Does god EXIST?

[teaboy]

If you like to worship on the basis of "faith", being that there might just be a single entity in a fantasy realm called Heaven, that created you and the Earth etc etc
IMHO I think you are insane to the fullest extent of the word.

Charles Darwin
The Origin Of The Species, try reading it !!!!

And when you die my theory is this, there is no heaven !!!! "try thinking about what it was like before you were born"
Can't remember ?
That's exactly what its like when you die IMHO !!!

Have you? Terrible read! Obviously massively important, but bloody hell it's dull!

 

[chucky1973]

religion is very very dangerous when in fact its preached as peaceful. thats why I choose to stay away from it.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

And when you die my theory is this, there is no heaven !!!! "try thinking about what it was like before you were born"
Can't remember ?
That's exactly what its like when you die IMHO !!!

People have been, supposedly, regressed to "past lives" through hypnosis. Maybe life is just like a dream and we forget it. Nobody knows.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

If you like to worship on the basis of "faith", being that there might just be a single entity in a fantasy realm called Heaven, that created you and the Earth etc etc
IMHO I think you are insane to the fullest extent of the word.

Charles Darwin
The Origin Of The Species, try reading it !!!!

And when you die my theory is this, there is no heaven !!!! "try thinking about what it was like before you were born"
Can't remember ?
That's exactly what its like when you die IMHO !!!

If one of the implications of your post is that all Christians believe the world was made in 6 days and then God had a day off on the seventh, you are labouring under a misapprehesion.

As a card carrying Christian, I fully believe in Darwin's evolution stuff, as do the majority of others who share my faith - at least in my experience. And if any educational authority had tried to teach my children anything of this creationist rubbish when they were at school, I would have been the first to at least question it and probably complain vociferously.

In the mainstream church that I am a member of, it would be accepted that the creation story is just that a (fairy) story - there, I said it for you.

 

[goldstone]

If one of the implications of your post is that all Christians believe the world was made in 6 days and then God had a day off on the seventh, you are labouring under a misapprehesion.

As a card carrying Christian, I fully believe in Darwin's evolution stuff, as do the majority of others who share my faith - at least in my experience. And if any educational authority had tried to teach my children anything of this creationist rubbish when they were at school, I would have been the first to at least question it and probably complain vociferously.

In the mainstream church that I am a member of, it would be accepted that the creation story is just that a (fairy) story - there, I said it for you.

So if as a card-carrying christian you don't believe the creation stuff, do you believe the jesus stuff? Rising from the dead, water into wine, loaves and fishes? And if you do believe the jesus stuff, but not the creation stuff, why one and not the other?

I guess you're saying it's OK to pick and choose the bits you believe and don't believe from a religion, which, thinking about it is probably what most religious people do. Believe in what is convenient; ignore the rest. Very strange.

 

[teaboy]

Out of the countless rules, laws and behaviours of our universe , and life itself, it is almost impossible to find any at all that does not serve some kind of purpose, apparently assisting or being absolutely vital for the existence of life.

However if there is a "reason" for existence, it's clear that the importance doesn't lie on an individual level, as is evident with the immense levels of suffering that is and has always been.

How would we know if the universe DIDN'T assist the existence of life?

 

[beorhthelm]

Out of the countless rules, laws and behaviours of our universe , and life itself, it is almost impossible to find any at all that does not serve some kind of purpose, apparently assisting or being absolutely vital for the existence of life.

what absolute bollocks. while many forms of life exist in nice symbiosis, many do not and its not always balanced. a flower might need a bee, but the bee doesnt need that flower, theres plenty of others. how many species of grass or clown fish are needed to serve a purpose? fact is most life exists for no purpose other than the sake of existing, doing so long enough to produce the next generation of itself.

 

[dingodan]

what absolute bollocks. while many forms of life exist in nice symbiosis, many do not and its not always balanced. a flower might need a bee, but the bee doesnt need that flower, theres plenty of others. how many species of grass or clown fish are needed to serve a purpose? fact is most life exists for no purpose other than the sake of existing, doing so long enough to produce the next generation of itself.

