Does God Exist?

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Lukla I am going to busy for awhile with your sources since the first one is at least a 600 + page book (No kidding its long!) I just want to know one thing... Have you read it? All of it? Because if you haven't, your comment of asking me if I read my sources (Which I did), might be considered a bit hypocritical.
      I read the portions that relate to the evidence for the big bang, which is what you asked for. Anything else the source covers is irrelevant.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Also I would like to point out that all three of your sources seem at first glance to be biased on the big bang's behalf.
      Two of them were written by some of the worlds leading astrophysicists. If you don't accept the evidence they present as being at least somewhat reasonable, then we have other issues.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      I hope so. My ideology is get biased religion out of my science class.
      Are we really going to start this again?

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Thirty seconds after we all die, we will all find out what our beliefs will have brought us too. Whether it be fading into nothing, or judged by God in that moment we shall surely know.
      If we fade into nothing, we're not going to know what our beliefs brought us to.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      I don't know why I am bothering even saying this but you have never seen the big bang logically demonstrated. No one has.
      You don't need to observe the big bang to logically demonstrate it. All you need is verifiable evidence. Which is has.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      It is just simply what you have chosen to believe.
      And I've chosen to believe it because of the evidence.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      True. You could argue that. Feel free to start anytime you like. Though... if you do I would have to point out religious discrimination toward Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Christians, Satanists, and just about every religion but the big bang because the only one allowed to be taught in science class is the big bang.
      And, again, that would be because the big bang is a scientific model with scientific evidence. Creationism is not.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Now... if you want to include all of the religions in science class, including the big bang, creation, and Greek river goddess's then I suppose I can live with being forced to learn all of you peoples blasted religions and make my own logical deductions about which one sounds more feasible. Why wouldn't that be fair?
      Because they're not based on scientific evidence.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Actually I would believe it. I have no problem believing it. I am not against the big bang. Despite your objections to the contrary, despite the lack of evidence, I believe in a big bang.
      The only difference between me and you is I know that the big bang is only a belief. Logical? Maybe, maybe not but that is for each person to decide themselves.
      You have a nasty habit of maligning the big bang merely because it's considered a "theory" or "belief." So I once again find myself having to explain basic scientific workings to you. It's a scientific theory which is well-substantiated by evidence. And that's by definition. Because of that, I choose to believe in the big bang as opposed to some other creation story.
      I also believe in gravity, death, and that we revolve round the sun. Those are all beliefs of mine, which have been scientifically demonstrated.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      You know... I could say stop giving credit to fallacious big bang books and use common sense but that would sound just as ridiculous as what you told me.
      The difference is, my books are written by people who have dedicated their life and education to science and the universe. Many of your sources are written by people who couldn't pass an elementary astronomy exam.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Here is a list of the sources I & Lukla have used. (Sorry if I missed any.) Some are creationist (How that automatically makes them fallacious I would love for you to explain?)
      You're still defending the creationist sites you used? Seriously?

      It's fallacious because they're incredibly biased and they know nothing about the subjects they're trying to refute.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      The fact is that this whole conversation is a result of Lukla trying to prove that the big bang is more then a belief. He calls it a well substantiated scientific theory. Using his source: (Please read it as I love this source) Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition
      It is a scientific theory. And a scientific theory is, by definition, well-substantiated. QED: a well-substantiated scientific theory.

      Oh, so now the NAP is biased too?

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Listen, if "The Scientist Said It" is good enough for you then, great... but that sounds a bit to much like "The Pastor Said It" for me.
      So I can't use scientists to prove my point...because that's essentially using a religion? Right.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      Lukla... What you see as evidence is your right. Who you believe is the final word on the beginnings of the universe or anything thereafter/before is entirely up to you. Who and what you chose to prove you point is your choice. If you believe everything the scientists say so be it. If you believe everything you see so be it.
      I think the biggest problem here is that you are so hung up on trying to prove to me that your Big Bang happened that you are failing to realize that I am not against the Big Bang.
      Are you just so insecure in your beliefs, that the simple act of my pointing out discrepancies and possibly flaws in the belief makes you scramble so intently to prove yourself?
      You have successfully degraded your debate style to attacking, upon assumption of untruth, sources provided of which I never gave any claim to authenticity. Is that all you can find to attack? Sources I have already said contain both biased sides?

      To everyone else who may have common sense.

      People used to burn witches based on well-substantiated theory. They had evidence (not very scientific), like people getting healed quickly (thanks to herbs)... but it was claimed as magic and the people burned them. Other such faulty, yet well substantiated evidence was used. For centuries such theory was believed by the majority of well educated people.

      The majority of well educated people used to believe the world was flat. They had the well substantiated evidence that no one they knew had ever sailed around the earth and come back to talk about it.

