Probality of God

[CuriousChris]

I will say this. I have the Bible as proof for my end, what do you have for your end? Nothing but speculation and conjecture. I beat you out 1 to none on that point alone. What is left for you to argue? Or is this your thing and you are a beginner?

Magzimus Leviticus

So your proof is a book written by man. Your arguments are to repeat the arguments uttered by other people. You have no basis for your faith except to choose to believe what others say.

Which is as I have said earlier the reason for so many different religions. And why people choose a religion which suits there own internal purposes or that they have been indoctrinated in.

You have no proof that what you have been taught and choose to believe is the truth.


"The book says that all that was created merely 10,000 (ten thousand) years ago. At least its followers believe that, based on biblical calculations."

Verifiably false. Therefore the book is verifiably false.

[WilbyInebriated]

A hypothesis by Douglas Adams

And speculation by the Fool.

I see nothing there that proves that God does not exist.  I know you are playing that card as if it is.     

Ok what else ya got? 

Magzimus Leviticus

it is proven... and here is the evidence:

42


when you ask the wrong questions, or in your case, none at all... the answers don't really mean anything.

[Magluvin]

So your proof is a book written by man. Your arguments are to repeat the arguments uttered by other people. You have no basis for your faith except to choose to believe what others say.

Which is as I have said earlier the reason for so many different religions. And why people choose a religion which suits there own internal purposes or that they have been indoctrinated in.

You have no proof that what you have been taught and choose to believe is the truth.


"The book says that all that was created merely 10,000 (ten thousand) years ago. At least its followers believe that, based on biblical calculations."

Verifiably false. Therefore the book is verifiably false.

Oh, so your saying that since it has been verified that the earth has been in existence for way more than 10k years, the book must be false?


Mags

[CuriousChris]

Oh, so your saying that since it has been verified that the earth has been in existence for way more than 10k years, the book must be false?

Mags

Yes!

But to eloborate.

Creationists believe the book is a matter of fact and the earth has only existed for a short time period.

But maybe you choose not to be a creationist. Therefore you are saying I'll choose a different version of events (to creationists).

Now you should be able to see the problem. The book is interpreted differently by different people. Therefore there are different religions. some which differ on a few minor points. Some which differ on major points. Some that do not see eye to eye at all.

But how does anyone know their version of the truth is the correct one?

[Newton II]

And you still have everything backwards.  No one has to prove that religion is wrong.  Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.  It is up to theists to prove that their outlandish claims are right.  For example, if you posit there is an afterlife, well explain how you know this.  And old Jewish fairy tales do not count, or I can start trotting out Lord of the Rings as evidence.

Who is talking about religion?   I am talking about spiritualism and probality of God.   


Science is quest for truth and spiritualism is also quest for truth.   Sceince's quest is about visible world which is explainable.   Spiritualism's   quest  is about invisible world which cannot be explained but only be realised. 


Newton wrote about absolute time, absolute space etc.  But Einstein denied the notion of absolute and said everything is relativistic and nothing is absolute. Tomorrow some other scientist may say that everything is just an illusion.    Which means that scientists are not clear about what they are talking about. So why should we trust these scientists when they say God does not exist?.    They should give clear picture of everything before coming to conclusion.