How would bee's make honey without flowers? And who would make all the other fishies laugh if there was no clown fish?

Everything in nature has it's place as part of the food chain if nothing else. Nature doesn't do useless, just because you don't know what role this or that species of plant or creature plays doesn't mean they don't play one.

 

[beorhthelm]

How would bee's make honey without flowers?

maybe you should read more carefully. having a place in the food chain is not the same as being irreplacable in the food chain. nature does plenty of usless, male nipples for a trite example. thats the real wonder of nature, it just exist for no reason other than to exist.

 

[dingodan]

maybe you should read more carefully. having a place in the food chain is not the same as being irreplacable in the food chain. nature does plenty of usless, male nipples for a trite example. thats the real wonder of nature, it just exist for no reason other than to exist.

Does nature just create loads of random shit and get lucky?

I don't know what I would do without a sneaky nipple tweak when I'm feeling lonely.

 

[beorhthelm]

Does nature just create loads of random shit and get lucky?

yes. yes it does. marvellous isn't it?

 

[dingodan]

yes. yes it does.

Nah.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

So if as a card-carrying christian you don't believe the creation stuff, do you believe the jesus stuff? Rising from the dead, water into wine, loaves and fishes? And if you do believe the jesus stuff, but not the creation stuff, why one and not the other?

I guess you're saying it's OK to pick and choose the bits you believe and don't believe from a religion, which, thinking about it is probably what most religious people do. Believe in what is convenient; ignore the rest. Very strange.

The creation story is hardly going to be an eye-witness account, and if you think it is, you would be admitting that it is true. It was written thousands of years ago about things that happened millions of years ago. Even when it was written, people were not intended to believe that was how things were supposed to have happened. it was written as a story. So no, I don't believe it, I would maintain that nobody with any common-sense would. I would even go as far as to say that those who do believe it and particularly who want to "teach" it are fundamentalists. And that word when applied to other faiths is often dangerous.
.
As for the other things you mention, the accounts of all those were again written at least decades after they might have happened. A necessary part of faith is the possibility of doubt. It is not, as many seem to think, a question of buying in to it all or not buying in to anything. Some miracles can be explained - even up to the resurrection.

I personally do believe in the resurrection, but in many ways do not think it is important. The "Promise of Eternal Life" bit I don't actually consider to be important. What is more important is the teachings of the man and the religion, which are about tolerance, compassion, fairness and justice among other things. The Bible is not full of diatribes about homosexuals - in fact it wasn't an issue, so make of that what you will. Probably about 80% (if not more) of the Bible is about justice and fairness, and jesus spent most of his time mixing with people he should not have mixed with according to the social and religious teachings of his time. he deliberately confronted and challenged the authorities. He would be appalled at some of what is done in his name and for his sake now.

I will now get off my soapbox and go and throw darts at a picture of Paolo di Canio

 

[Phat Baz 68]

If one of the implications of your post is that all Christians believe the world was made in 6 days and then God had a day off on the seventh, you are labouring under a misapprehesion.

As a card carrying Christian, I fully believe in Darwin's evolution stuff, as do the majority of others who share my faith - at least in my experience. And if any educational authority had tried to teach my children anything of this creationist rubbish when they were at school, I would have been the first to at least question it and probably complain vociferously.

In the mainstream church that I am a member of, it would be accepted that the creation story is just that a (fairy) story - there, I said it for you.

How can someone believe in Darwins TOE and God and Heaven etc etc at the same time ??

It just doesn't make sense to me, you either believe one or the other surely

 

[beorhthelm]

Why do you think male nipples are a mistake?

i'm pretty sure i said "useless", not a mistake. it may seem sensible to replicate the nipple, but nature didnt see fit to provide men with a vagina, yet this more drastic change hasnt led to diverging species.

Can you think of any other examples of what you consider to be "mistakes" in nature? In my experience, amongst all known life forms, extinct or otherwise, there hasn't been a single trait that does not have a reason or purpose for being there.