      The majority of well educated people used to believe flying was impossible. They had the well substantiated theory that no one had ever done it before. Then along came the Wright brothers.

      I am not saying that the big bang is false. I am saying it hasn't been proven. Whether or not you believe it, substantiated or not, is your choice. Whether you believe the as the majority, is your choice.

      If "The Scientist Said It" or "The Pastor Said It" or "The Majority Believes It" is what you want to base your personal belief on then that is your right.


      I prefer to make my own conclusions and not simply take what the majority says as fact, but that is simply, my choice.


      "Practice really seeing whatever it is you’re looking at.” -Anonymous

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Who you believe is the final word on the beginnings of the universe or anything thereafter/before is entirely up to you.
      How kind of you.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      If you believe everything the scientists say so be it. If you believe everything you see so be it.
      Who else am I going to believe? I don't have the time nor the ability to go out and get a degree in every single scientific field. As such, I go off of what experts in their particular field have found.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      I think the biggest problem here is that you are so hung up on trying to prove to me that your Big Bang happened that you are failing to realize that I am not against the Big Bang
      I couldn't care less whether or not you're against the big bang. You said it's lacking evidence, which is the only thing I've taken issue with, because it's a flat-out lie.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      Are you just so insecure in your beliefs, that the simple act of my pointing out discrepancies and possibly flaws in the belief makes you scramble so intently to prove yourself?
      LOL
       I don't know if you're stupid or if you just think we are.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      You have successfully degraded your debate style to attacking, upon assumption of untruth, sources provided of which I never gave any claim to authenticity. Is that all you can find to attack? Sources I have already said contain both biased sides?
      This debate strayed away from any legitimacy the second you started raving about "getting religion out of my science classroom" and "the big bang is just a 'theory'." It's like your on some sort of conquest to rid the world of anything that isn't considered a "fact."

      You notice how a few other people have already dumped you in this debate? It's not because they lost. It's because you're a narrow-minded stickler and don't understand even the basic fundamentals of science.

      The only reason I've continued to entertain this is more for my amusement than anything else.

      KIA&SS wrote:

      People used to burn witches based on well-substantiated theory. They had evidence (not very scientific), like people getting healed quickly (thanks to herbs)... but it was claimed as magic and the people burned them.
      See, this is a perfect example of why this is funny to me. Your bring up points so idiotic it's funny to watch. In this case, you're once again demonstrating your inability to understand what it means to be "well-substantiated." Nothing about witch-burning was well-substantiated. The south had "evidence" before and during the civil war that blacks were better off enslaved. However, we all know the evidence was obviously BS, and it was in no way a well-substantiated theory.
      For someone who has an obsession with using definitions, you sure don't incorporate them very well.

      The rest of your post is just more BS about well-substantiated theories, so I'm not going to even bother. And I'm sure your next reply will be more of the same, so I probably won't be bothering with that either. I think I've tested my patience long enough.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      You amuse me Lukla.

      You said it's lacking evidence, which is the only thing I've taken issue with, because it's a flat-out lie.
      Really? Are you certain you wish to continue accusing me of lying when you cannot demonstrate any irrefutable evidence?

      You yourself have already stated:
      Who else am I going to believe? I don't have the time nor the ability to go out and get a degree in every single scientific field. As such, I go off of what experts in their particular field have found.
      That you are taking what scientists say on faith.
      Do you really believe what you say you do?
      Do you really believe that anything or nothing could spontaneously explode, without any outside force?
      Do you really believe that anyone could with any accuracy say what happened over a billion years ago?
      Do you really believe an explosion could create a living planet not to mention the complex solar systems, when no one has ever had any evidence of any other explosion creating anything but chaos and destruction?

      It's like your on some sort of conquest to rid the world of anything that isn't considered a "fact."
      Where did I mention ridding the world of anything?

      You notice how a few other people have already dumped you in this debate? It's not because they lost. It's because you're a narrow-minded stickler and don't understand even the basic fundamentals of science.
      See it how you like, they still quiesced.
      Do you understand the fundamentals of science?
      Do you understand that no matter how much you wish to turn a scientific theory into a scientific fact they are not the same thing?
      Do you understand that if expert scientists had irrefutably proved the big bang they would call it the big bang fact or the big bang law?
      If the big bang has been irrefutably proven as you wish to claim then why haven't the very scientists you believe called it a fact?
      Do you truly grasp that a scientific fact is not a scientific theory?

      For someone who has an obsession with using definitions, you sure don't incorporate them very well.
      Perhaps your bias of not looking at all the facts makes you blind to the application of the definitions.

      your inability to understand what it means to be "well-substantiated."
      I find it amusing that you picked only the example I said was "not very scientific" (not at all actually) to attempt to prove your point.

      Tell me, in the time of the Wright brothers was it not a "well-substantiated" theory that humans could not fly? Did they not incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses for their theory?

