Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (27 Viewers)

[Sheik Yerbouti]

When an atheist argue a lot and say that there is no God, to me that's an evidence that God is pursuing them. Why would they argue about God existence if He's not pursuing them?

I didn't ask to be a Muslim, I'm just lucky. ALLAH O AKBAR!!!

I bet you wouldn't have said the same thing if you were born into a Hindu or a Christian family too.

Oh definitely. God is pursuing me to talk about him. But which God? Brahma, Vishnu, Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, Thor, Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Celestial Teapot? Which one?

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Mohad]

I bet you wouldn't have said the same thing if you were born into a Hindu or a Christian family too.

Sure thing, and I will keep searching.

Oh definitely. God is pursuing me to talk about him. But which God? Brahma, Vishnu, Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, Thor, Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Celestial Teapot? Which one?

Allah, duh! And Jesus is a prophet.

Most of those names you mentioned was made by a human's hand (no offense to anyone).

 

[Gustav]

I believe in the BBT. While it is not a perfect theory and that answers all questions raised, it considers material evidence and gives the best possible explanation based on our current knowledge. And I will believe in this until there is a newer theory than does a better job than BBT. And I do think that the BBT will not stand the test of time. Cos when our understanding of the universe increases, we will find better ways to explain it and how it was created. I say it again: I do not expect humans to get the theory of the universe's creation right the first time.

And who developed the big bang theory?

A Catholic priest


"There is no conflict between religion and science"

 

[ALC]

You guys need to read up on the Large Hauldron collider. They've already achieved something like the Big Bang but in much smaller magnitudes if I'm not mistaken. That thing is like a scientists' wet dream.

 

[JuveJay]

Most of those names you mentioned was made by a human's hand (no offense to anyone).

Mohamed and Jesus weren't?

 

[JuveJay]

You guys need to read up on the Large Hauldron collider. They've already achieved something like the Big Bang but in much smaller magnitudes if I'm not mistaken. That thing is like a scientists' wet dream.

We can create an alternate or a hypothesis but the question that would make or break the religious argument is what existed before.

 

[Raz]

I believe in the BBT. While it is not a perfect theory and that answers all questions raised, it considers material evidence and gives the best possible explanation based on our current knowledge. And I will believe in this until there is a newer theory than does a better job than BBT. And I do think that the BBT will not stand the test of time. Cos when our understanding of the universe increases, we will find better ways to explain it and how it was created. I say it again: I do not expect humans to get the theory of the universe's creation right the first time.

To each his own i guess, it's just sad(from my perspective at least) that people abandon spiritual side of world because of science. Because those things serves entirely different purposes both of which are important (spiriutal I think is more important, but that's just my opinion )

 

[Raz]

I bet you wouldn't have said the same thing if you were born into a Hindu or a Christian family too.

Oh definitely. God is pursuing me to talk about him. But which God? Brahma, Vishnu, Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, Thor, Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Celestial Teapot? Which one?

Oh btw, if there is god it almost certainly be just one. Just that people have different names for it.

 

[Raz]

We can create an alternate or a hypothesis but the question that would make or break the religious argument is what existed before.

You can't deny religion, spirituality or whatever with science those are two separate fields.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Sure thing, and I will keep searching.

What I meant is, if you were born into a Christian family or a Hindu family, you would praise Jesus or Brahma instead of Allah. That's how random religion is. It's not a universal truth. You just happen to be born into a Muslim family.

Allah, duh! And Jesus is a prophet.

Most of those names you mentioned was made by a human's hand (no offense to anyone).

Actually, all of the names I mentioned were made by a human's hand(no offense to anyone).

 

[JuveJay]

You can't deny religion, spirituality or whatever with science those are two separate fields.

Of course, because it's a belief system, but you can discredit it. Just like I can believe that we are descendants of people from the Epsilon Eridani system. It's less absurd than many religious teachings. The ones I do agree with are those that purport betterment as people, without oppression.

Humans have always had belief in something and always will, I won't try to deny them that. What I will say is that the direct contrast of religion against science as the centuries have passed shows a clash and will continue to do so. However, as long as everything cannot be explained (and long after), people will believe in a higher being.

 

[Raz]

Yes but discrediting religion with science to me is not something to be very creditable. I mean science is created to answer questions of whole other area and here it tries to crack questiosn it can't possibly answer because it was meant to answer whole different kind of questions.

 

[Raz]

What I meant is, if you were born into a Christian family or a Hindu family, you would praise Jesus or Brahma instead of Allah. That's how random religion is. It's not a universal truth. You just happen to be born into a Muslim family.

Actually, all of the names I mentioned were made by a human's hand(no offense to anyone).

But you forget that behind all those religions and their different names the basic ideas is almost the same if not actually the same.

 

[JuveJay]

Yes but discrediting religion with science to me is not something to be very creditable. I mean science is created to answer questions of whole other area and here it tries to crack questiosn it can't possibly answer because it was meant to answer whole different kind of questions.

Religion is a man made concept, right?

 

[Raz]

Religion? What do you mean by it?

I think that there is more to this world then just physical appearance, not that I believe in a god who has personality issues, but that I think that there are forces at work that we could not detect with scientific methods, at least not in the near future. So no I don't think that man made those forces.

 

[JuveJay]

The idea of religion? When people looked up at the sky 5,000 years ago (and still even to this day in some parts of the world) they feared the sun and moon as conscious entities. What about polytheism? It's part of human nature to believe in something more.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Yes but discrediting religion with science to me is not something to be very creditable. I mean science is created to answer questions of whole other area and here it tries to crack questiosn it can't possibly answer because it was meant to answer whole different kind of questions.

Religion, and maybe in your case spirituality, will always set themselves out to answer the void that is not answered by science. IMO religion was deliberately made in such a way that science cannot touch it, science cannot prove it. This way religion can avoid being judged by science. As time passes, science will progress and answer more questions than we know, thus make the little void smaller and smaller.

But you forget that behind all those religions and their different names the basic ideas is almost the same if not actually the same.

Not just the name, but the scriptures, stories, prophets, creation myths, places of worship are all different. Their customs are different. You're just playing safe by not subscribing to these religions, but their core idea. But how credible or plausible is this idea is the bigger question.

 

[Mohad]

Mohamed and Jesus weren't?

No, they were messengers.

 

[Raz]

I think is something we are born with, thus it can't be man made if we are born with it.

Polytheism or monotheism it makes no difference, these are just labels given, the underlying fact is that we are searching for the answers instinctly, something inside of us needs to search, because if it were man mad it would have just died out as everything man has made, but yet it persist in us. As you said it is something in our nature, not something we made up.

 

[Raz]

Religion, and maybe in your case spirituality, will always set themselves out to answer the void that is not answered by science. IMO religion was deliberately made in such a way that science cannot touch it, science cannot prove it. This way religion can avoid being judged by science. As time passes, science will progress and answer more questions than we know, thus make the little void smaller and smaller.


Not just the name, but the scriptures, stories, prophets, creation myths, places of worship are all different. Their customs are different. You're just playing safe by not subscribing to these religions, but their core idea. But how credible or plausible is this idea is the bigger question.

But by your logic something that has no proof doesn't exist, how can you tell that there are these answers that science can answer which disprove religion?

And I think religion was major part of our ancestors lives way before science was.


As for being different, of course they are different, people were living in separate places that is why their customs are different, that is why the myth are different, but the idea behind why those customs are performed what is said by those myth are the same almost in every major religion