MOH Forum: Prove God Exists and Get $1,000,000

Prove God Exists and Get $1,000,000

Posted By:
Lord Lucan
in somewhere strange
Jan 12, 2005

<a href="http://www.thinkandreason.com/" title="Think and Reason">Think and Reason</a> is offering $1,000,000 if you can<b> prove</b> that God exists. There are conditions attached. But they do say: <i>"All you have to do is prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that God exists. It is really that easy!"</i>

Is there really this money sitting waiting?

Supposing I said I was God - and prove I exist (should be easy) - is the money mine?

Category: Money, Religion; Replies: 1406

Comments

Page 14 of 24 pages ‹ First < 12 13 14 15 16 > Last ›
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 \| 05:42 PM Leo said: "I thought atheists were all about making it so people wouldn't believe in myths yet, charybdis is celebrating Christmas." Well, Charybdis is choosing to exchange gifts with friends and relatives on December 25th. He isn't celebrating the alleged birth of Christ. You DO see the difference, don't you? Try this if you don't: December 25th this year also happens to be the last day of Hannukah. Do you think that Jews are celebrating Christmas? Besides, if Charybdis said, "Yeah, I'm celebrating Christmas," what point would that make in your mind? If he SAYS he's an atheist, he's an atheist.
Captain Al in Vancouver Island, Canada Member	Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 \| 01:35 PM The <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4558956.stm">Pope has asked for a spiritual wakeup</a> in his Christmas message. He claims he is praying for those working toward peace in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America. I've heard this from the pope every year for as long as I can remember. Strangely, I can't see that it ever makes one iota of difference. If God doesn't answer the pope's prayers, whose does he answer? Maybe God should spend less time fooling around with Virgin Mary water stain images and more on world peace. It also seems this pope has a thing or two against technology. The news items states: "He urged the crowd not to focus entirely on the "immense progress" made in science and technology during the previous millennium." Meanwhile, religious leaders the world over are using this technology to build bullet-proof popemobiles, fly around the world in private jets and broadcast the word of God with geosyncronous satellites. As an added bonus, they use computers to maintain a <a href="http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm">Vatican website</a> and calculate the daily interest earned on all the money that flows in from the poor people they preach peace and goodwill to.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 \| 03:17 AM But Captain Al, surely all that technological goodness would have happened anyway due to the power of prayer. I mean, science might have given us means to combat polio, smallpox, or malaria, but prayer has given us um, late night psychic hotlines.
Timmo Member	Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 \| 05:59 PM Talking to God isn't as useless as you think. Last June at uni I was going through the worst week I have had for about 10 years. I had almost hit rock bottom and I started brokenly praying in the toilet in tears, asking God to give me some, any, kind or filler if He was there. I got a text from my brother saying he suddenly felt as though God was calling him to pray for me. Not complicatedly at all, just "please help God". My brother only texts me about once every 3 months.
Timmo Member	Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 \| 06:40 PM Maybe God should spend less time fooling around with a Virgin Mary water stain and focus more on world peace? I see what you're saying. Ususally this is the bit where I point out that God doesn't force world peace because He wants Free Will, and you point out that Free Will only accounts for a fraction of the suffering in the world. For example, no kids in Africa chose to die of malaria, and no fish chose to be suffocated in fishing nets. The guy who made Narnia said himself that he used to be an atheist because biological life, seemingly accidental, only miserably survives by the death of other biological life. It is not the cruelty of the universe so much as it's randomness. But think about it: If the universe was such that suffering could only ever be reached when someone chose it, then what would be so good about making good decisions? If you had never been there to make the decision, the situation would apparently not have been in the need of good to start with. Consequently you've done nothing, so the universe has to be random to have meaning.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 \| 07:31 PM Still, how can you worship someone who murders (yes, murders) millions of children a year to prove a point about free will? Even if proof of God's existence came to light, I still could never worship someone who has brought so much evil into this world and allowed it to continue.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 \| 07:17 AM Timmo said: "Talking to God isn't as useless as you think. Last June at uni I was going through the worst week I have had for about 10 years. I had almost hit rock bottom and I started brokenly praying in the toilet in tears, asking God to give me some, any, kind or filler if He was there. I got a text from my brother saying he suddenly felt as though God was calling him to pray for me. Not complicatedly at all, just "please help God". My brother only texts me about once every 3 months." Why do you assume that your prayer "made" your brother text you? Are you sure you're recalling the incident accurately, for starters? What about the millions of people every day who pray for things that don't materialize? Does that, in your mind, prove that God DOESN'T exist? If not, why not? One incident proves the existance of God but millions of others DON'T prove His non-existance? See the problem with your logic?
