Religion Debates and Discussions

they crash landed in the water, sank, and it froze over...?

what else do need

 

I definitely did not read 43 pages of debate but I did see this

To my understanding, according to you, believing in god is logical because you can look outside and see a "beautiful world" But what about the people living in let's say Syria that look outside their windows every day to see blood and carnage in their war torn country. According to your argument what other people see is that the blood is red due to the interaction between iron and oxygen in hemoglobin. Although many may question the existence of a god in a world like theirs. Idk if that made any sense I'm just rambling here. Btw I am a devout agnostic xd.

 

I think that his point was that the proof for God is beyond what's on the world's surface; that you have to see past face value to see God.

 

If being a volcano head means treating creationism like the crackpot idea that it is then I'm a volcano head and I don't apologise for it.

Also

a) do you ever link us to anything that isn't creationist-slanted or some BS like the daily mail?
b) This proves nothing about creationism or evolution. Seriously.

 

Woah this hasn't been locked?

Colour me impressed guys.

 

I think the staff might be a bit scared to

 

I have to agree with Gehenna with that.

 

You're calling @Gehenna_Beam out for posting something irrelevant, but yet, same goes for what you just said. The fact that "he posted something from dailymail" does not have anything to do with religion. Moral of the story is: practice what you preach, please.

 

literally all of his linked sources are from extremely unreputable and biased sourced that we cant fully trust

 

And I think the moral of your story is: think before you type. Did you not read my post or did you just purposefully misrepresent me?

Wait, it's that easy? All this time we've just been debating I could've just said "you lose" and I would've won? Dammit!

On another note Gehenna, I have a question for you. Are you able to debate me or anyone else on evolution or carbon dating or various sciences that you disagree with, without mentioning God or Christianity? If your only objection to evolution is that it's incompatible with the Bible, then that's not an objection that stands on its own, it's not one you came up with yourself. It's clear that you had the Bible hammered into you, were presented with an opposing theory, and just immediately pushed it away because you couldn't handle the Bible being wrong. But if you can debate me on evolution without invoking your faith, if your objection to evolution is actually founded on some other than religious belief, then please let me know. And maybe we can reach an understanding.

 

@GlobalistCuck I have a question, what reason(s) make you so sure there is no God? Please don't take this as an attack or whatever and just say your points instead of wasting time by getting mad.

 

he cant be sure that there isnt a god, just like you be sure that there is

 

As I've said probably twenty times by now, burden of proof lies with religion, not with science. If you believe in something's existence, you have to back it up with evidence. You can't just call on the other side to disprove it.

 

Then the question is what makes you think that it is unlikely that there is a God? Usually people pull out the "Because of the suffering in the world" or something like that. Just an example.

I can bet that he is "sure" or at least thinks he is sure that there is no God

 

I think it's unlikely that there is a God because ideas that directly contradict the evidence provided for a God have more weight and evidence behind them than those that support a God.

Here's a related question: of all the things that religions hold in common when it comes to evidence, how can you be sure that the evidence you see supports only your religion? There are plenty of other religions out there with far more complex and in-depth descriptions of the natural world. What makes these incorrect?

If he's 100% certain of anything, he's going about it the wrong way IMO. As would you be, if you were 100% certain.
Doubt is a healthy thing to have, and without it you can hold back thinking on a variety of things. I have doubt about religion, in that I'm confident that I would be willing to take in evidence around me and process it myself before coming to a final conclusion about anything.

 

In other words, you want to prove God exists while ignoring our arguments about different factors of why God might not exist?

Why can't you listen to all explanation before you conclude that God exists?

No. Maybe if you actually bothered to listen to us and try to refute the arguments presented, I'd find newfound respect in you.

I remember on another page on this thread where @ObamaTheReptile spoke about carbon dating. I can't remember what it said. Can you dig it back up for me?

 

Quick question to you, but how can Carbon Dating prove to be useful in terms of Evolution? I mean if the Earth is many billion of years old (supposedly) then how could Carbon Dating be useful since it can only remain accurate up to 50,000 years ago?