Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (13 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dinsdale
- Start date
Everything man creates is a response to a need. That's why I said even if there was not a God I'd still believe there is one. I would have created the term as a response to what I feel I need. So it's fine to me if man created God.
What we try to create are only our natural response to what we need. Chance might have a role in the process of creation but I'm talking about the intentions.
What we try to create are only our natural response to what we need. Chance might have a role in the process of creation but I'm talking about the intentions.
I think what Gabriel wrote is spot on. I don't know if our brain is "designed" this way, but humans try to find a purpose even if there is none.
I saw an interesting programe once about why people believe in god, and they showed some sort of test where some squares moved around. People who saw it, had the perception that one of squares tried to keep the other square out and they sympathized with it. But in reality it was random and there was no meaning to it.
Don't know if it makes sense?
I saw an interesting programe once about why people believe in god, and they showed some sort of test where some squares moved around. People who saw it, had the perception that one of squares tried to keep the other square out and they sympathized with it. But in reality it was random and there was no meaning to it.
Don't know if it makes sense?
I don't believe there is a God. IF there is a God I don't believe he or she has anything to do with whatever ideas mankind has made up. No religion is more accurate than the other. I do however feel that religion, the made up by man kind, serves a purpose and helps people day by day. I will never criticize a believer unless he or she tries to "manipulate" another one or if someone uses religion as an excuse to do things. I firmly believe that most things conducted in the name of God is just jibbrish. Religion has and will always be a tool for people in power and people who want power and this is NOT religions fault. Even if we removed religion something else would step up. We would conduct things in the name "of this theory" or whatever that suited us. I'm a scientist and argue and ridicule theories daily and really don't see the difference. We're doing the exact same thing but instead of using "our God" we're using "our theory", if you catch my drift. If anyone is feeling offended, which I really don't, I send my sincerest apologies and that was never my intention, I think you've misunderstood me since this is a sensitive subject. I respect religion and visit the church once every year and then. Not because of religion but because I find the place soothing. I leave the science debate about religion and God up to the rest of you which you'll all already depicted on. All I can say is that every part of all books has already been denied through various sciences. This is however uninteresting to me and doesn't change anything.
I was referring to the last sentences which I felt everyone here had already discussed thoroughly and I had nothing left to add to that part of the discussion. It's an interesting debate but I had nothing else to add. If anything I think the bible has some historical references that are interesting to note on how things were back then. If one takes the stories with a pinch of salt and accept that they are written down hearsay, looking at it from a scientific point of view. But yeah, I could have chosen my words a bit more properly. I had a bit too much to drink and was on a buss ride who were at its end so I had to hurry up my last words. Might as well add an editing while I'm at it. "If anyone is feeling offended, which I really don't think anyone is,"
I think what Gabriel wrote is spot on. I don't know if our brain is "designed" this way, but humans try to find a purpose even if there is none.
I saw an interesting programe once about why people believe in god, and they showed some sort of test where some squares moved around. People who saw it, had the perception that one of squares tried to keep the other square out and they sympathized with it. But in reality it was random and there was no meaning to it.
Don't know if it makes sense?
I saw an interesting programe once about why people believe in god, and they showed some sort of test where some squares moved around. People who saw it, had the perception that one of squares tried to keep the other square out and they sympathized with it. But in reality it was random and there was no meaning to it.
Don't know if it makes sense?
Up to anyone to make up their mind. Perhaps it does explain though why some animals are rather "spiritual", like elephants for example.