Captain Al in Vancouver Island, Canada Member	Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 \| 10:45 AM Timmo said: "Last June at uni I was going through the worst week I have had for about 10 years. I had almost hit rock bottom..." Rock bottom? Are you saying your life is worse than those kids in Africa dying of malaria? Unless there are some exceptional circumstances, I would think you've got it pretty good. You at least are in a situation where you can attend university. So why would God answer your prayers and ignore the prayers of kids in Africa? You can also seek therapy if you exercise your so-called "free will". Please tell us how those kids in Africa can use their "free will" to cure their malaria.
Timmo Member	Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 \| 07:32 PM No I think I am recalling the incident accurately. I wasn't in a trance. I just said "please help me" to the thin air in front of me, as sane as you are now, and hoped that if God was there, He'd hear me. It was later in the week that I got the text. I had recovered but was still feeling slightly down in the dumps and my bro texted me saying he felt as though God was calling him to ask help for me that week. Why do people in Africa have malaria even though they probably pray 24 hours but I get something for nothing? I dunno. But before the incident (in post 221, I believe) I remember trying to mathematically PROVE that God was Perfect and by some formula the world (everyone in Africa) would be as well. I remember thinking I was well good. Following the incident I have discovered that part of the plan is that God becomes a living thing and dies and rises. As my brain functions with the laws of the universe, I cannot comment as to what this plan is as it is outside the universe. And I was arrogant to do so before. I only believe it because of the text (it's not blind faith). As it was to this guy Jesus that I prayed, who lived 2000 years ago and claimed (at least, some scrappy records SAY He claimed) that He would answer if you asked Him, I assume His claims were true.
Captain Al in Vancouver Island, Canada Member	Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 \| 09:36 PM Wow! After 2000 years of waiting Jesus finally reveals himself. All those centuries of faith really paid off when the Almighty Lord was able to command a person to email his brother only weeks before he would have done so anyway. Can world peace be far behind?
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 \| 10:24 PM Timmo, let me ask you straight. Why do you worship the greatest mass murderer ever? Why do you love him and feel that he loves you? Let me clarify a bit, I'm not even going to go into the recent tsunami for this one. Let's go for something undisputedly God's handiwork. It says so in the Bible. The Flood. God sent a flood to MURDER all the people living on Earth, save for Noah and his immediate family. According to the Bible, countless people, thousands certainly, maybe millions, were MURDERED directly by God. It's impossible to swallow the idea that EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE PLANET deserved to die. Newborn babies don't deserve to die. People born with mental retardation don't deserve to die. In fact, it seems logical that the vast majority of the population of the planet <i>can't</i> have been deserving of death or society would never have continued to function. Even at the height of our recent genocides and mass murderers, the majority of the populace was just trying to survive. Why did God MURDER all those innocent people? And what makes you think that God won't murder you just because he feels like it? After all, practically the entire population of the planet was wiped out just because He got a little cranky at some sinners one time. My stand once again - If God exists he is deserving only of contempt, not love, for He is an uncaring and murderous Bastard.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2005 \| 12:14 AM Timmo said: "No I think I am recalling the incident accurately. I wasn't in a trance. I just said "please help me" to the thin air in front of me, as sane as you are now, and hoped that if God was there, He'd hear me. It was later in the week that I got the text. I had recovered but was still feeling slightly down in the dumps and my bro texted me saying he felt as though God was calling him to ask help for me that week." OK, so the story has changed a bit. I was under the impression that you asked God for help and almost immediately heard from your brother. Apparantly that is not the case. Why do you automatically assume cause and effect in the case of two events that happened days apart? Perhaps it was the fact that you had Wheaties one morning for breakfast that "made" your brother contact you. I'm sure you think that's absurd. Think about it for a moment, though. You're employing the logical fallacy that because A preceeded B, A must have caused B. If you back up and look at things objectively, you'll see that there were MANY "A's" before B happened. Why CAN'T it have been one of the other A's which caused your brother to contact you (or, more likely, A had NOTHING to do with B, it was merely coincidence). The "A caused B" fallacy is extremely common and is behind a lot of wrong-headed thinking. We've all made that mistake many times. It's something to watch out for.
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 \| 05:56 PM Fair enough, CMG, it could just be a coincidence. Some guy (forgotten his name) once said that in science it is never possible to prove a theory, only to disprove it. So say I propose a hypothesis and then do an experiment in the real world, and find out the real thing contradicts the hypothesis, I have killed the hypothesis stone dead. Whereas if the real thing tallies with my hypothesis, my hypothesis MAY be correct, but I should experiment many times before making it a theory. Doesn't it seem as though I am in a much worse position than you? I could give you a hundred examples of the above story and not prove Jesus. You, on the other hand, only have to give me one other example to kill my theory stone dead. Now, if it is true that this guy was God, coming into the world to die so the world could be made compatible with God and thus be made Perfect, and it is also true that He said "Whoever in the world, wherever, whenever, only has to call on me and I will give him life: I will answer!", then I will still not be able to prove it, but you can disprove it. Faced with a theory (a strange theory, I admit) such as this, surely the more scientific man is the one who tests the theory honestly, and then either disproves it, or finds out it is more likely to be true but still does not prove it. You can't lose on this one.
