Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (20 Viewers)

Well, did...

  • Man make God?

  • God make Man?


Results are only viewable after voting.
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
I have read you several times here saying you are not searching for him, that you have already made your mind up about this issue. And to be honest it does seem like it, you do seem to have moved in to live in the box where only numbers and technocratic explanations are possible. In this box and by the rules that apply in this box you will never find or believe in god.

So unless you are prepared to move outside it I see no point in discussing about god.

Like someone here said before, it was Tahir maybe? There are two different worlds, physical and spiritual, and I agree with it. And I think that one can't detect spiritual world with physical methods.
On what basis do you assert that?
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Elvin

Senior Member
Nov 25, 2005
36,923
the good samaritan was a story Jesus used it in a parable, the son of God existed thats fact creation existed you just have to understand the way the story is told. in the end the beginning of this discussion was is their a creator or not it didnt specify which creator, just if there was one.You non believing members keep bringing in semantics to distract from the core discussion
Hey I do believe in a God, but I also believe Christianity is for mentally retarded.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
On what basis do you assert that?
I feel it. Thought's aren't physical, love, hate, compasion is not too, you can't measure, weight or grab around them, this is what I humans spiritual side is. You might find out how they manifest in our physical world, but the feelings, thoughts itself won't ever be physical yet they will always be real to everyone.
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
I feel it. Thought's aren't physical, love, hate, compasion is not too, you can't measure, weight or grab around them, this is what I humans spiritual side is. You might find out how they manifest in our physical world, but the feelings, thoughts itself won't ever be physical yet they will always be real to everyone.
But they still happen in the brain, right? Besides, if we do find out how they manifest in our physical world, THAT WILL MAKE IT PHYSICAL!!!

In the end, you are taking something which we don't fully understand(abstract human feelings) and using that to make an assertion of a spiritual world. As vague as the term 'spiritual' and 'spirituality' is, and how different people have different definitions of it, you are not making a strong case for the existence of a spiritual world.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
First of I'm not of the oppinion that spiritual is something magical. That ghosts are flying round or etc.

Feelings will never be physical, even if they found out what chemical reactions make certain feelings. That's just how they manifest in our physical reality, the feelings itself you feel won't become physical the moment that happens.

As for god? Well I think man created god, but as all things that are created becomes real so does god, but he is created not in a physical world, but in mind and heart, it's an idea, which you can't measure or grasp, but it is real notheless, specialy to those who believe in that idea.
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
First of I'm not of the oppinion that spiritual is something magical. That ghosts are flying round or etc.
Neither am I.

Feelings will never be physical, even if they found out what chemical reactions make certain feelings. That's just how they manifest in our physical reality, the feelings itself you feel won't become physical the moment that happens.
Still, it doesn't validate the existence of a spiritual world.

As for god? Well I think man created god, but as all things that are created becomes real so does god, but he is created not in a physical world, but in mind and heart, it's an idea, which you can't measure or grasp, but it is real notheless, specialy to those who believe in that idea.
"things that are created becomes real"? :wth: :crazy:

Yes, the concept of a god is created in the human mind. It's just our imagination. It does not make it real. Our imagination comes up with great stories like Harry Potter, Finding Nemo, and the Da Vinci Code. But just because we can imagine it, doesn't make their existence real. Same goes for religious myths. Just because we imagined it and wrote about it, doesn't make it any real.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
Still, it doesn't validate the existence of a spiritual world.
To me it doesn't need to be validated, to me it exists ether i like it or not.

"things that are created becomes real"? :wth: :crazy:



Yes, the concept of a god is created in the human mind. It's just our imagination. It does not make it real. Our imagination comes up with great stories like Harry Potter, Finding Nemo, and the Da Vinci Code. But just because we can imagine it, doesn't make their existence real. Same goes for religious myths. Just because we imagined it and wrote about it, doesn't make it any real.
Well if someone believes in god and sees his deeds and actions everyday, to that person the presence of god is real, from his perspective that is. You choose to see the world in 1 and 0, and don't think anything is possible if it can't be explained by those numbers, well ok. But that doesn't make other people everyday life expiriences any less real if it can't be explained by your chosen system.

---------- Post added 30.03.2012 at 12:59 ----------

Retorts - thanks for the new word :D
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
To me it doesn't need to be validated, to me it exists ether i like it or not.
Doesn't need to be validated? :wth: Come on, Raz... don't be so irrational!

Well if someone believes in god and sees his deeds and actions everyday, to that person the presence of god is real, from his perspective that is. You choose to see the world in 1 and 0, and don't think anything is possible if it can't be explained by those numbers, well ok. But that doesn't make other people everyday life expiriences any less real if it can't be explained by your chosen system.
And from my perspective, the presence of god is a delusion.

