Religion Has Maciamo proved that God doesn't exist?

[John Doe]

And, btw, eastern Mediterranean type people such as Greeks aren't northwestern Europeans, they're southeastern Europeans.

I'm aware of that, and truth be told, I doubt Anatolian Turks descend overwhelmingly from Mongolia 800 years ago.

 

[Rethel]

I'm aware of that, and truth be told, I doubt Anatolian Turks descend overwhelmingly from Mongolia 800 years ago.

It must be small percentage of them.

For examle hg C+N+O+Q=7,31% plus maybe some of R1a, but not so much.

So average circa 8% people of Turkey comes from Mongolia.
(not 800 y.a., but a couple of hundrets of years earlier, but it doesn't matter)
And if hg C is original paleoaltaic hg that means that amongs
Turkish people "turkishness" is only in 1,34% of them...

 

[Aberdeen]

I'm aware of that, and truth be told, I doubt Anatolian Turks descend overwhelmingly from Mongolia 800 years ago.

I never said they were. You seem determined to take this thread off topic. My point was that the myth of Saint Nicholas is insufficient to explain the idea of an entity such as Santa Claus, also known in some countries as Father Christmas. It seems clear to me that he is partly a northern European folk memory of a god of the winter solstice. My initial point was that people believe in or claim to believe in all kinds of gods whose existence can't be demonstrated.

 

[Aberdeen]

I was never beliving in that, neither when adult people try to convinced me.
When I was 3 or 4, I saw a Santa, who had a female legs and shoes
This fact didn't even disprooved Santa in my eyes, because before that fact I was never beliving in him.

But I always was beliving in God. Not because someone taught me that, but because it is logical.

Santa never was logical or real for me.

God always was.

And even in theory, existence of God-Absolute who is beyond the Creation is
much more coplicated thing than some Santa Claus and his elves, which are
seem do be a products of Disney's cartoons rather than personal reasonable
and scholastic (with hugely build theological knowledge) Neccesery Being.

So I must say, that trying to compare god's existence to stupid teaching
of stupid parents who want make their children stupid - is nonsensical.

How is it nonsensical to compare the existence of one immortal, magical entity (Santa Claus) to the existence of another immortal, magical being (God) if neither entity can be proven to exist outside the human mind? Why do you say that the existence of an ubergod is logical? Who created him? If we're going to claim that something always existed and therefore needs no creator, I'd rather apply that idea to the universe, which can actually be shown to exist.

Even if you could prove that some sort of ubergod exists, you certainly can't prove that he's the god of any particular religion, or that he cares more about humans than he does about chickens or shrubs.

 

[Rethel]

How is it nonsensical to compare the existence of one immortal, magical entity (Santa Claus) to the existence of another immortal, magical being (God) if neither entity can be proven to exist outside the human mind?

1) It is not true!
If at the midnight at 24/25 XII Santa doesn't come to your house - this means that he doesn't exist!

2) How can you compare fiction person from Disneys cartoons with subject of study through thosands years...

Besides, noone never claimed that Santa Claus existed and never show any proofs.
Santa never had a church, books, prophets, message, plan, and explanation of us, him and the world.
So - what are you talking about? This is simply trivial and unserious...

Why do you say that the existence of an ubergod is logical?

Because we are, and we know about it.

Who created him?

Concept of uncreated Creator cannot have many creators of creators, because it does not have sense.

This is much better, than belive, that nothing nowhere never exploded and... here we are! Eureka!

If we're going to claim that something always existed and therefore needs no creator,

And this is wrong!
Because The God doesn't always existed...
He is beyond the time, so he simply existed.
In his existence there is no begining, no past, no present, no future, and no end.
There is no time. He exist in notime.
He doesn't need a theoretical creator, because he never had a beginning, he has no linear present, and he has no end.
He is timeless and spaceless Existance beyond the Creation.

For exaple, you are not part of your Computer, and you are not dependent from priciples who rule inside your computer.

ubergod

If you are creating such words please use ü. Thanks. :cool-v:

exists, you certainly can't prove that he's the god of any particular religion, or that he cares more about humans than he does about chickens or shrubs.

If such kind of God of whom I am talking about exists, he should
contact us in acient times and creat some faithfull succession of
beliving people/tradition with some written information from him.
And such a religion couldn't loose their fight with others religions.
This conditions exclude everything except Christianity.

 

[Aberdeen]

Rethel, your god hasn't come to my house, so by your logic he doesn't exist. And if he exists in no time, he doesn't exist in this universe. And there are lots of religions that have an organized religious structure with priests and ancient books that explain their religious concepts - read the Vedas and you'll see one example.

The only thing unique about christianity, in my opinion, is that your god is depicted in your holy book as a dangerous sociopath who did many evil things, such as sending bears to kill little children who made fun of one of his prophets. Your god even killed his own son and brought him back to life in order to impress people - that was the act of a madman. None of the gods or goddesses mentioned in the Vedas ever did anything that wicked.

 

[Maleth]

1. Christianity 2.1 billion
2. Islam 1.3 billion
3. Secular/Irreligious/Agnostic/Atheist 1.1 billion
4. Hinduism 900 million
5. Chinese traditional religion 394 million
6. Buddhism 376 million (see also buddhism by country)
7. Primal indigenous 300 million
8. African traditional and diasporic 100 million
9. Sikhism 23 million
10. Juche 19 million
11. Spiritism 15 million
12. Judaism 14 million
13. Bahá'í Faith 7 million
14. Jainism 4.2 million
15. Shinto 4 million
16. Cao Dai 4 million
17. Zoroastrianism 2.6 million
18. Tenrikyo 2 million
19. Neopaganism 1 million
20. Unitarian Universalism 800,000
21. Rastafari movement 600,000

and many of these are again subdiveded in adversory groups to make different religions climb to thousands. Which one is really the church of god?