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 \| 06:06 PM The above post is pretty lengthy and therefore tempting to skim. But if skimmed, it may give the wrong end of the stick, so please can you read it normally. Can I also say that the prayer should not be mere parrot fashion or chants, but simply "God? If you were (and are) Jesus, then my answer is "Yes"; show yourself to me, even if I am feeling reluctant". He may not answer in the way you expect, though, or as quickly as you expect, but answer He will nonetheless
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 \| 07:17 PM Charybdis, According to the laws of logic, there is badness in the universe, God is in total control, so there shouldn't be any badness if God was not only very loving, but the infinite source of all Love. Thus God cannot be loving if he exists. You said that even if I was to give you evidence of God, you still could not worship him for the cruelty he has controlled. Let's take a look at the evidence people usually give for God. If God is defined as a being with total control, then there must be no laws outside Him ("outside Him" means "beyond His control") I will define something Perfect to have no laws outside it, and something imperfect to have laws outside it. Now, consider the whole of imperfect existence. Either there is something outside it, in which case that thing must be Perfect, being outside imperfect existence, or there may be nothing outside it. But if there is nothing outside it, then imperfect existence is in fact perfect, for there are no laws outside it. According to the above, God is in charge of all logical laws. Now, when I look at the suffering in this universe, I cannot think of any way in which God can rectify it; I mean, it's here, isn't it? Hasn't God already let this happen? But my brain is subject to the laws of logic in this universe. If God is above them (or maybe, according to the above, God partly IS them), then it is possible that God has loved everything we are watching and it will be perfect by some twist of logic. I cannot prove this but it is a possibility. I certainly can't understand how it works if it does.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 \| 01:04 AM Timmo said: "Doesn't it seem as though I am in a much worse position than you? I could give you a hundred examples of the above story and not prove Jesus. You, on the other hand, only have to give me one other example to kill my theory stone dead." Well, if I follow you, yes, I guess that's true. Of course, that could be because I'm just right. After all, shouldn't a perfect being be consistent? If God isn't consistent, maybe that's because He doesn't exist and all the supposed "proofs" of such are merely results of people trying too hard to read between the lines.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2006 \| 09:12 AM Timmo, it sounds like you're using convoluted 'logic' to 'prove' a supposition that you desperately want to believe. The fact is, there is no more reason to believe that God exists than to believe that any other fictional creation exists. It's amazing how much time and effort has been expended over the millenia just so that some people can have religious power over others.
Timmo Member	Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2006 \| 06:04 PM I don't want power over anyone. I know you weren't referring to me, but to others who have; I'm just saying I don't. May I ask if anyone tried the scientific experiment I suggested?
Homer Simpson	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 05:40 AM I could offer arguments to you...but no matter what I'd say, you would come up with something to refute it. I have my reasons to believe in God and that He is Objectively real- but I don't want to talk about that. I'd like to make the observation that it seems many people here invest much of their time and thought to something they don't believe in. Isn't that a waste of your time?...Couldn't you be doing something else? Or are you trying to liberate the minds of the ignorant religious people who still believe in God? (if that were true...it would be more noble) If you are an Atheist or Agnostic then all truth is objective because there is no reference for Good or Bad. Truth then becomes a personal thing...in witch case you should avoid trying to show that God does not exist since doing so would only rob those who do believe in God their happiness and hope. God gives them something to hope in. Why would you rob them of hope, happiness, and peace of mind?- if there is no God, what is the harm in them believing in God? Isn't that THEIR TRUTH? Why do you have to defend your position and reaffirm it with others? If you DO get off by taking away joy and hope then you are (by the common idea of your peers since there is no God)a tyrant and bully. A true Christian only wants to share the Joy and Hope, they find, with others(seems noble to me). What happiness does your belief bare? BTW: Religion doesn't cause all the problems...sinful ideas/people do. Look at Communism or the French revolution -No religion there. Do you feel strongly enough in your beliefs(I mean Dis-beliefs)that you would live by them? After all, without God...You can do anything you want. Nothing wrong with stealing or killing as long as you get away with it- right? Next time you have a dilemma of conscience, you have the duty to live by your ideals. In conclusion-Don't was your time thinking about the absents of God. If you really honestly meditate on God (or even the idea of God), you will see the absurdity of this whole conversation. *Info about me- I stumbled here from Google after a search for "zoraster bible" I'm a Catholic Convert as of about 3 years ago. I took me about a year and a half to decide that the Church was where the largest amount of objective truth is deposited. I used a mixture of prayer, logic, and philosophy to figure that out. If you want good, logical Christian arguments/answers check out a work from the great philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas here: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/ If you do eventually come to believe in God it will be by His grace...So you'll owe Him the money ;o)
