Desi Cartman Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Same is applicable for atheists who want to shovel their views down others' thoughts. Live and let live. Isn't it actually other way around in this thread? Isn't the OP trying to prove that atheists are wrong and should consider that there is god
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Isn't it actually other way around in this thread? Isn't the OP trying to prove that atheists are wrong and should consider that there is god It could be because atheists try to see Gods as mythological characters :dontknow:
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 I think both religious and atheist are wrong in trying to shove their opinion down each others throats I recall reading Bhagwat Geeta and there was a verse which said to the order of "don't discuss me with fools, non-believers, etc. They will try to deride you." And something similar has happened to the OP Going by what I have read in Bhagwat Gita - "even the demi-gods and greatest of sages do not understand me completely." .... You have to work really^infinity hard to get to / understand God. So how is someone who is just going to temples and doing a few pujas going to understand God completely and then gain the knowledge to try to explain God's existence to someone who does not even believe in him? Going to temples and doing pujas only shows that you have faith in God (and may be he would even help you in some way) but it does not mean that you have gained the intelligence to a) understand God, and b) take it up on yourself to explain the existence of God Also to those who ask for proof (atheist) as if God is some channel on your TV network that will show up once you press a button :haha: .... And then these people have it in them to believe that someone who is considered as ultimate/supreme has to somehow show that he/she exists to you! (tomorrow you could be run by a truck and soon no one will even remember you - that's your reality .... God is and will be on most people's mind) .... I guess some people think it is fashionable to appear atheist or question God's existence. Just reading two books on science inflates your ego. And despite being so shallow, you are delusional enough to think that you have the depth to question the existence of God And there can be no true atheist, imho. At some point in our lives we do faces challenges where we have to think about something more powerful than us to help us. Acting as an atheist and truly being one are two different things .... In his last days, caged like an animal in his bunker, and with a gun on his head, Hitler too would have hoped for a miracle to save him
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 There is a spaghetti monster orbiting around the sun. Prove he doesn't exist. It wasn't God who conceptualized religious texts. It was this spaghetti monster.
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 There is a spaghetti monster orbiting around the sun. Prove he doesn't exist. It wasn't God who conceptualized religious texts. It was this spaghetti monster. No one would believe that .... However they believe God exists So wouldn't it show that people don't believe in random comments :hmmmm:
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 No one would believe that .... However they believe God exists So wouldn't it show that people don't believe in random comments :hmmmm: Hundreds of years back people used to believe the earth is flat. Some random people who said it is round based on scientific evidence were dismissed as lunatics. All it shows is a majority poll is no substitute for scientific evidence.
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Hundreds of years back people used to believe the earth is flat. Some random people who said it is round based on scientific evidence were dismissed as lunatics. All it shows is a majority poll is no substitute for scientific evidence. True, but it also shows that science's inability to discover earth is round earlier
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 True' date=' but it also shows that science's inability to discover earth is round earlier[/quote'] And what is there to be detected will be ultimately detected only through scientific practices. A few hundred years of science practiced by a minuscule amount of the population and thousands of years of religious garbage practiced by the vast majority of the population and their achievements are clear proof about which method is better.
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 And what is there to be detected will be ultimately detected only through scientific practices. A few hundred years of science practiced by a minuscule amount of the population and thousands of years of religious garbage practiced by the vast majority of the population and their achievements are clear proof about which method is better. Not everything is detected through scientific method. For e.g. fire, wheel, etc. were discovered by chance, so people can argue that God's guided the path to help discover science :winky:
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Not everything is detected through scientific method. For e.g. fire' date=' wheel, etc. were discovered by chance, so people can argue that God's guided the path to help discover science :winky:[/quote'] Fire and wheel were not discovered by scientific methods but by through religious methods? Can you provide some evidence for that?
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Fire and wheel were not discovered by scientific methods but by through religious methods? Can you provide some evidence for that? I will use a formula to explain that: By chance = miracle ----> Miracle = God -----> God = Religion :P
moniker Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 I recall reading Bhagwat Geeta and there was a verse which said to the order of "don't discuss me with fools' date=' non-believers, etc. They will try to deride you." [/quote'] Looks like god is a hypocrite. He derides those who don't believe in him by calling them names instead of patiently explaining himself to them but asks his followers to play the victim and ignore the non-believers. Oh, so the "greatest of sages" can understand god partially? That's a start! Do they also have a partial proof for the existence of god? So not only he's a hypocrite, he is also egoistical and undemocratic! He sounds horribly like Kejriwal. Can we have re-elections please? Things falling into place in a manner beneficial to you is pure chance, and Hitler would've hoped for it too. The probability for a pair of dice to throw a total of 12 is just 3%, but that doesn't mean that when it occurs it's a "miracle".