Retorts - thanks for the new word :D
:hi:
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
Doesn't need to be validated? :wth: Come on, Raz... don't be so irrational!
What can I do if I feel that way? After all feelings are irrational :p

And from my perspective, the presence of god is a delusion.
Fair enough, though I don't agree.

I wouldn't get involved in these discussions anymore, just that it pisses me off how technocratic our civilization is becoming, and that technology is portrayed as the means and the end game(our civilizations aim). It's good and all, but the way it is showed now, as the only true way, the only criteria that can be on which judgement can be based on to understand the world around I don't agree at all. I think the is more to it, and I don't think one can find it with regular scientific methods.

Why I think that way? I think it's too limited system on which to understand the world we live in.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
Science is still the most reliable system we have right now. It's applications far outweigh any other alternative. Unless you can demonstrate that there's a better system, your assertions will be pointless.
I'm not questioning it's relyability or usefulness, but to rely on it as the only way of explaining things, to me that's too limiting.

What other system? I have no idea, I think humans can search in themselfs for answers and use them without needing to confirm them with scientific method. That's just my opinion, call it delusion if you want, but that's how I feel :)
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
What are the limits? Is empirical evidence the limit? Again, unless you have an alternative to explaining things and an explanation that actually has practical applications, then there is no point in making such an assertion.

Look, this whole "searching within for answers" is bollocks. It's just you and your thoughts. That's it. It's not a reflection of reality. You cannot answer the external by looking inwards. It doesn't make any sense.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
What are the limits? Is empirical evidence the limit? Again, unless you have an alternative to explaining things and an explanation that actually has practical applications, then there is no point in making such an assertion.

Look, this whole "searching within for answers" is bollocks. It's just you and your thoughts. That's it. It's not a reflection of reality. You cannot answer the external by looking inwards. It doesn't make any sense.
Limits? Yes the limits are the physical world. Which can not be explained beyond using scientefic method, if there was something there you will not be able to know it using scientific method, thats the limit.

And searching withing, doesn't equal only your own thoughts, there are countles of books, people you can talk discuss and search for answers. It's not only you sitting in the corner and imagining stuff.
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
Limits? Yes the limits are the physical world. Which can not be explained beyond using scientefic method, if there was something there you will not be able to know it using scientific method, thats the limit.
Look, I'm not saying there isn't any other world than the physical one. But the physical world is still the ONLY world we KNOW so far. We still don't know with certainty of an immaterial world, and don't know how such a world will affect our physical world. So there is no reason for believing in one. Unless we can study and demonstrate the effects and implications of such a world, there is no point in believing in one.

And searching withing, doesn't equal only your own thoughts, there are countless of books, people you can talk discuss and search for answers. It's not only you sitting in the corner and imagining stuff.
But how do you assess the validity of the answers you derive from books and people? How do you know if these answers are reliable and a fair reflection of reality? It all comes down to the scientific method.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
Look, I'm not saying there isn't any other world than the physical one. But the physical world is still the ONLY world we KNOW so far. We still don't know with certainty of an immaterial world, and don't know how such a world will affect our physical world. So there is no reason for believing in one. Unless we can study and demonstrate the effects and implications of such a world, there is no point in believing in one.
But that's it with scientific method we will never come to a conclusion about it, because we can't measure with physical methods something that is not physical. And there is a point in believing in it, if it makes you happier, helps you make sense of life, by all means do and believe. No point is trying to deny it with methods that can not by it's definition in what you believe while at the same time thinking it makes no difference if one believes or not.

There is no point in searching for god or whatever lies beyond our physical realm with physical measuring stick. You are doomed to failure.


But how do you assess the validity of the answers you derive from books and people? How do you know if these answers are reliable and a fair reflection of reality? It all comes down to the scientific method.
Do you think the reality is objective? How do you define what is real? If it is in your mind is it real? A though is real or not?
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
But that's it with scientific method we will never come to a conclusion about it, because we can't measure with physical methods something that is not physical. And there is a point in believing in it, if it makes you happier, helps you make sense of life, by all means do and believe. No point is trying to deny it with methods that can not by it's definition in what you believe while at the same time thinking it makes no difference if one believes or not.

There is no point in searching for god or whatever lies beyond our physical realm with physical measuring stick. You are doomed to failure.
"If it makes you happy"? That has to be the poorest, weakest reason to believe in something.

Do you think the reality is objective? How do you define what is real? If it is in your mind is it real? A though is real or not?
Yes, I think reality is objective.

Reality: Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined. -Wikipedia

Depends on what's in my mind. There is no rule that it is real.

A thought itself is real. But what the thought defines or implies may or may not be real.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 20)