribute any characteristics (!memory!, PLEASE) is putting him in a level with us or below us. He automatically stops being God. If you would ever want to get an insight on God. Try a human psychology course.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnice to meat you, God.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

I actually ment my first statement :-/ I meant "See no-one will change anyones minds"

And i didn't mean it like that. The Big Bang could of been created by God for all you know!. And I am not a creationist. And its not only 1 thing in the bible.

Creation: Most things proven, all attacks by evolutionists repelled, no mistakes made.

Evolution: Most things "proven", then distroyed by other EVOLUTIONISTS! or Creationists. Millions of Mistakes made, yet those mistakes still taught to the youth.

People don't want to believe in Creation because its hard to comprehend, hence them beliving evolution. Even though creation still has more proof then Evolution. Society wants to believe that Humans are the most omni-potent "race" or thing, they don't like to think of themself as lower then somthing else.

Even those strata ( i think they r called that) layers in the rock, have been proven to be able to form quickly in a horisontal pattern rather then slowly over millions of years laid down from top to bottom.

Give me some evidence that I cannot refute and I will become a evolutionist.

 

[Des Chamberlain]

God is the purest form of energy from which everything springs, His memory is in the DNA of the living and the 22 quantum particles that form the base of all matter.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

now even i find that ridiculous..

 

[addman]

Creation: Most things proven, all attacks by evolutionists repelled, no mistakes made.

Excuse me but am i missing something? Most things are proven for your view of creation ( i assume you are referring to genesis in the bible?)

 

[Janitor]

Even those strata ( i think they r called that) layers in the rock, have been proven to be able to form quickly in a horisontal pattern rather then slowly over millions of years laid down from top to bottom. - Gelsamel

Would you kindly provide a link to a site that tells more about that? And are you saying that all strata were formed quickly, or just that some of them were?

 

[Alem2000]

Hello fellow scientist! There is actuallly proof of the christian bible. First of all the book of jobe where God talks about dinasours..ok that's not really a good one. But in the book of enoch, for those who don't know it predates Jesus by about 6 thousand years...talks about how the universe is structured and how the moon orbits the Earth and the Earth orbits the sun and other complicated details of the universe. And not to mention that Isac Newton used the bible to help him in his mathmatical and astronomical persutes. And then the book of jobe talks about vents in the deep sea that let out hot gas and lave...and the scientific community found this out when you ask...only in the late 19th century.

 

[Janitor]

Alem2000, I am not familiar with Enoch. If it predates Jesus by 6,000 years, that would make it, at 8,000 years, far older than any other document we have, wouldn't it? I find that implausible. Do you have some supporting references you can give us?

 

[Alem2000]

Just for those who don't know Enoch was the 7th son of Adam. Okay here is the link to the 3rd part of the book of enoch which talks about the sun and Earth and stars. Try to keep in mind that at that time even knowing that the Earth is a sphere is a discovery itself. If you read carefully past the coded words you can see that it talks about ligh as a wave, and orbits of the moon. Let me know what you think. http://www.piney.com/Apoc3Astronomy.html By the way this book was ruled out of the bible for some theological reason.

 

[selfAdjoint]

So all the sun comes up in the east of the world and travels across the sky to the west of the world, that's just "coded words" and light as a wave, that's some phrase with your own secret interpretation. Frankly my dear, it isn't worth a damn.

And the Book of Enoch isn't in the Bible because it wasn't written by Enoch but by a heretical sect of Judaism in the first century - i.e after the destruction of the temple.

 

[Alem2000]

"through which the rays of the sun break forth: and from them is warmth" enoch 3 chapter 75:4. Okay how about that? And by the way it wasnt written by a heretical jewish sect after the destruction of the temply because after it was lost it was found in ethiopia and was said to have been there early before King Solomon and his temple. And you didnt think of the fact that the first language it was written in was ethiopic and enoch was an east african. And next time please read the whole thing not just the first paragraph before you start to "damn" it. And what about the orbits?

 

[Alem2000]

I think we are straying from the point of these threds. I don't have a specific standing on the scripture or have a good understand of its coded language. And if you ask what i mean by that..i think it is very obvious that the bible is coded and allmost allways has (2nd 3rd...ect) meaning that theologins know..ie we are not theologins.

So ill stop talking and let the scientists speak.
Astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle:

"A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

Theoretical physicist Albert Einstein:

"The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation... His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection."

Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking:

"The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."

Astronomer Robert Jastrow:

"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

Physicist James Trefil:

"...The evidence we have at present clearly favors the conclusion that we are alone. From the formation of the sun as a single G star to the evolution of the Earth's atmosphere to the conditions of the Earth's recent climate, everything points to the same conclusion -- we are special.

"But we are living on an insignificant speck of rock going around an undistinguished star in a low-rent section of the galaxy. We are not the center of the universe.

"Maybe so, but we are special.

...If I were a religious man, I would say that everything we have learned about life in the past twenty years shows that we are unique, and therefore special in God's sight. Instead I shall say that what we have learned shows that it matters a great deal what happens to us."

 

[Mike2]

Why do we not consider that God is the Logic that created and sustains all things? Then both Theologians and Scientist are both doing the same thing, trying to understand Him better.

 

[shadowman]

Why do we not consider that God is the Logic that created and sustains all things? Then both Theologians and Scientist are both doing the same thing, trying to understand Him better.

I agree very much, Mike... CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?!

 

[shrumeo]

(hey folks, since i keep getting emails and i keep reading this insane thread I'll throw in another 2 cents)

Why do we have to understand "HIM" ? Who the +%@# is "HE"?

What is so hard about just shrugging, saying "I dunno", and leaving it at that? DO you HAVE to believe one way or the other? Must everything be proven or disproven to be true or untrue? Just accept that you will never know and deal with it. Is it so hard?