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 I will use a formula to explain that: By chance = miracle ----> Miracle = God -----> God = Religion :P Thanks for putting down in words the shallowness of your argument. Here is a more scientific explanation. We see this fire so often, does it come from heaven, let's try to rub our bodies together, that doesn't work. Let's try to rub stones together, yeah we see a light and spark but it doesn't persist. So let's try to create that spark on things like wood which we've seen burning. Presto, that works!
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Thanks for putting down in words the shallowness of your argument. Here is a more scientific explanation. We see this fire so often, does it come from heaven, let's try to rub our bodies together, that doesn't work. Let's try to rub stones together, yeah we see a light and spark but it doesn't persist. So let's try to create that spark on things like wood which we've seen burning. Presto, that works! Or what? I saw a spark when I hit two stones together? .... eureka!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks God
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Or what? I saw a spark when I hit two stones together? .... eureka!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks God I didn't get what you are trying to convey here. Can you please elaborate?
zen Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 I didn't get what you are trying to convey here. Can you please elaborate? "By chance" Anyways, your assumption that religion represents God and science doesn't may not be accurate. It is "us" who are trying to make that distinction .... Also God is not just for humans, but for other being as well
Desi Cartman Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 I think both religious and atheist are wrong in trying to shove their opinion down each others throats This thread is clearly to prove there is God and take a shot at people who don't agree I recall reading Bhagwat Geeta and there was a verse which said to the order of "don't discuss me with fools, non-believers, etc. They will try to deride you." And something similar has happened to the OP Going by what I have read in Bhagwat Gita - "even the demi-gods and greatest of sages do not understand me completely." .... You have to work really^infinity hard to get to / understand God. So how is someone who is just going to temples and doing a few pujas going to understand God completely and then gain the knowledge to try to explain God's existence to someone who does not even believe in him? So you are assuming that you are the only one who read a religious book and others just figured out that I'd be cool not to believe. Good. Going to temples and doing pujas only shows that you have faith in God (and may be he would even help you in some way) but it does not mean that you have gained the intelligence to a) understand God, and b) take it up on yourself to explain the existence of God So people who pray and visit temple are wrong and those who don't believe in it are wrong and you are the only one who has struck a balance between the two wrongs. Congrats Also to those who ask for proof (atheist) as if God is some channel on your TV network that will show up once you press a button :haha: .... And then these people have it in them to believe that someone who is considered as ultimate/supreme has to somehow show that he/she exists to you! (tomorrow you could be run by a truck and soon no one will even remember you - that's your reality .... God is and will be on most people's mind) .... I guess some people think it is fashionable to appear atheist or question God's existence. Just reading two books on science inflates your ego. And despite being so shallow, you are delusional enough to think that you have the depth to question the existence of God So again, you read 3 books (2 science and 1 religious) and since you have come to a conclusion, we should just agree with you. oh so Shallow and delusional of us to make up our mind :(( And there can be no true atheist, imho. At some point in our lives we do faces challenges where we have to think about something more powerful than us to help us. Acting as an atheist and truly being one are two different things .... In his last days, caged like an animal in his bunker, and with a gun on his head, Hitler too would have hoped for a miracle to save him Your opinion is not really humble, it's just gross generalization based on some assumptions and you are free to believe that you are not wrong.
The Outsider Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 "By chance" Anyways, your assumption that religion represents God and science doesn't may not be accurate. It is "us" who are trying to make that distinction .... Also God is not just for humans, but for other being as well Firstly, nothing happens by chance. The inventors might not have been employing the accepted scientific practices but that doesn't mean it was 'by chance'. Unless you can prove through universally accepted procedures that the discovery of fire was 'by chance' we should shun the topic to save you from further embarassment. I have zero clue about what you've attributed to be me assumption. Can you provide links for the claim or Bhagwan kha Gaye?
Desi Cartman Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Analogy: Twins talking to each other in their mother's womb "By chance" Anyways, your assumption that religion represents God and science doesn't may not be accurate. It is "us" who are trying to make that distinction .... Also God is not just for humans, but for other being as well Maybe not
zen Posted July 3, 2015 Posted July 3, 2015 Firstly, nothing happens by chance. The inventors might not have been employing the accepted scientific practices but that doesn't mean it was 'by chance'. Unless you can prove through universally accepted procedures that the discovery of fire was 'by chance' we should shun the topic to save you from further embarassment. I have zero clue about what you've attributed to be me assumption. Can you provide links for the claim or Bhagwan kha Gaye? In your book that may be the case - say you are driving your car, you get lost, and come across a desolated hotel and find your long lost girl friend. So this was a scientific process where you drove your car, chose the road you wanted to be lost, picked the desolated hotel, and sensed that your long lost GF was in there - a wonderful victory of well though out procedures! :P I am happy if my assumption is wrong so in that case there is an agreement that God does not differentiate b/w religion and science. Only question for you is does God exist. Eventually, through science we may discover God, and that would be something that the religion has been saying since I don't even know when
Recommended Posts