      The rest of your post is just more BS about well-substantiated theories, so I'm not going to even bother. And I'm sure your next reply will be more of the same, so I probably won't be bothering with that either. I think I've tested my patience long enough.
      Human patience is a fickle thing. I look forward to your acquiescence.

      Acquiescence: Acceptance or agreement by keeping quiet or by not making objections.
      [CENTER]“If she’s amazing, she won’t be easy. If she’s easy, she won’t be amazing. If she’s worth it, you won’t give up. If you give up, you’re not worthy.” [/CENTER]

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      God does EXIST!!!

      look what i found on the internet LOGICAL PROVE:

      The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student answered bravely, "Yes, he did".

      The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn't respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had "proved" that "belief in God" was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.
      Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " "Of course" answered the professor.
      The young student stood up and asked : "Professor does Cold exists?"
      The professor answered, "What kind of question is that? ...Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?"
      The young student answered, "In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot."
      "And, does Dark exist?", he continued. The professor answered "Of course". This time the student responded, "Again you're wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's lack of light."
      Finally, the student asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" The professor replied, "Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil."
      The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man."
      After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn't answer back. The young man's name was ALBERT EINSTEIN.

      OMG i luv this story source:
      Einstein Proves God Exists - Urban Legends

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      imchamp wrote:

      God does EXIST!!!

      look what i found on the internet LOGICAL PROVE:
      The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student answered bravely, "Yes, he did".

      The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn't respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had "proved" that "belief in God" was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.
      Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " "Of course" answered the professor.
      The young student stood up and asked : "Professor does Cold exists?"
      The professor answered, "What kind of question is that? ...Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?"
      The young student answered, "In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot."
      "And, does Dark exist?", he continued. The professor answered "Of course". This time the student responded, "Again you're wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's lack of light."
      Finally, the student asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" The professor replied, "Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil."
      The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man."
      After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn't answer back. The young man's name was ALBERT EINSTEIN.

      OMG i luv this story source:
      Einstein Proves God Exists - Urban Legends
      I love the story source too, especially the part where it specifically states it's an urban legend.

      The story doesn't prove God exists either. All it does it seek to disprove the idea that God, if he exists, is evil.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      LuklaAdvocate wrote:

      I love the story source too, especially the part where it specifically states it's an urban legend.

      The story doesn't prove God exists either. All it does it seek to disprove the idea that God, if he exists, is evil.


      1. The universe could not have brought itself into existence.<LI style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">If something does not exist, it has no ability to perform an action by which it can bring itself into existence.
      2. If it exists so as to be able to perform an action, then it already exists.
      3. The universe was brought into existence by something other than itself.
      if you say the big bang created the universe then who performed the action of the big bang???
      The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model that explains the early development of the Universe.[1] According to the Big Bang theory, the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state which expanded rapidly. This rapid expansion caused the Universe to cool and resulted in its present continuously expanding state.

      what caused the universe to be in an extremely hot and dense state???

      source:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

      The post was edited 1 time, last by imchamp: added extra information about the big bang ().

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      imchamp wrote:


      1. The universe could not have brought itself into existence. If something does not exist, it has no ability to perform an action by which it can bring itself into existence.
      2. If it exists so as to be able to perform an action, then it already exists.
      3. The universe was brought into existence by something other than itself.

      Why can't the universe be eternal? Why does it need a beginning?

      imchamp wrote:

      if you say the big bang created the universe then who performed the action of the big bang???
      I'm not saying the big bang created the universe.

      imchamp wrote:

      what caused the universe to be in an extremely hot and dense state???
      Most likely gravity.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by LuklaAdvocate ().

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      Man, I'm loving these sources, wikipedia and urban legends, man, best sources ever. Quote those at university and prepare to fail.

      The universe is one a constant cycle, it ends, then it all starts back up again, only to slowly die and for the process to repeat itself.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
      [SIZE=4] I Love You Cassie<3
      OOOOH THESE KNIVES MAN       [/SIZE]      [/CENTER]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Laddergoat. ().

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      Laddergoat. wrote:

      Man, I'm loving these sources, wikipedia and urban legends, man, best sources ever. Quote those at university and prepare to fail.

      wikipedia is probably the best source ohh and why didnt you answer my questions because you cant you idiot,that would proof you wrong.

      Seriously answer my question about the big bang above and proof me wrong.

    • Re: Does God Exist?

      Laddergoat. wrote:

      Wikipedia is the best source? Really? You have to be a troll, there is no way in hell you are that stupid.

      I lack the physics and scientific knowledge of the big bang to answer your question, my intelligence is focused elsewhere.

      ohh wait a second i thought you are convinced by logic so as i understand it God exists because it is just logic that the big bang theory was performed by him because If something does not exist, it has no ability to perform an action by which it can bring itself into existence.

      OWNAGE