On the Existence of "God"

@Janus1:

because people are stupid. but thats just me venting. look, all god is, is a legend/myth. just like the greek myths. i mean, what makes this god better than those gods? i actually think those myths were even more believeable. when man cannot explain something, he turns to science or religion. in the past, there was no science (im talking way long ago), or whatever science did exist was primitive at best, and people believed in dragons, and magic, and all that other good stuff. why? because it explained things to them. now, we are “more advanced” and know that to be untrue (we know nothing). but apparently, “god” isnt counted among those numbers, because “god” actually exists (absolutely not). It may have been Nieztsche, but I actually dont remember who “if god did not exist, man would have created him”. he almost hit the nail on the head. god does not exist, he is a mythical creation of man used to explain things that previously had no explanation. the only difference between god and magic and the like is that god was apparently a more popular myth, and caught on better. (and even if you believe in god, please dont tell me you support any of the christian churches, they are so wrong it hurts)

Janus I have to Disagree with you here man. first of all I dont understand how you could ever think that the Greek Gods were more Believable then our one God now. First of all there wasnt a one true church to hold up the Religion. Their Beliefs varied from town to town. Now We have the Church that has stood for 2000 years. It has had its faults in the past, Everyones human. But it is still the only true holy church. Because it is the One, holy, Catholic, and apostolic church. Its Origin was divine. Jesus himself made the church with his words to Peter the first pope. Even if you dont believe that Jesus is the Messiah, which is nonsense, you must still believe he was holy. He did many miracles on earth which have been notated in the bible and foretold from the Prophets of old. As for the Jews, who were the chosen people(ekklesia), I dont understand how they could not see him as the messiah, and what is even more shocking is that they call him a prophet! How could he be a prophet if he said hes the messiah. Most prophets in the past were not liars. So the Jews of Jesus’ time knew he was holy but they would not except him for he spoke out against the crooked scribes in charge of the Jews at that time.

O and about you Nieztsche quote, heres a few others:

1.“The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.”

• Hey mr. Nietzche, Sorry but Im afraid I cant agree with you on this one. Your trying to portray a culture where all are brought up so that they must all agree on al topics. Huh, sounds like communism.

-ECT

2.“I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.”

• Sorry Mr. Nieztche but Im afraid Ill have to disagree with you. Maybe if you were a God, your view would be a little different. If you went to the trouble of making a people and giving them the chance to live in eternal happiness, maybe you’d want a little respect and praise. And second of all the people in this world barely give you an hour of their time every week. Most so called Christians only go to mass once a week and they dont even give you a thought the rest of the week.

-ECT

@Ect.:

Janus I have to Disagree with you here man. first of all I dont understand how you could ever think that the Greek Gods were more Believable then our one God now. First of all there wasnt a one true church to hold up the Religion. Their Beliefs varied from town to town. Now We have the Church that has stood for 2000 years. It has had its faults in the past, Everyones human. But it is still the only true holy church. Because it is the One, holy, Catholic, and apostolic church. Its Origin was divine. Jesus himself made the church with his words to Peter the first pope.

What about the orthodox church? Does it not use “older”, more pure rites and sets of believes than the catholics?
I remember something about that. Just look up your history book about the year 1054.

Even if you dont believe that Jesus is the Messiah, which is nonsense, you must still believe he was holy.

I need not believe anything. “Must believe” is more nonsense than not believing. With the comment on N-i-e-t-z-s-c-h-e (which totally misunderstood to the point of probably not reading it carefully), the “must believe” is more sounding like “agreeing on all topics” and “communism”.

… How could he be a prophet if he said hes the messiah.

because it was a time of a lot of false prophets and false messiahs. And i am not sure that JC said himself he’s the messiah, or wether that was the title given to him by his followers.

Most prophets in the past were not liars. So the Jews of Jesus’ time knew he was holy but they would not except him for he spoke out against the crooked scribes in charge of the Jews at that time.

So, he was a revolutionary, a left-wing radical. I can agree with that. But i don’t see how that makes someone a messiah.
Oh, and Mohammed of course is a liar and false prophet, right?