I think we all actually WILL start to get along once this happens.

 

[shadowman]

(hey folks, since i keep getting emails and i keep reading this insane thread I'll throw in another 2 cents)

Why do we have to understand "HIM" ? Who the +%@# is "HE"?

What is so hard about just shrugging, saying "I dunno", and leaving it at that? DO you HAVE to believe one way or the other? Must everything be proven or disproven to be true or untrue? Just accept that you will never know and deal with it. Is it so hard?

I think we all actually WILL start to get along once this happens.

so are you telling me that you are willing to straddle the fence and be just fat, dumb and happy about the whole thing? All of science from the atheist or creationist point of view is about finding more answers. You can't just be complacent. Do you realize that if everyone had your way of thinking, we might still be thinking the world is flat? Continents would not have been discovered by the "modern" world. We would still think that atoms are little tiny balls that are the smallest single unit in the universe. We would have definatly never entered space or landed on the moon. So even though there is a battle so to speak going on, it is necessary for progress. for if you never stand for something, then you'll fall for anything.

 

[selfAdjoint]

If you stick with scientific investigation - the real thing - then you come up with no proof of God's existence and no proof of his non-existence. So there's no scientific reason to say yea or nay. Beyond that there are the human religions and churches. Many scientists have a very low opinion of them.

 

[hazakate]

truthfully does it matter if there is really a god. it is a way for the non fufilled to exist and if they need it to exist where is it are place to tell them it is not true. everyone has there belifes it is all your choice not others. i was place in a anglican school where belife is pushed on you. it is your right to believe as you wish

 

[hazakate]

such hate in such a small area this is what happened in iraq

 

[Mike2]

If you stick with scientific investigation - the real thing - then you come up with no proof of God's existence and no proof of his non-existence. So there's no scientific reason to say yea or nay. Beyond that there are the human religions and churches. Many scientists have a very low opinion of them.

If God is the Logic that maintains consistency between facts and thus determines all things, then His existence is the starting premise of anyone who thinks. How hypocritical for someone who claims to think straight to deny God. That's like denying that logic is relevant to any conversation. Such people disqualify themselves from debate.

 

[sol2]

If God is the Logic that maintains consistency between facts and thus determines all things, then His existence is the starting premise of anyone who thinks. How hypocritical for someone who claims to think straight to deny God. That's like denying that logic is relevant to any conversation. Such people disqualify themselves from debate.

There are many sicentific minded people who believe in God. They understand the requirements of science in the debate. Yet they still believe.

Should such people disqualify themselves from the current project they are working on? The ultimate adherence to the scientific world would be the home of the atheist, because of the requirement of its supporting factual needs.

You had mentioned a falsifiable assumption as a starting point to the big bang?

Some do not need this, they just change the way they look at things:)

Is this not logical?

 

[shadowman]

this is what happened in iraq

Listen, you can be against God or for God...that is your business. But DON'T you go somewhere you don't need to go. What on Earth do you know about Iraq? ABSOLUTLY NOTHING ! The things you know are only what you hear from the misinformed too-liberal-for-their-own-good media. You have absolutly NO idea what is really going on in Iraq. I just got back from there. We are not the cause of Iraqi suffering. What causes problems is when you give children care packages with food and other things to take back to their families, and then their parents shooting and killing the children because they interacted with american soldiers. They are a poor hurting people because of the regime they just came from. Most Iraqi people desire us to be there, but it is the ones like i mentioned above that make the media. All you hear is about the bombers and the extremists that don't want us there. You do not hear about the lives we save, and the thousands upon thousands of people we help. So unless you have been there and experienced it for yourself, SHUT UP. unless you have friends killed by people they are trying to help, SHUT UP. you know what, just shut up anyway.

 

[Deca-of-CD]

*skims through all of the posts*

"Anyway, what's wrong living a morally correct life?"

Forgot who said that^ ... But you are implying that people who do not believe in your 'almighty' God are living immorally?.. And besides, I know many Christians who do not live morally correct lives, yet they insist on forcefeeding me their bull****..

And why is it that 90% of Christians do the same things when confronted with proof of the existence of their God? They either: attack in numbers (which this thread is a good example of.. though, there happens to be many non-religious people joining in the fray to combat the religious.. so meh), change the subject, avoid the question, or block/ban/ignore you..

 

[TsunamiJoe]

first of all i believe tell peolpe to "shut up" and putting others down in this forum is prohibited

secondly if you think hard about morality, morality is based upon religion why? because very long ago when religions were formed they were told or instructed by a vision, prophet, or what-not that such things are wrong. But in todays available free thinking society people will say no i don't believe in religion and tell you somethings wrong without having non-theological proof to support it.

another thing is. Is that if we were to have just stopped the persuit of knowlage which is what shrumeo is saying to do. Thus meaning we should have just stopped bothering trying to develope usable electricity. To hell with the automobile and radio and lightbulb! Why in Earth should we have went through the pursuit of developing the wheel, I mean come on what has it done for us? (sarcasm there my friends in case no one noticed)

also thank you for the responce to my post but what you said was completely illogical for soddom and Gomorrah are actually scientifically said to have a high chance of actually being not actual cities but symbols of degradation of society. Also do you know what the red sea scrolls actually are? they themselves for many ought to proove gods existence indefinintly. Though due to sketchy translations the english version of them isn't terribly usefull to most unless you know its origanal language. secondly it will be literally impossible to detect traces of a flaming chariot due-to-the-fact that it wasnt an actual flaming chariot but a mere "metephysical" symbolism of such. If one would understand the bible to a great extent one would discover it is primarily a lot of symbolism, for the what i will call "primitive" culture they used what best they could to discribe the "extravagant" acts of god.