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 09:08 AM <i>I'd like to make the observation that it seems many people here invest much of their time and thought to something they don't believe in. Isn't that a waste of your time?...Couldn't you be doing something else? Or are you trying to liberate the minds of the ignorant religious people who still believe in God? (if that were true...it would be more noble)</i> The fight against ignorance and superstition is never a waste of time. <i>If you are an Atheist or Agnostic then all truth is objective because there is no reference for Good or Bad.</i> Bullshit. I don't need the threat of eternal damnation to know the difference between right and wrong and neither do any of the people who follow religions that don't teach the doctrine of "I love you, but if you do wrong I'll punish you for all eternity". The fact that you require a God threatening you to make you behave simply shows how unethical you truly are. Ethics and belief in God are not the same. They exist totally separate from each other. This is the one that really floors me. Are all Christians so amoral that they MUST have a watcher to threaten them with punishment? An ethical, moral person doesn't need a watcher. That's the whole point. If you can't act appropriately without someone watching you, then you aren't really moral. <i>...if there is no God, what is the harm in them believing in God?</i> Because believing in a myth opens people up to those who seek to take advantage of their gullibility. Tithes are mandatory in many churches, and if you fail to comply you're harassed and/or expelled from the church. Also, many religious leaders teach hatred and intolerance in the name of God, and Christianity is one of the biggest offenders. Try being gay/lesbian in most Christian churches. Try being a wife who wants to leave her husband in the more extreme Mormon sects. And these are just the mainstream religions. The church does much good, but that good can be done outside. There are many humanitarian organizations that have nothing to do with religion. These groups don't fall prey to cult leaders. Lastly, if you find joy and hope believing in fairy tales how can I ever take you seriously about anything else? If someone professed to truly believe in, and pattern their life after, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves would you let them teach and care for your children, no matter how happy their belief made them? I find happiness and joy in the life I have. I don't need empty promises of a next life to fulfill my existence, nor do I need someone to threaten me to make me behave. I actually have morals.
Timmo Member	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 10:02 AM (if anyone tried my experiment, my email is dhc104@#oton.ac.uk, where =t, #=s; in case my neighbours type in my email on google. oh do let's give it a go; I mean, whoever heard of einstein being too chicken to test if E=mc^2)
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 02:16 PM Boy, that was well-said, Charybdis. Good work.
Homer Simpson	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 04:29 PM You missed my point... I am talking about how we decide -What is truth? When I was talking about "God" I wasn't talking about a Judge to scare you straight. I was talking about an objective truth in the universe. HOW do you know what is good? Not what you know isn't- This is a serious philosophical question not a "soft-minded Christian" question. You said: "Because believing in a myth opens people up to those who seek to take advantage of their gullibility." I feel the same about you. I think you believe in the myth of no God. -Who is to say what's right? I do think with all my convictions that God is all truth, goodness, justice/mercy, and love. God Bless
Larry in Missouri--USA Member	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 07:20 PM I admit I haven
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 10:03 PM <i>You said: "Because believing in a myth opens people up to those who seek to take advantage of their gullibility." I feel the same about you. I think you believe in the myth of no God. -Who is to say what's right? I do think with all my convictions that God is all truth, goodness, justice/mercy, and love.</i> - Homer Simpson. The argument of what is Good and what is Evil is an extremely difficult philisophical argument that has been raging for millenia. There are no concise answers. There is no automatic religious connotation to that argument, however. The only reason you associate knowledge of good and evil with religion is because of the Bible. Are you telling me that Buddhists don't know the difference? Many of them don't even believe in a God figure. How about Hindu, Native beliefs, Shinto, Confucianism, Nordic beliefs, or better yet, Greeks? They invented philosophy, to all intents and purposes. Are you saying that they don't know the difference because they didn't believe in the Bible? After all, the Garden of Eden didn't happen as far as they were concerned. Are you telling me that I don't know the difference between good and evil? Now, as to atheists : Atheist don't form cults and kill themselves and their children to be with their god, be it the Christian God or aliens. Atheists don't preach hatred and intolerance "in the name of God". Atheists don't enslave people "because the Bible said so". Atheists don't force their beliefs on others "for the salvation of their souls" even unto the death of the victim. Now, obviously there have been some atheists who actually did the above, but they were aberrations, not the norm. You can't say that about religion. The Southern Baptists boycotted Disney because they allowed gays/lesbians to use their parks. The Mormon extremist cults, which are still a very strong force in Utah, enslave their women and children, often-times against their wills if they can't convince them that 'God demands it". The Catholic Church ordered inquisitions against witches and anyone who didn't follow Catholic doctrine. Thousands, if not millions of people died because they didn't have the proper beliefs. So, explain to me again how you worship one who is "all truth, goodness, justice/mercy, and love." by bringing hatred or death to anyone who disagrees.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 \| 10:15 PM Sadly Larry, I tend to rant even more than the people I'm arguing with. I need to pull back on that. Anyways, <i>but I know the Bible tells us that faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen. It goes on to say that without this faith, it is impossible to please God.</i> Everthing you've stated falls back on the Bible being the Word of God. What would happen if the Bible turned out to be just a collection of stories that people made up, and nothing more? The entire rest of your argument about faith would be groundless. You can't tell me that the Bible is the Word of God, because your only souce of proof for that is the Bible itself. "God exists because they Bible says so, and the Bible is true because it is the Word of God" is a circular argument. Now, I fully realize that even if it was proven beyond any doubt that the Bible was fiction, you'd still believe. The reason is because your faith feeds upon itself. Once you start to believe it becomes a self-sustaining operation. You don't want to stop believing so you continue to do so even in the absence of any external reason for doing so. It can be very hard and embarassing to lose one's faith. So much so that many people who do lose their faith pretend otherwise so as not to be ostracized. Atheists are one of the last groups that can be freely discriminated against, and who wants to face that?
