[Closed] Do you believe on god?

Nah.

[img] [/img]

But only after God created man first.

Even if you believe in god, you can't say god created man,

I think you'll find you can, God laughs at your puny restrictions on what it can or can't do!

The idea that science can enable us to live without myths is one of these silly modern stories." In fact, he argues, science has created its own myth,

this is the circular arguments that I have come to expect from the religous tbh.

Man created god(s).

But only after God created man first.

reminds me of some graffiti I read in a university toilet cubicle.

[i]In 1882 Nietzsche proclaimed "god is dead"[/i]

Underneath someone added

[i]In 1900 god proclaimed "Nietzsche is dead"[/i]

Who'd have thought graffiti could be so amusing and educational at the same time.

reminds me of some graffiti I read in a university toilet cubicle.

I wish I was shitting [s]on[/s] [b]out[/b] an emo

🙂

But only after God created man first.

There are so many gods to choose from though. Which one are you refering to?

Even if you believe in god, you can't say god created man, your could maybe say god created the first organisms on earth that evolved in to man..well unless you are one of those creationist weirdos that discounts science in favour of the scriptures..Are you one of them?

Yep.

And I find evolutionists as weird as you find creationists 😀

Science and God are mot mutually exclusive. Science is merely the exploration, discovery and explanation of what God created.

If you truly believe in God (as I do) then that means believing He specifically and deliberately created Man. In His own image too.

Science and God are mot mutually exclusive. Science is merely the exploration, discovery and explanation of what God created.

It's totally not.

If you truly believe in God (as I do) then that means believing He specifically and deliberately created Man. In His own image too

Why does god need nipples?

so god is a HE

and science is so not. It provides huge amounts of evidence to discredit creation but hey you have faith so dont worry about the facts 🙄

But only after God created man first.

There are so many gods to choose from though. Which one are you refering to?

In my comments I refer to the Christian God.
Man has many 'gods' (small g), but there is only one true God.

Of course, we all have free will whether to believe in Him or not.

Oh the ironing of decrying science via the interwebs.

He specifically and deliberately created Man. In His own image too

Which image of man is based on his?
Male or Female?
European, Arian, Asian, African or maybe in the image of one of the destroyed south American tribes that didn't believe?

explain the flippin nipples ferchrissakes..!!

so sexist and stupid I am impressed by your god
I reject "him" and wont capitalise either
I hope my persecution reinforces your belief system 🙄

Yep.

And I find evolutionists as weird as you find creationists

Science and God are mot mutually exclusive. Science is merely the exploration, discovery and explanation of what God created.

If you truly believe in God (as I do) then that means believing He specifically and deliberately created Man. In His own image too

To quote Mr Hicks, Is god ****ing with you? 😀

[i]I hope my persecution reinforces your belief system [/i]

Bit tetchy aren't we. You should let a bit of joy into your life 🙂

If you truly believe in God (as I do) then that means believing He specifically and deliberately created Man. In His own image too.

So is this the image of God then?

[img] [/img]

In my comments I refer to the Christian God.
Man has many 'gods' (small g), but there is only one true God.

Of course, we all have free will whether to believe in Him or not.

So what about the 'small gee' gods that were worshipped by man before the christian god existed* and created man?

* by existed i probably means invented.

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/13/brazil-church-embezzling-millions-poor ]I don't thing the lowercase gods, help their leaders like the uppercase one....[/url]

God. Can't much see the point. Useless sort of a thing, really.

Of course, we all have free will whether to believe in Him or not

With a massive dose of blackmail thrown in.

Bit tetchy aren't we. You should let a bit of joy into your life

is that a euphemism , are your flirting with me
and of course

Hallelujah

Anyone joined the other side yet?

Given how slim molgrips has managed to get on your diet ... i am tempted if I am honest. You ?

[img] [/img]

Row, row, row your boat,
Gently down the stream.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily,
Life is but a dream.

😉

My final religious message of the day:

[img] [/img]

In His own image too

[img] [/img]

you're stuffed sunshine 😆

😆

Pretty much sums up everything. 😈

only nine pages? i thought this might go on like, forever. or at least until judgement day.

Elfin, I didn't expect this to keep going on so didn't check back. Naive huh?

OK: "Again, I've got to strongly disagree with this. Herman; seems that you cannot conceptualise God outside of the framework of organised religion, and have little or no understanding of how others, such as myself, can."

Little or no understanding? A tad offensive ol' bean! When I was much younger I did believe in God. I have dabbled in both, have you ever not been religious?

Among the range of religions proposing a God, how come you have chosen yours as the version to be correct?

When you selected a religion, how many options did you go through before confirming your faith?

Regarding science, as soon as something that's a bit scientific is done it's labelled and regarded as equal to something rigorous and stringent. The crux of science is to remove variables in order to establish factual information. Discussing God versus science is like discussing art versus architecture. One is a form of interpretation and expression which has it's value defined by perception, the other is functional but has elements of the first option. I agree that power is frequently abused and often things in the name of medical progress end up realistically for monetary gain.

It has been discussed many, many times how early religion came from the need to offer hope to those witnessing death. Reassurance at this time is obviously very important, therefore the soul was proposed. This therefore resulted in a whole other realm of pre/post existence and as time passed analogies and metaphors were applied. These have been taken literally and now we have our current situation. Think about it; we happily bend the truth to make reality more palatable for children. Imagine if they never got past the stories, metaphors and examples we give them and took them as fact? Then imagine that the person telling the stories is treated as special and develops a degree of control in their community...and now they also hold control of language, politics and finance. It's a slippery slope that has taken a long, long time to slide down.

Religion exists because life is hard, reality is confusing and it provides reassurance where logic fails.

I'm not going to convert you, nor do I want to (I will state my stance though). But perhaps you cannot understand a physical existence without the big man?

Excuse me if this doesn't flow too well, I've only just woken up! 😆

Nope.

+1 Herman 😈

It provides huge amounts of evidence to discredit creation

No, it provides evidence to discredit the biblical account of creation. For my limited knowledge of big bang theory I can't see anything that rules out a creator being starting the whole process off.

Oh, and if a creator being was ever discovered, nothing would change in science. Science simply seeks to explain how things happened. It doesn't matter if things were set up by a divine being or not.

If science ever finds proof of a god then it will just start studying the nature of that god and how it came into being.

I can't see anything that rules out a creator being starting the whole process off.

In the same way it doesnt rule out the tooth fairy or Father Christmas. Either of those are equally likely to exist where there is no evidence of any existence prior to the big bang.

or at least until judgement day

It has...

Either of those are equally likely to exist where there is no evidence of any existence prior to the big bang

Clearly, but that's not my point. Which was that science and theism are not mutually incompatible.

thats more like it, now Ive got something to read on a slow friday

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

Succinctly put (quoted) Lifer.

(Epicurus – Greek philosopher, BC 341-270)

David Hume 1711-76

“God’s power is infinite. Whatever he wills is executed but neither man nor other animals is happy. Therefore he does not will their happiness. Epicurus's questions are yet unanswered”

If we look at the universe with the limited knowledge we have it's pretty bloody old, pretty big and fairly complicated I think we can mostly agree on that.

I don't understand how anyone can think that adding in an omnipotent all powerful creator makes things any more explainable.

Seems to me that anyone who believes in god is uncomfortable with saying "I don't know" when faced with the big questions around life the universe and everything. So in order to avoid admitting not knowing they say well it was all down to god which to me seems properly mad and very arrogant but probably quite comforting.

No, as man invented God.