Ben Stein Expelled

[Grumath]

Originally Posted by Indiana

You're the king of fallacious arguments. Here let me save you the time to type up your next post.

LOLZ HITLER, MAO, POL POT AND STALIN WERE ATHEISTS.

YA RLY! They also all had an 'O' in their first or last name! Its a linkage, they are connected! O's are evil and cause genocide! See what I did there?

[vurt]

Originally Posted by Cynno

Maybe it is my active imagination or just a simple delusion, I don't see a reason why there couldn't be a creator. Although there is obviously no "definitive" proof that a creator exists. I guess that the fear of death is a motivating factor for my belief in a creator. Irrational and illogical as it may seem, I just don't want to believe that when I die, my consciousness, or soul, will simply cease existing. I want to believe there is something more to existence than just posting on some stupid internet message board.

I don't understand this attitude. Being dead is just as bad as not being born, and that wasn't too bad. It's not like you're going to by lying in the dirt thinking about how much it sucks to be lying in the dirt -- there won't be a you to worry.

And what's with the indenting?

[Cynno]

Originally Posted by vurt

I don't understand this attitude. Being dead is just as bad as not being born, and that wasn't too bad. It's not like you're going to by lying in the dirt thinking about how much it sucks to be lying in the dirt -- there won't be a you to worry.

And what's with the indenting?

Well, before I began existing in this world I didn't have the opportunity to ponder the possibility of ceasing to exist.

Also, my indenting is pro.

[Asmadai]

Originally Posted by Indiana

You're the king of fallacious arguments. Here let me save you the time to type up your next post.

LOLZ HITLER, MAO, POL POT AND STALIN WERE ATHEISTS.

I was simply using that point to disprove the constantly stated idea that people believing in God has held back man-kind from making scientific breakthroughs.

We are called 'close-minded sheep' and that 'if it wasn't for people believing in God, we'd see more scientific breakthrus', 'thankfully there are non-believers like me so the world can advance'. 'People who believe in God are holding us back - they are living in the Stone/Bronze Age'.

I mean seriously, go back read the fucking thread and see what's being said. When someone makes an inane point about how "religion" is some big enemy and holding man-kind back, but yet one of the most INFLUENTIAL people in the HISTORY OF WHAT YOU FUCKING HOLD TRUE believes in God, it's a logical fallacy? That's rich.

The guy who was the pioneer for the scientific method everyone keeps bringing up? Devout Muslim. Need I go on?

Oh let me guess - if these believers in God hadn't have thought up their theories, someone who didn't believe in God would have eventually right? Or is it something more along the lines of, "If they didn't believe in God, they would have made their breakthroughs years before hurhur."

Like I said before, i'm not shitting on science. And for those of you who are just too dense to figure this out, i'll paint a picture - this is a science vs religious debate. I said I don't believe in aspects of science - no that does not mean I don't believe in computers and technology and to assume so is just retarded. The aspects of science i'm not too keen on, are the 'theories' which contradict my beliefs. Period.

[Arbitrary]

You have got to stop. You just aren't making good arguments and you've lost all sense of context or historical perspective.

You are honestly one step away from the "Bananas Show God Exists" video.

[Asmadai]

Originally Posted by Arbitrary

You have got to stop. You just aren't making good arguments and you've lost all sense of context or historical perspective.

You are honestly one step away from the "Bananas Show God Exists" video.

This is why I can't argue with any of you people.

You make claims that religion is holding the scientific community back, I show you how it isn't and i'm the crazy one. I mean what the hell else can I say? You argue with me using fallacies, then accuse me of doing the same. How pointless is this discussion?

You claim the 'scientific method' is the true 'logical and reasonable choice' and disproves the existence of God, yet I point out that the pioneer of that exact method believed in God, and I'm crazy?

wat

[Arbitrary]

You quoted me and then attached to me nothing I actually said.

Go back and read every single one of my posts in this thread. You'll see a connection.

[UnchainedAcolyte]

Originally Posted by Asmadai

This is why I can't argue with any of you people.

You make claims that religion is holding the scientific community back, I show you how it isn't and i'm the crazy one. I mean what the hell else can I say? You argue with me using fallacies, then accuse me of doing the same. How pointless is this discussion?

You claim the 'scientific method' is the true 'logical and reasonable choice' and disproves the existence of God, yet I point out that the pioneer of that exact method believed in God, and I'm crazy?

wat

In general, religious zealotry often resists man's attempts to progress to a better understanding of the world, especially if those views contradict the church's doctrine on a particular issue. See Galileo.

Scientific theory and the scientific method are sound regardless of whether the person holds to any particular belief or not. The examples of the Pope and others who allow room for the possibility of evolution and other theories of existence do so because of the burden of evidence produced by the scientific community, as well as their inability to produce observable evidence for their beliefs in an increasingly skeptical world.

Science doesn't disprove the existence of God, but religion cannot prove the existence of God via any observable, calculable phenomena. The classical problem is that the burden of proof rests not with science to disprove, but with faith to prove the existence of God.

Oh, and if you try to make the argument that "Well science doesn't know everything, so God could exist", it is possible. However, on that claim, read up on Russell's Teapot by Bertrand Russell.