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 \| 01:01 AM Larry said: "In the end, it comes back to faith. Just as my 7 year old cannot understand everything I do he has to accept that I know best. He cannot comprehend why he has to get those shots in the arm that hurt so much. WHY do I allow this to be done to him? Of course, I understand why, but he doesn
Larry in Missouri--USA Member	Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 \| 04:11 PM Chary, Ranting? Actually
Larry in Missouri--USA Member	Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 \| 06:09 PM Cranky Media Guy said:
lindsay	Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 \| 11:50 PM i cant believe this thing is still going on haha i decided to forget it after i was labeled as just the immature youth. it wasnt even worth defending myself...hed never have understood truly what i was saying. but its ok someday people will understand, so i dont care if they laugh now believers- maybe you all should consider quitting the debate. the people that you are trying to convince have their hearts closed tight, the only thing that you can really help them with would be prayer. right now youre only giving them more amo to use against christians. even if you make a good point, usually itll be ignored. and even if you somehow managed the impossible and convinced them with logic that God was real then their hearts still wouldnt believe it. and that is the true thing that needs convincing here. why use up all of your energy, all of your virtue, on someone who will only waste it? im sure that there are many people that would gladly listen to you and accept God. theyve chosen their path. the only thing that could happen here would be harm now, unless someone stumbles upon the site and likes your arguement. but this debate will only plany seeds of doubt in your mind. and even though im sure it wont make you backslide, it can only hurt you. its just a suggestion. idk i just dont want anyone to pass up any oppertunities from God, or get hurt on this sight. anyway i never really said my formal goodbye. actrually i stopped mid explaination so byebye. good luck to you guys. i hope that many of you will have your eyes opened someday. i hope that you dont just remember me as the immature youth because i actually cared about guys. so do the rest of the people argueing against you, so have at least understanding in that. ps- and as one final comment i would like to say this "Everthing you've stated falls back on the Bible being the Word of God. What would happen if the Bible turned out to be just a collection of stories that people made up, and nothing more? The entire rest of your argument about faith would be groundless." our arguements and belief in GOd are not soley based on the bible. it doesnt matter what name our creator choses to take, what message he forms, because we just know him as our God. he shows us who he is and obviously he has shown most of us on here that the bible is a guide for us. if were wrong, then that does not mean were wrong about God being God. we know him for who he is, not what someone told us he was. hopefully someday you will able to understand that 😊 god bless everyone (had to make one last huge long ranting)
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 01:49 AM Larry said: "Yes, I understand the value of medicine and the medical fact behind it. Science is a wonderful thing and I appreciate it. I posted that in an effort to illustrate that at times I do not understand God
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 04:33 AM Charybdis & CMG, I don't know whether you are scientists or not? I can understand you thinking I haven't provided enough evidence, but may I ask if you tried the experiment? I'll bet any scientific atheists/agnostics who have viewed this site in the hope of scientifically finding which answer is right may have experimented it, in the hope of either disproving it or making it more likely. I'll be praying from now that the experiment becomes as simple and clear and wonderfully scientific to you as it actually is. (God will not control your free will to try the experiment) Larry and lindsay, you'll be praying alongside me for these guys as well, won't you?