1.“The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.”

• Hey mr. Nietzche, Sorry but Im afraid I cant agree with you on this one. Your trying to portray a culture where all are brought up so that they must all agree on al topics. Huh, sounds like communism.

Read the quote again. He describes a way to corrupt a youth! That’s done by holding people with the same beliefs in higher esteem. Not-corrupting is not-judging people wether they agree with you or not.

2.“I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.”

• Sorry Mr. Nieztche but Im afraid Ill have to disagree with you. Maybe if you were a God, your view would be a little different. If you went to the trouble of making a people and giving them the chance to live in eternal happiness, maybe you’d want a little respect and praise. And second of all the people in this world barely give you an hour of their time every week. Most so called Christians only go to mass once a week and they dont even give you a thought the rest of the week.

You mix up the reality (people spending an hour a week), and it is only your reality, as european christians usually spend much less time, with the divine demands on its believers (which is what Nietzsche talked about). On that topic you say “you’d want a little respect and praise”, which is not disagreeing with Nietzsche (“who wants to be praised all the time”).

Ect. I exaggerate quite a bit, so dont always take everything i say to heart, either try and decipher my meaning (which i dont think is that hard) or just ignore me.

about the greek gods, i dont believe in those either, my point was that god is just another myth, like they were, and i personally like the greek myths better. my point about the christian church was intended to say that christianity has truly gotten bogged down in humanity (that is, it seems to be the most corrupted by human hands). I will dismiss the rest of your post about jesus, because you are arguing from the assumption that jesus was divine, which is not possible ( :wink: )

i dont know if my quote was from nietzsche or not, like i said, i do not remember. but frankly, it doesnt matter. it also doesnt matter anything else he said, because he is just a man. philosophers are funny like that. no one is right (except me :wink: ) because its all opinion. anything one guy says, is sure to be backed up by a bunch of others, and refuted by a bunch of others also. its really just a lofty form of thinking and arguing. so dont try to prove me wrong by refuting nietzsche, i dont even agree with most of what he said, i was simply using a quote that may have been from him.

Both extremes tend to scare me.

yes, extremes in anything are generally a bad thing.

I consider myself a weak athiest (lack of belief in a god)

as opposed to a strong athiest (belief that there is no god)

Imho, the second position requires just as much faith as a thiest does.

thats an interesting pov, ive never thought of that before. but imho, being an atheist does not require a belief. if we try to argue this, we get bogged down in semantics, but basically, if i tell you there are no invisible elephants in this room, i dont really have to believe that, i think most people would agree with me, but if i say there are invisible elephants in here, id have to believe that. does that make any sense at all?

I’m not sure what the point of my post was, but I’ll end saying there are worse things to donate to than a christian church!

agreed. i wont say that the church is evil or bad, it has intentions to do good. but i disagree with what it stands for, and do not support it. if you choose to do, thats fine, just be aware that when the revolution comes, you will be killed. :wink: :P

finally, ignore my arrogance. im not stubbornly opposed to the idea of god, if something ever changes my beliefs, i will admit it, but they cant, because im right. :D

but basically, if i tell you there are no invisible elephants in this room, i dont really have to believe that, i think most people would agree with me, but if i say there are invisible elephants in here, id have to believe that. does that make any sense at all?

No. First, define “here”, second, you don’t necessarily have to “believe” what you say.

if you choose to do, thats fine, just be aware that when the revolution comes, you will be killed.

No I won’t. :P

finally, ignore my arrogance. im not stubbornly opposed to the idea of god, if something ever changes my beliefs, i will admit it, but they cant, because im right.

Or just unwilling to admit it. :P

When you assert something, be it ‘There are no invisible elephants in this room’ or ‘There is no God’, you are making a positive claim.

In other words, you claim to have knowledge, or somehow know that God, or invisible elephants do not exist.

Therefore, the initial burden of proof lies with you. You must show evidence to support your claim, and anyone who has taken logic 101 knows it is nearly impossible to prove a negative. (i.e. something does not exist)

I can’t think of any evidence you could provide that would conclusively prove there are no invisible elephants anywhere. So why try? Just say
‘There is no evidence supporting invisible elephants, so I have no reason to believe they exist.’