If you want to bolster your arguments for the existence of God, live according to your beliefs and show the fruit of your efforts. People will be more impressed by your life and living out your convictions than they will by trying to scientifically argue for His existence. If you do believe in God, then trust that He will provide conviction to others of His existence.

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
-Francis of Assisi


EDIT: Has there been a restriction on setting links to Wikipedia? If so, good

[Asmadai]

Originally Posted by Arbitrary

You quoted me and then attached to me nothing I actually said.

Go back and read every single one of my posts in this thread. You'll see a connection.

Well, I'm sorry but that's the downsides to having to argue with 15-20 people. I don't have the time of day to sort through you all and determine who's talking sense, and who's talking out of their ass - thus you all get lumped together.

I'm really just sick of hearing this stupid fucking man-made logic terms that non-believers are using to defend themselves. They'll talk out their ass to me, and when I try to refute their point my argument is labeled with some term and declared moot. It's their faultless defense which prevents them from having to actually refute my rebuttal, and it's bullshit.

[Arbitrary]

You fucking quoted me!

[vurt]

Originally Posted by Cynno

Well, before I began existing in this world I didn't have the opportunity to ponder the possibility of ceasing to exist.

Also, my indenting is pro.

And you no longer will have that opportunity; the non-existent you will not even have the capacity to ponder the loss.

You can sit around worrying about death, or you can accept it as merely a part of life.

[Asmadai]

Originally Posted by UnchainedAcolyte

Scientific theory and the scientific method are sound regardless of whether the person holds to any particular belief or not.

Of course they are, i'm not saying they aren't. My point is, that using a scientific method that was practically invented by a believer in God in an attempt to disprove the existence of God is one of the dumber things i've ever heard. Scientific method is used in many cases aside from the whole 'who created who' argument, and I'm not saying it's wrong - I just disagree with it.

Originally Posted by UnchainedAcolyte

The classical problem is that the burden of proof rests not with science to disprove, but with faith to prove the existence of God.

Indeed, and that's why I'm having such a hard time talking with everyone. It's me vs. 20, and they already have the higher ground by not having to prove their theories, but yet I have to prove mine.

Originally Posted by UnchainedAcolyte

If you want to bolster your arguments for the existence of God, live according to your beliefs and show the fruit of your efforts. People will be more impressed by your life and living out your convictions than they will by trying to scientifically argue for His existence. If you do believe in God, then trust that He will provide conviction to others of His existence.

I try to live according to my beliefs. It's just the whole topic at hand makes my head hurt. The science believers keep going on and on about how believing in God makes me so close-minded, sheepish, etc and how by learning God doesn't exist I could 'open my mind' and 'live a better life', but in the end we're still all nerds posting on a video game forum. They try to convince me how learning God isn't real will somehow 'enhance' my life, but yet to show what it has given them.

Thing is, I could live out my convictions, and it does wonders in real life, but this is a forum. Living my convictions does nothing - you have to type. I trust that God will eventually provide conviction to others, but it's just hard given the gang banging i'm receiving.

Like I said - i've not ever met a single person who thinks "Meh, Christianity? Not for me, but to each his own" and the continuation of this thread helps more solidify that ideal in my own mind that they don't exist. These rabid, verbal, rage-filled attacks on my faith just shows me that there has to be something to it. And as cliche as it may be to say it, they just don't get it, and until they find God they never will.

[UnchainedAcolyte]

Originally Posted by Asmadai

I'm really just sick of hearing this stupid fucking man-made logic terms that non-believers are using to defend themselves.

Some of us believers use it too. And God did give us a brain.

Originally Posted by Asmadai

They'll talk out their ass to me, and when I try to refute their point my argument is labeled with some term and declared moot. It's their faultless defense which prevents them from having to actually refute my rebuttal, and it's bullshit.

The same with labeling others "non-believers", and dismissing their views by saying that they don't understand.

The problem is that the arguments you're giving for the existence of God (very few other than your own conviction) have been heard by skeptics hundred of times before, sometimes in a different form, but always essentially the same argument.

Essentially the debate gets down to:

"God exists!"
"No he doesn't, I can't see him!"
"Well you're wrong!"
"Well, you're wrong, I know he exists!"
"But you can't prove it!"
"But, I still know that he exists because of my convictions!"

etc. etc. ad nauseum.

[Zerai]

I refuse to believe Asmadai is anything but a troll. His writing is too good to be a complete idiot but due to how dense he is making his argument, it can't be anything else.

[Asmadai]

Originally Posted by UnchainedAcolyte

The problem is that the arguments you're giving for the existence of God (very few other than your own conviction) have been heard by skeptics hundred of times before, sometimes in a different form, but always essentially the same argument.

You are right, I'm using mostly my own convictions to argue my belief, but I don't really know of any other way to argue that point.

I mean, the non-believers are physical - they have to have tangible physical proof to make them believe anything. If there was tangible proof for the existence of God, we wouldn't be having this discussion because everyone would believe in God.

The reasons I believe in God are not due to convincing arguments or anything of that nature; it's just almost natural. I know He exists just as easy as I know if I jump up the air i'll come back down. I found God through realization, and it's hard to sometimes put that realization into explanatory means to try and convince others. It's an uphill battle, but I guess it always has been for God believing people.