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 04:39 AM I will not press you to try the experiment any more (what's the point?), but remember my email if you do try it (or just post here), whether the result is positive or negative
Larry in Missouri--USA Member	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 09:26 AM CMG I didn't miss your point on medicine. There is plenty of factual evidence to prove that certain medical treatments accomplish certain results. Faith is not an issue with that...and, again, I appreciate such things. I also have agreed with your point concerning God and logic. They don't mix---not in the human mind anyway. There is no legalistic, factual evidence about the existence of God. I've told you I understand these thoughts. I felt the very same thing and had some of these very same issues with God. One might say I was in your camp on this...looking back I was at the very least an agnostic salad with perhaps a dash of atheist tossed in for dressing. Do you love your wife? Do you love your mother? I'll take the liberty of assuming the answer is yes. If so...show me this thing called "love"? Pull it out of your pocket and let me have a look at it? Of course we can't "show" love. But, most of us would agree it's something very real inside of us and we do not doubt it's power. That's all I'm saying about my relationship and faith in God. It's something inside of me that's very, real and very powerful. Not a perfect analogy (I see the holes in it) but it at least illustrates to a degree what I'm trying to. There are some things in life that either defy explanation or are difficult to explain with logic and fact. You feel them
Captain Al in Vancouver Island, Canada Member	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 09:33 AM Another excellent picture in today's <a href="http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060108.html">Astronomy Picture of the Day</a>. It shows the Tadpole Galaxy, 420 million light years away. That means the light reaching us today left that galaxy about 100 million years before dinosaurs walked on the earth. It probably has 100 billion stars in it (like our own Milky Way galaxy). How many planets circle those 100 billion stars? Also visible in the photo are dozens of other galaxies and each one probably has an average of 100 billion stars in it with a trillion planets circling them. And this is just one tiny section of the sky. Amazing stuff, but what's even more amazing is here on the insignificant planet Earth, one of hundreds of trillions of planets, some insignificant animals called humans have for a mere 2000 years believed a "god" created all this especially for them. Is it just me or are we humans extremely arrogant? I said it before on this forum and I'll say it again. People were on the Earth long before "god" was invented and they will still be here long after that "god" is forgotten.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 \| 05:22 PM Larry said: "Do you love your wife? Do you love your mother? I'll take the liberty of assuming the answer is yes. If so...show me this thing called "love"? Pull it out of your pocket and let me have a look at it? " The difference between love and faith is that most people recognize that love is an emotion generated from within their brain. God, however, is alleged to be an external being. No, I can't point to love any more than I can point to the pain I feel if I prick my finger, but no one is claiming that love is a free-standing entity. If I misunderstood your position on things in general, by the way, I apologize. I guess I just get a little heated after having debated with many believers. I don't want to misrepresent or misinterpret your position, though; neither of us would gain from that.
Name here	Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 \| 10:46 AM Charybdis in Hell Said: "Because believing in a myth opens people up to those who seek to take advantage of their gullibility. Tithes are mandatory in many churches, and if you fail to comply you're harassed and/or expelled from the church. Also, many religious leaders teach hatred and intolerance in the name of God, and Christianity is one of the biggest offenders. Try being gay/lesbian in most Christian churches. Try being a wife who wants to leave her husband in the more extreme Mormon sects. And these are just the mainstream religions. The church does much good, but that good can be done outside. There are many humanitarian organizations that have nothing to do with religion. These groups don't fall prey to cult leaders." I agree.
Name Here	Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 \| 11:25 AM Cranky Media Guy said: "Well, you seem to have missed the point entirely. What I was saying is that you do NOT have to take medicine on faith since it's testable. With religion, you have NO proof at all; all you have is faith. As I said, you CHOOSE to believe" I disagree with how you interpreted it. I believe he was saying that in the scenario of getting a shot his kid is like us on earth, and he is God (Not in a literal sense). He, "God", knows, but his kid, "earthlings", doesn't know about all the evidence and the proof that the innoculation will work, so the child relies on his fathers faith. He has faith in his father. I agree that people choose to agree. The bible is nothing but a book about morals and stories that were made in tumultous times. Something happens and people blame God. When lightening hit houses in the old days people would just let it burn because they thought that it was the work of God. No offense to anyone who believes in the Bible, but I personally don't believe in it. Although I do in fact believe in God. I think it's wrong to push religion down peoples throats. (Not saying that all of you believers are doing so). Just remember, The past is told by those who WIN. I think people should believe what makes sense to them. It seems to make life much more bearable or more reasonable for them. That's the best way. Also, I encourage anyone who loves to read to read the Da Vinci Code. It pretty much sums up my belief in the bible. Last, I don't think CMG, and Charybdis, and any other atheist want you to pray for them. I would take that as an insult. I did when one of my friends said that he was praying for me just because Im not baptized. It's rude and although it seems like a nice gesture, it's not (with some exceptions of course). It can make some people feel inferior and quite a bit pissed off. So don't pray for them, pray for people who are fighting disease, people caught in the tsunami and hurricane. Pray for world peace and tolerance, pray that your Grandmother will live through a surgery. But DON'T pray for people because they believe differently than you. Why would you pray for them, CMG and Charybdis are living happy content lives(Im sure), so don't insult them especially if they don't believe in prayer. If you do, don't tell them, because they don't care, and because .............. IT'S INSULTING!
