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

[Martin]

You seem more cheerful already. Did you pop a pill?

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[AndreaCristiano]

So if a man said in court that he killed someone because God told him to, would you let him go?

What does that have to do with belief in a deity. One has to do with the laws and how they are applied the other is completely different

 

[Martin]

What does that have to do with belief in a deity. One has tondo with the laws and how they are applied the other is completely different

Isn't a command from God more important than human law?

 

[Trequartista]

You seem more cheerful already.

Talking about American corruption/politics/whatever is always fun, much more interesting than this theological debate that has outlived its usefulness.

 

[Raz]

I've said time and again that if all these gods embody just 1 god, then it leads to a lot of contradictory claims in various scriptures. It creates more confusion as to the nature of god. This explanation is something I come across a lot when speaking with Hindus. But they fail to go into details that are contradictory within different religions. It's not a good explanation. Period.

The scriptures are written by human, not god. And you will notice that the difference are minor in almost all major religions and mostly down to the culture not the principles.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I find this argument the most boring. God is god, and mostly we get the name of god from where we are born, but that doesn't change the fact that they all believe in god.

They all believe in god, yes. But they are all different gods. Different attributes, different creation processes, different methods of judgement. It's ludicrous to even suggest they are all the same.

 

[Raz]

Isn't a command from God more important than human law?

Not kill. Well it's sort of major rule in most religions, would be hard to convince otherwise.

 

[Martin]

Talking about American corruption/politics/whatever is always fun, much more interesting than this theological debate that has outlived its usefulness.

Wehey.

 

[ALC]

That's because pharmaceutical companies bribe politicians though campaign funding.

exactly.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

I've said time and again that if all these gods embody just 1 god, then it leads to a lot of contradictory claims in various scriptures. It creates more confusion as to the nature of god. This explanation is something I come across a lot when speaking with Hindus. But they fail to go into details that are contradictory within different religions. It's not a good explanation. Period.

As a Freemason I can tell you that all of them are there because they echo through out the inner most being of mankind the essence that God is there. A lot of religion and interpretation comes from the experiences that those humans had and the easiest way for them to comprehend or try to comprehend the creator.

 

[Martin]

Not kill. Well it's sort of major rule in most religions, would be hard to convince otherwise.

It's hard to convince Sheik as well, what's your point?

Did God not kill everything on the planet except Noah and his arc? What's so hard to believe?

 

[Raz]

exactly.

I love lobbying. Fucking disease of this world.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

Talking about American corruption/politics/whatever is always fun, much more interesting than this theological debate that has outlived its usefulness.

So go into the political thread and talk about that. Man your a whiney bastard sometimes

 

[Raz]

It's hard to convince Sheik as well, what's your point?

Did God not kill everything on the planet except Noah and his arc? What's so hard to believe?

I have nothing to argue agaisnt here, as I think those are stories/tales about events of the past and not the actual word to word true descriptions of them.

The hard to convince otherwise was jsut for fun sentence.

 

[Trequartista]

So go into the political thread and talk about that. Man your a whiney bastard sometimes

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

The scriptures are written by human, not god. And you will notice that the difference are minor in almost all major religions and mostly down to the culture not the principles.

They are written by men, yes. But the content is revealed to the author by god, no?

The differences are major. Yahweh has a son Jesus, but Allah doesn't. The Hindu god Brahman is represented by a trinity: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, while the Sikh god is just 1. Yahweh created the earth and the heavens as described in Genesis, but Brahman created the universe through the cosmic egg, while Waheguru doesn't go into details of how he created. The Bible talks of the apocalypse and Jesus' second coming, while the Vedas mention no such thing. Neither does Waheguru. Do these really seem like minor, cultural differences to you? Come on!

 

[JuveJay]

As a Freemason I can tell you that all of them are there because they echo through out the inner most being of mankind

This I agree with, mostly, but probably not in the way that you would see it. Religion being a man made concept. Like we have to explain all things, this is how many choose to explain feelings they can't comprehend.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

As a Freemason I can tell you that all of them are there because they echo through out the inner most being of mankind the essence that God is there. A lot of religion and interpretation comes from the experiences that those humans had and the easiest way for them to comprehend or try to comprehend the creator.

"As a Freemason"? You think that'll make anything you say more credible?

 

[Raz]

They are written by men, yes. But the content is revealed to the author by god, no?

The differences are major. Yahweh has a son Jesus, but Allah doesn't. The Hindu god Brahman is represented by a trinity: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, while the Sikh god is just 1. Yahweh created the earth and the heavens as described in Genesis, but Brahman created the universe through the cosmic egg, while Waheguru doesn't go into details of how he created. The Bible talks of the apocalypse and Jesus' second coming, while the Vedas mention no such thing. Neither does Waheguru. Do these really seem like minor, cultural differences to you? Come on!

If you nitpick them for the face value and think that the cosmic egg is the birth of the universe then of course you will only think that your god is the only one.

So far I haven't see any major teachings that would really differ or oppose to other religions, I see those stories bound to the goegraphy the same as I see the name god differ from one continent to other. What I fail to see is the major and principal difference of what they try to say and teach.

 

[Martin]

If you nitpick them for the face value and think that the cosmic egg is the birth of the universe then of course you will only think that your god is the only one.

So far I haven't see any major teachings that would really differ or oppose to other religions, I see those stories bound to the goegraphy the same as I see the name god differ from one continent to other. What I fail to see is the major and principal difference of what they try to say and teach.

So does that mean any religion is as good as the next?