There is a CHANCE that God exists...? What the...

[Nylan]

The whole idea of logically trying to approve/disapprove God's existence is absurd IMHO.

I agree. In the end, it comes down to what you want to believe, what you will deny and what you will take a risk for. Everyone has a right to make a choice for themself, and everyone is on neutral ground in this respect.

 

[El_Machinae]

Hmm, birth rates drop dramatically in 'modern' societies for a number of reasons (essentially it's just too expensive to have lots of children). I think that predicting a continuation of high population growth for centuries is a bit of a stretch.

Very true, high population growth is (thankfully) a dying beast. But even so, in a couple hundred years we'll be able to have well over 10^10 humans alive simultaneously. Much, much higher than if the Earth was the only thing we had, like we had assumed.

A 10^10 limit would have forced us to an asymptote of maximum population size. A size which doesn't actually exist.

Even if we only double the maximum number of humans that was previously thought to be the upper maximum, this is as significant as the first protist which decided to remain joined to its parent and become a multi-cellular organism.

My point, long-winded as it is, is that human potential (at any snapshot in time) will be much, much higher than we previously assumed. Even if we're only measuring the potential for human existence. The sum of human experience will be higher than our ancestors thought possible.

Most of you will never understand what it is I'm saying, because you have never felt anything spiritual, or at least have not felt it in a large enough quantity to be recognized. Its intangible, and if it was not it would, theologically (sp?), defeat the purpose of having it in the first place.

This is untrue. I have felt very powerful spiritual experiences. These experiences were nurtured and encouraged by people who, too, had powerful spiritual experiences. All of my significant mentors in this stage of my life were loving and good people, who very much wanted what was best for me.

These spiritual experiences ended up convincing me of things which later proved to be false. Not just suggested to be false, or assumed to be false, but proven to be false. I met and loved what people call "God". Turned out it wasn't.

After my enlightenment, I still had to contend against the social pressure of everyone around me being Christian, and the powerful allure of believing what everyone else believed, even if I didn't experience it with the same intensity.

 

[Gogf]

A tiny bump, but I was just watching Red Eye, and this pretty much sums up that atheists are wrong.
http://www.dailygut.com/?i=3077
Read it.

That's not even remotely close to any kind of argument, let alone a valid or convincing one. It sounds exactly like it was written by someone who doesn't understand the other side's argument whatsoever, and what scares me is that that's exactly how an awful lot of people—American politicians on both sides of the aisle included—sound.

 

[Gogf]

Fallacy:

The fact that spiritual experiences happen to everyone doesn't mean they're not caused by God.

If you Can't prove a negative, then for all you know you are black, since you can't prove that you're not black...it's a negative.

The "earth shattering factor" was brought up because the question of God's existance was considered trivial...which is something I already mentioned. Are you going to put forth points or are you going to argue for the sake of arguing, and debate semantics?

You can't prove a negative, but you can prove the opposing positive.

 

[mdwh]

A tiny bump, but I was just watching Red Eye, and this pretty much sums up that atheists are wrong.
http://www.dailygut.com/?i=3077
Read it.

Please tell me that this is a spoof/parody?

 

[mdwh]

This is different from any "remote possibilities" for multiple reasons. The first is that it is very widely believed, in one form or another. If it is wrong, then it is the biggest factual oversight the world has ever seen, by a long shot. That's hard to prove.

There are lots of things which are widely believed - magic, fairies, UFO/alien abductions.

Secondly, its about what feels right, what helps you be a better person and live a better life, what helps you to prepare for what happens after death.

When you say "its about", what do you mean by "it".

Given what you say, "it" here is your personal feelings and morality.

But "it" is most certainly not anything to do with the world around us, which things physically exist, or how the universe came to be. What have scientific questions like that got to do with how you "feel"?

Nobody tries to answer other scientific questions with what "feels right"! Again, why is "God" a special case?

 

[Nylan]

I see I overreacted in my frustration at a lack of comprehension of my points. Not that they were debated, but that the point was missed. Thus, I overgeneralized when I spoke of none of you having spiritual experiences, as in my irritation I rationalized that it would be the only explanation. I apologize to any I have offended.

You can't prove a negative, but you can prove the opposing positive.

Semantics. Proving that God doesn't exist can merely be reworded as proving that there is no deity that created the universe.

When you say "its about", what do you mean by "it".

Given what you say, "it" here is your personal feelings and morality.

But "it" is most certainly not anything to do with the world around us, which things physically exist, or how the universe came to be. What have scientific questions like that got to do with how you "feel"?

Nobody tries to answer other scientific questions with what "feels right"! Again, why is "God" a special case?

Again, we have not the scientific knowledge nor the technology to prove the existance or nonexistance of God. Therefore, the decision whether or not to believe in God is a decision that must be made on a personal level. See my previous post.