Name Here	Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 \| 11:30 AM In my previous post I put: "I agree that people choose to agree" I meant I agree that people choose to believe. Heres a good saying. Let's agree to disagree, no matter how wrong you may be. It can work either way for believers and Non.
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 \| 06:07 PM Name Here said: "Why would you pray for them, CMG and Charybdis are living happy content lives(Im sure), so don't insult them especially if they don't believe in prayer. If you do, don't tell them, because they don't care, and because .............. IT'S INSULTING!" Yup, and condescending, too. I know believers have a hard time with this, but honestly, I do NOT suffer in any way I can determine from not believing in God. Like any reasonably intelligent person, I wonder about the nature of the universe, but I just don't imagine there to be a big, all-knowing guy in charge of the whole shebang and it doesn't get in the way of my functioning at all. One cool thing is that my wife, who is no longer a believer either, is a legitimate Biblical expert so I can ask her what the deal is whenever I run up against some contradiction in Christian stuff. It's neat to have an in-house expert.
Name Here	Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 \| 01:03 PM Cranky Media Guy Said: "Yup, and condescending, too. I know believers have a hard time with this, but honestly, I do NOT suffer in any way I can determine from not believing in God. Like any reasonably intelligent person, I wonder about the nature of the universe, but I just don't imagine there to be a big, all-knowing guy in charge of the whole shebang and it doesn't get in the way of my functioning at all." That's right. Religion or not, people are living the way they see fit. Although I am a believer I always have questions about our origins. I can't just settle for something that can't be proved. I am open minded enough to see all views. So I believe because that's what I see fit, just like Non-Believers. Religious people think that they're better than everyone else, yet they always say, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." or something like that. They don't practice what they preach and it's irritating as hell! (I am not religious, I consider myself more spiritual). Here's a contradiction. They say that God is perfect in every way, yet he is a jealous God? That makes no sense at all. Jealousy is NOT a characteristic of perfection. Being Understanding IS, I think, and I think he'd understand why some people believe in certain religions and why some don't believe at all. So Larry, Quit praying for people just because of their differences, and if you do don't tell them. Worry about your own damn life. Just telling it like it is. No offense........ If the Bible is right, then I guess our lives are just one big game for God. Chess between God and the Devil, and we're all pons. Oh what fun!
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 \| 05:51 PM Name Here, other than the issue of believing in general, I actually agree with just about everything you say. Yes, extreme believers are INCREDIBLY annoying in their smugness. Hey, we may disagree but I applaud you for having the intellectual courage to examine your own beliefs. That's how we learn and grow as humans.
Name Here	Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 \| 10:37 AM I applaud you as well. You live through life with much scrutiny from Believers, but yet you are not fazed by it at all and most important of all you stick by your belief. I respect anyone that sticks to their beliefs despite others ridicule, and whether I agree or disagree w/ them. Smugness; Boy you got that one on the dot! They are all smug. Religions need to see the world as a whole, and support people of their views(w/ a few exceptions), not look down because of them. Surely, I hope, that all the people who have visited and will visit this website will realize that No One person has the absolute right answer. The Religious are based on Blind Faith, and usually Blinding Ignorance, But us believers could be right. But it works for us and it gets us through life. The non-believers are based purely on facts and science, and I agree that that's the smart way to go about things. Atheists aren't usually fooled. Im not trying to be rude to believers, since I am one, but some believers need to realize that not everyone is the same, and that it's OK. I am leaning more toward the existence of God, but Im leaving open the possibility of being wrong, anyone one can. If God has a prob w/ that, and he can't understand why people believe what they believe, then he is not a God worth worshiping. Blinding Ignorance can be misleading. I just wish that all believers would think things through and forget all about the bible and church for a little bit, just a little bit, and see what is really in their heart. Luckily, I grew up in a house where we can be any or no religion that we want. So I wasn't brought into this world brainwashed. I have never been forced into a religion, and I don't think anyone should. CMG said: "...That's how we learn and grow as humans." Exactly! Thank you! I guess some people just don't realize that.
Name Here	Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 \| 10:41 AM One more thing, all of you believers may think that these guys are ganging up on you, but in actuallity you guys are the ones ganging up on them(Well some of you). That means that they have the right to snap back. So don't get offended!
caz	Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 \| 07:01 AM lol god is real and i can prove it .... i am god !!! there so wheres my $1000000 i want it i will get it i am god mwahahhahhahahahahah
caz	Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 \| 07:03 AM i will xchange peter and co for $1000000
Pro	Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 \| 06:30 PM Alright Caz, Let's see some miracles. Can you make me float from where you sit? Didn't think so sucka.
lofty	Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 \| 03:43 AM as only one man has seen him and he wrote it there is no prof till armagedon
Boyd	Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 \| 06:47 AM Err, if God gave Man the gift of free will, then the concept of 'free will' is fallible itself because it's been forced upon Man. The entire population could not have 'accepted' a gift without all of Mankind, from the beginning of time to the end, recognising the existence of God, which we all don't. Even those who do believe in a diety don't all believe in the same one, and that's in the present day, not to mention religions that have been part of the present and new ones that will surely form part of the future. So if free will was truely an act of free acceptance, then all peoples would have a collective memory of such an event, proving that God exists. But we don't, so He doesn't. In a way, science created the concept of God, by primitive man becoming aware of our mortality through absolute proof of it (death). Or something..