Viola! Burden of proof is on the other guy.

~Cheers

But then the other guy probably answers: “Oh there is, it smells like invisible elephants here… don’t you recognize that smell that only invisible elephants have?” … or something like that.

And then I say ‘Sorry, I had a burrito for lunch.’

~Cheers

No. First, define “here”, second, you don’t necessarily have to “believe” what you say.

quibbling. replace “here” with “in this room”.

Quote:
if you choose to do, thats fine, just be aware that when the revolution comes, you will be killed.

No I won’t.

Quote:
finally, ignore my arrogance. im not stubbornly opposed to the idea of god, if something ever changes my beliefs, i will admit it, but they cant, because im right.

Or just unwilling to admit it.

now you are just trying to provoke me. :wink:

now you are just trying to provoke me.

And I almost succeeded, too. :roll:

Janus I have to Disagree with you here man. first of all I dont understand how you could ever think that the Greek Gods were more Believable then our one God now. First of all there wasnt a one true church to hold up the Religion.

“One True Church” which less than half the religion follows. Which is a political organization. Which did not write the book which it follows.

Their Beliefs varied from town to town. Now We have the Church that has stood for 2000 years. It has had its faults in the past, Everyones human. But it is still the only true holy church. Because it is the One, holy, Catholic, and apostolic church.

My like Barnes and Nobles has four shelves of different Bibles. The Greek Religion (which was carried over by the Romans, they just changed the names into Latin and adopted the Trojan Penates), lasted just as long.

Its Origin was divine. Jesus himself made the church with his words to Peter the first pope. Even if you dont believe that Jesus is the Messiah, which is nonsense, you must still believe he was holy.

Jesus was not divine, and I’d love to see a primary source pre 332 AD (I believe thats the date, its somewhere in that area) which depicts Jesus as the son of God. He wasn’t considered divine until the Council of Nicaea of the same year, when the bible was compiled by Emperor Constantine and his advisors. Christianity was to be the Religion which would save Rome. Christianity was in essence not created until then. Until that day, Christians were actually Jews who happened to follow the teachings of Jesus. Christianity was actually a blend of this new Judaism, Roman Paganism (Jove, Venus, Mars, ect), Barbarian Paganism, and Roman Sun worship. Roman Sun Worship was in fact the offical religion of Rome at the time. Constantine himself, unlike the popular belief, was not Christian, he was a sun-worshipper, and devotely did his duty as Pontifex Maximus until he was baptised half dead on his deathbed right before he passed away.

Jesus was indeed a great leader, but he was a mortal prophet. He envisioned a religion of equality. Jesus was a married man with children before the Nicaea council. As part of his divinity, Jesus could not have had any mortal contact. All records of his wife and children were destroyed. His wife was Mary Magdalene. She of course was long dead and rotting by this point. However, right after Jesus was Crucified, Magdalene fled to France, her life at risk. In France, she (and her son, Jesus’s son) became the first of the Merovingian Dynasty in Southern France. All records of her name were burned. She was given a new role in the Bible to defame her, as a whore.

Read into your religion’s history, its quite interesting. I suggest reading The Templar Revelation.

The New Testament itself refered to Jesus in the gospels as the son of God, because the few gospels included were written by the Romans. In fact, there is evidence that pre-Nicaea volumes of the “New Judaism” pseudo-bible had dozens of gospels from figures in the bible. Included are writings from Mary Magdalene herself.

Proof? The Dead Sea scrolls date back 100 years pre-Nicaea and back everything up here, including all the missing gospels. This is nothing new either. Even Leonardo Da Vinci, called the smartest person of all time, painted all this into his paintings. Take a look at Madonna on the Rocks (Not Virgin on the Rocks) and the Last Supper next chance you get. Look to Jesus’s right (your left), and look hard. Look at Peter. Look at the person immediately to JEsus’s right, thats no man. And look how they all interact.

Look at the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist in Madonna on the Rocks.