Virii? parasites? Jeremy Kyle? so nature needs all 3500 species of grass, if there were only 3000 the ecology of the world would collapse? of course not. there are 600 seperate species of Oak tree, 6000 species of earthworm (and that just one type of worm), 15000 species of butterfly, couple of dozen species of mouse... do you really think they are all "assisting or being absolutely vital for the existence of life", beyond their own species? no. many are utterly superflous, where a couple of species would suffice and often there's bearly any difference between them and the rest are the result of random inconsequential changes.

 

[One Love]

How can someone believe in Darwins TOE and God and Heaven etc etc at the same time ??

It just doesn't make sense to me, you either believe one or the other surely

I believe in evolution and God. They don't have to be separate IMO

 

[beorhthelm]

I am not convinced you understand how evolution works.

nor am i convinced you do, but then you believe in an omnipotent designer. a species might evolve in responce to an environmental pressure, but then remains when that factor recedes or changes again. another evolves due to a random change that improves its ability over its fellow species. sometime this will push other species out of existance or to the margins of existance, sometimes they will co-exist in the same environment for hundreds of millenia. there are other changes that make no difference - as long as they are not negative, they will persist. i see flaws in evolution, because its not perfect. we are a prime example, held by some to be the pinnacle, yet neither the strongest, fastest animal, with middling vision, hearing, poor smell. we have one or two crucial adaptions that allow a massive advantage.

you believe there is no random or pointless (purposeless is better) feature to a species because you believe they were designed. so there's no vestigial structures in any animal? every colour, pattern, texture and shape is suited to a purpose? go ask a biologist what they think of that.

 

[beorhthelm]

You are making much of what you just said about evolution up...

i think you are making up what i write either deliberately or because of the late hour. i said some species will evolve and push others to extinction; i said humans has flaws not that thy are a flaw of evolution. i already gave examples, unless you believe that each and every grass, oak, worm and mouse species serves a specific purpose within the rest of the biosphere. to humour you i'll offer powdery mildew as a species that serves no purpose other than its own existance and the human toe nail as a purposeless trait.

 

[teaboy]

I am not convinced you understand how evolution works.

All of the species of grass, oaktree, butterfly, mouse and every other living thing are related to their respective family of species - go back far enough and their ancestors will have been the same. The reason different variants of the same species exist is because a lot of the time, and over time, a species needs to adapt (or evolve) to survive in their ever changing environments.

You are quoting me when you ask do we really think they are all "assisting or being absolutely vital for the existence of life", but you have misinterpreted my quote. I was referring to the laws of the universe, as well as life itself, each of which seem to be flawless with their laws and rules, in order for life to exist and flourish.

How can you possibly find a flaw in evolution, when the planet that life inhabits is oozing with life from every corner and orifice - no matter how cold, deep or inhostile it is. Not to mention creating us - a species perhaps capable of one day occupying space, or potentially the entire universe.

The direction of the evolutionary path of species is clearly not random- it only evolves and adapts, goes forward - despite millions of species being known and studied there has never been discovered a "random" or pointless feature to a species - every attribute that is known has been created for a reason, to aid the survival of life - evolution is the ultimate designer, it creates solutions for even the most improbable problems in order for life to survive - far beyond what man is capable of. There is no plausible theory explaining why evolution exists, the theory of an omnipotent designer is one of the strongest.

It appears you don't understand how evolution works. Evolution just happens. Genes mutate - those that are not harmful survive and are passed on. In certain situations members of the species with certain genes will be more successful and will reproduce more. If members of the species carry genes or traits that are harmful, or not useful in survival or reproduction IN THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION then they tend to die. There is no plan.

If a designer is omnipotant, why would there be a need to evolve? Did the designer get it wrong first time?

 

[teaboy]

You are making much of what you just said about evolution up... Can you give a single example of a species that has gone extinct because of an evolutionary trait?

All extinctions have been down to evolutionary traits. Plants and animals unsuited to the environment they find themselves in tend to go extinct. The Dodo went extinct because it was flightless (an evolutionary trait) and could not deal with predators (an evolutionary trait). When a predator was introduced to the environment they were all killed as they couldn't escape, and didn't know that they should.