Captain Al in Vancouver Island, Canada Member	Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 \| 11:33 AM Here's some good (and hilariously funny) logic by George Carlin. It's not likely he will win the $1,000,000 prize for proving God exists. <a href="http://www.silversix.nu/carlin.mp3">There is no God</a> It's an 11 minute MP3 file (3.2Meg). If that's too big for your connection speed, you can get the <a href="http://www.silversix.nu/writingscarlincomedy.htm">text version here</a>.
Timmo Member	Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 \| 07:24 AM I don't understand your post concerning free will, Boyd. Could you repeat it please?
Timmo Member	Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 \| 10:51 AM Sorry. I'm honestly not trying to get the last word here (as if God's existence (or not) depends on which of us gets the last word) I'm just asking
Timmo Member	Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 \| 11:15 AM Above, I wrote "as if God's existence (or not) depends on which of us gets the last laugh". I want to change that now to "As if God's existence depends on which of us gets the last laugh". For though God won't usually allow a 100% proof (or even a 90% plus proof) of His existence, He will give it to someone who actually asks Him for it. As He has granted that to me, I am justified to miss out "or not"
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 \| 01:24 AM Timmo said: "For though God won't usually allow a 100% proof (or even a 90% plus proof) of His existence, He will give it to someone who actually asks Him for it. As He has granted that to me, I am justified to miss out "or not" The problem with your "logic" is that you aren't starting from a neutral point. You're beginning your "investigation" by saying, in effect, "There is a God and I'm going to interpret His actions to prove that He exists" instead of looking at things objectively to see if what exists proves or disproves the existance of God. When you start with the notion that God DOES exist and interpret everything in light of that, how could you possibly come to any conclusion other than that He DOES exist? See what I'm saying? Your argument is flawed from the get-go.
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 \| 04:03 PM But you can start from the neutral point and experiment as if He is there to find out if He's there or not. This is a perfectly scientific thing to do and there is nothing wrong with it (that I can see)
Timmo Member	Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 \| 04:11 PM I know I said I wouldn't jaw on about the experiment in post 821, but think how much you will have gained in the grand scheme of things if you find out you are right compared to the time you lost in the grand scheme of things if you find out you are wrong
Cranky Media Guy	Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 \| 11:40 PM Timmo said: "But you can start from the neutral point and experiment as if He is there to find out if He's there or not. This is a perfectly scientific thing to do and there is nothing wrong with it (that I can see)" But you're NOT starting from a "neutral point" if you're presuming there is a God. A real neutral point would be to say "I'm going to simply look at the evidence and see where it leads me." You're beginning with a conclusion (that there is a God) and proceeding from there because that is consistent with your belief. While you're certainly entitled to your belief(s), that isn't the way to look at something objectively or scientifically.
Name Here	Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 \| 08:37 AM Has anyone heard of the Cross controversy. Family of passed away highway patrol men are putting up crosses on the roads and it is not getting a good response from atheists. Atheists say they need to seperate church from state, and instead of crosses they should put up obelisks. In my opinion, I think that a family with any set of beliefs may put up anything they want, to honor and remember their deceased loved one. It's the families choice. If he was jewish, then they should be able to put up the star. If they are atheists, then I think they can put up an obelisk or anything they want. But I don't know why it's even being argued over. It's a big waste of time in my view. What do you guys think about this issue? I can give more info if you need any.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 \| 10:07 AM Assuming you're talking about the UHP memorial, the main issue I have is that they are putting up crosses for all the fallen officers, without regard to their own individual beliefs. To use your example of a jewish officer, according to the information I can find he would receive a cross. Highly inappropriate, wouldn't you agree? I'd have to have more information to make a judgement about the separation issue, but it does look to be a state sponsored memorial. I feel it would be much better if the did as they do in National cemetaries, using whatever symbol the family desires, but that isn't an option.
Charybdis in Hell Member	Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 \| 10:19 AM Okay, having read up on it, I have to agree with the lawsuit. It was a government sponsored, taxpayer paid memorial using a religious symbol indescriminately. In fact, most Mormons don't even use a cross on their tombstones. It's not a symbol widely used by them.
Page 14 of 24 pages ‹ First < 12 13 14 15 16 > Last ›

Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.