If god exist,
-
I'm not talking about causality. I'm saying that if God did indeed exist and wanted to reach out to you, you would not believe even if he slapped you over the head.Originally posted by january:We are talking about cause and effect, or causality. IN science and nature, we find out about cause and effect through observation and testing.
If you say something is caused by GOD but there is no definite way of carrying our any verification of the causality, then how do you expect science to know what is cause by god what is not cause by god? ...
As long as your mind remains closed, no evidence will ever satisfy or convince you that there is a God. Even in the example given by Phaze where an amputee re-grew a limb, I'm quite sure you would see it as some sort of David Copperfield trick and if verified by a magician that it is no trick as suggested by Phaze, you would probably think that the magician had been paid to lie. At most, you would probably put it down to a scientific phenomenon that we have yet to fully understand - maybe mankind has evolved to such a state where one in a billion of us has attained the ability to re-grow his limbs.
Or if someone discovered an old scroll in the Judean desert with all the inscriptions as suggested by Phaze predicting a mathematical formula, I'm sure you'll decry it as a fraud even if it was carbon dated - perhaps the fraudster used real old ink on real old parchment, etc etc etc.
Bottomline is that with a closed mind, no evidence, however extraordinary, will ever convince you and like minded atheists that there is a God, contrary to what Phaze might like to believe in the other post. -
I can also say that some Christians are so blinded that if Buddha suddenly appears before them they will think that he is Jesus and some Buddhists are so blinded that if Jesus appeared before them they will think that he is Buddha.
If Buddha slaps a Christian in the head, he will think that Jesus did it and if Jesus slapped a Buddhist on the head, he will think that it was Buddha.
Therefore Christians must be open to Buddha and Buddhist must be open to Jesus.
What's wrong with your "logic"? Try to figure it out.
-
All wrong, therefore God nor Buddha never existed.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:I can also say that some Christians are so blinded that if Buddha suddenly appears before them they will think that he is Jesus and some Buddhists are so blinded that if Jesus appeared before them they will think that he is Buddha.
If Buddha slaps a Christian in the head, he will think that Jesus did it and if Jesus slapped a Buddhist on the head, he will think that it was Buddha.
Therefore Christians must be open to Buddha and Buddhist must be open to Jesus.
What's wrong with your "logic"? Try to figure it out. 
-
This is something along the lines of Xenophilius Lovegood's "Prove that it is not" theory. Some people claim there is a God, and other people ask for evidence. The original group shows minimal concrete evidence, but asks the opposition to prove that God doesn't exist. Go figure. Anyway, check this out. Its pretty amusing.
Anyway, I figure that as long as you don't kill, maim, burn, rape, rob, steal, lust etc etc beyond what is considered a reasonable amount (there is NO reasonable amount for the first 5
), and attempt to do good deeds out of compassion, there shouldn't be any problems with God if you do pass into the afterlife and find that he does exist.
There are a lot of religious people who only pay their religious teachings lip service. Given a choice between a "religious" mortal sinner who is and an atheist who has lived life well, who do you think would be more likely to gain admittance into whatever paradise lies beyond death? -
If God exists and all this is his design, I'm afraid to even know what Heaven looks like.
Originally by Xerxis:
Considering how egoistic God can be, my guess is these guys
There are a lot of religious people who only pay their religious teachings lip service. Given a choice between a "religious" mortal sinner who is and an atheist who has lived life well, who do you think would be more likely to gain admittance into whatever paradise lies beyond death?
---> Christian Domestic Discipline, will get 1st dibs for Heaven real estate.
Damn it, someone pass me a paddle! -
By definition, an all powerful, all knowing God would be able to reach out to me if he wanted to. He would know what is my standard of evidence and it would be trivial for him to meet it.Originally posted by kenkaw:I'm not talking about causality. I'm saying that if God did indeed exist and wanted to reach out to you, you would not believe even if he slapped you over the head. [/b]As long as your mind remains closed, no evidence will ever satisfy or convince you that there is a God. Even in the example given by Phaze where an amputee re-grew a limb, I'm quite sure you would see it as some sort of David Copperfield trick and if verified by a magician that it is no trick as suggested by Phaze, you would probably think that the magician had been paid to lie. At most, you would probably put it down to a scientific phenomenon that we have yet to fully understand - maybe mankind has evolved to such a state where one in a billion of us has attained the ability to re-grow his limbs.[/b]
That might very well be true. Maybe the person is Wolverine with mutant regenerative powers. :p
That aside, if someone happened to regrow a limb (something that we believe is impossible right now), we would still have to seek more plausible answers that automatically assuming a supernatural being was the cause. If for example, one person regrew a limb, you would have to ask why god would only restore one limb out of the many tens of thousands of believers that pray for the same healing.
If a limb just grew back over a period of a few years, I wouldn't find that so convincing.
If someone stood over a person and said, "By the Grace of God, be healed" and before our very eyes, the limb regrew in a matter of minutes or hours, and it's verified to a reasonable degree that it's not trickery. I do think most people would be convinced. I mean c'mon, people are already convinced that god exists with no evidence.Or if someone discovered an old scroll in the Judean desert with all the inscriptions as suggested by Phaze predicting a mathematical formula, I'm sure you'll decry it as a fraud even if it was carbon dated - perhaps the fraudster used real old ink on real old parchment, etc etc etc.
And we should be skeptical. We know that tons of fraud occurs. And it may be that old civilization was just very advanced mathematically. In any case, in the example I used, I was talking about revealed knowledge. Note I didn't say the description should be about the formula for calculating Pi. It should be the digits of Pi far far beyond the ability of people to calculate in those days. Even if ancients discovered the formula for calculating the value of Pi, there's no reason for them to calculate it to 10 million decimal places for example. We only do it now because we have so much computational power available.Bottomline is that with a closed mind, no evidence, however extraordinary, will ever convince you and like minded atheists that there is a God, contrary to what Phaze might like to believe in the other post.
I have problems with this argument. You use examples of imaginary evidence and claim that we won't accept it even if it existed. The fact is, it doesn't exist. Give us a real example, please. -
Entrance to Heaven? Not for us to decide. Besides, you answered your own question. "Mortal sinner"? I doubt he/she will be given entrance unless he/she truly repents and feels genuine remorse.Originally posted by Xerxis:There are a lot of religious people who only pay their religious teachings lip service. Given a choice between a "religious" mortal sinner who is and an atheist who has lived life well, who do you think would be more likely to gain admittance into whatever paradise lies beyond death?