 

[Rethel]

Rethel, your god hasn't come to my house, so by your logic he doesn't exist.

Wrong argument again!

Noone ever said, that Jahwe are coming to every house as a man, especially, at one particular time every year.
So, your thinking is wrong at the beginnig.

And if he exists in no time, he doesn't exist in this universe.

Of course!
Noone never claim that he exists in this universe, like a shoemaker doesn't live in shoes.

And there are lots of religions that have an organized religious structure with priests and ancient books that explain their religious concepts - read the Vedas and you'll see one example.

There are almost only nonsenses, exept one: they also know, that existe one supreme God.

Besides, hinduism is so primitive, that he cannot came here and explain his way of "salvation".
So, hindism doesn't care, if I will be a hinduist or not. Hindusim doesn't want me and his gods do not want me too.

The only thing unique about christianity, in my opinion, is that your god is depicted in your holy book as a dangerous sociopath who did many evil things, such as sending bears to kill little children who made fun of one of his prophets. Your god even killed his own son and brought him back to life in order to impress people - that was the act of a madman.

I don't have so many time and vocabulary to disscus about that, so I can say: I like it

Of course your statment is wrong also, build on Dawkins, without understand basic stories from the Bible.

Nontheless he is GOD, The God, supreme in every sense, so he can do, whatever he whishes to do.

None of the gods or goddesses mentioned in the Vedas ever did anything that wicked.

Not at all... hahaha...

Vedas are so gigantic that I deeply doubt, that you know them very well...

One of most recognazable godess in the West is... Kali... probably I dont
have to write any more, because this name speaks for himself...

Do you ever see christian picture like that:




So, don't tell me, that hinduism is good, because Bible always was against that kind of cults.

p.s. do you see my signature in that post? Because I don't.

 

[Maleth]

The only thing unique about christianity, in my opinion, is that your god is depicted in your holy book as a dangerous sociopath who did many evil things, such as sending bears to kill little children who made fun of one of his prophets. Your god even killed his own son and brought him back to life in order to impress people - that was the act of a madman. None of the gods or goddesses mentioned in the Vedas ever did anything that wicked.

...........and what about the desolation of Samaria for being perceived as rebelling against her God had was stabbed with a sword and the baby in her womb was dashed to pieces + all pregnant women will be ripped up. (Hosea 16.13) How sick and macabre :banghead:

 

[Aberdeen]

...........and what about the desolation of Samaria for being perceived as rebelling against her God had was stabbed with a sword and the baby in her womb was dashed to pieces + all pregnant women will be ripped up. (Hosea 16.13) How sick and macabre :banghead:

Yes, we could think of many examples. But of course the purpose of discussing such things is not to bash people who embrace christianity but who understand and accept that not everyone agrees with them. Perhaps you would agree that the point is simply to point out that there is a great deal about that particular holy book that seems very strange and questionable to those of us who are looking at it from a logical rather than a faith perspective.

 

[Aberdeen]

Wrong argument again!

Noone ever said, that Jahwe are coming to every house as a man, especially, at one particular time every year.
So, your thinking is wrong at the beginnig.




Of course!
Noone never claim that he exists in this universe, like a shoemaker doesn't live in shoes.



There are almost only nonsenses, exept one: they also know, that existe one supreme God.

Besides, hinduism is so primitive, that he cannot came here and explain his way of "salvation".
So, hindism doesn't care, if I will be a hinduist or not. Hindusim doesn't want me and his gods do not want me too.



I don't have so many time and vocabulary to disscus about that, so I can say: I like it

Of course your statment is wrong also, build on Dawkins, without understand basic stories from the Bible.

Nontheless he is GOD, The God, supreme in every sense, so he can do, whatever he whishes to do.



Not at all... hahaha...

Vedas are so gigantic that I deeply doubt, that you know them very well...

One of most recognazable godess in the West is... Kali... probably I dont
have to write any more, because this name speaks for himself...

Do you ever see christian picture like that:


View attachment 7182

So, don't tell me, that hinduism is good, because Bible always was against that kind of cults.

p.s. do you see my signature in that post? Because I don't.

Your arguments seem to me to be very inconsistent, and I suspect that you don't understand the theological implications of taking the view that your creator god is absent from his creation. I also suspect that most people who have a good understanding of both Hindu and christian theology but who are looking at both from a perspective of logic and reason would conclude that christianity is much more simplistic than Hinduism and has a lot more theological weaknesses embedded in it. And for those of us who don't see anything sacred in your bible, having someone say that it is against something means nothing.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Your arguments seem to me to be very inconsistent, and I suspect that you don't understand the theological implications of taking the view that your creator god is absent from his creation. I also suspect that most people who have a good understanding of both Hindu and christian theology but who are looking at both from a perspective of logic and reason would conclude that christianity is much more simplistic than Hinduism and has a lot more theological weaknesses embedded in it. And for those of us who don't see anything sacred in your bible, having someone say that it is against something means nothing.

A God doesn't have to fall under the rules of human "theology" and understanding. Who are you to say a God separated from his creation doesn't make sense? It's pathetic in my mind that humans put their rules and understanding of the world onto spirituality. It contradicts the whole idea of the supernatural.

 

[Fire Haired14]

1. Christianity 2.1 billion
2. Islam 1.3 billion
3. Secular/Irreligious/Agnostic/Atheist 1.1 billion
4. Hinduism 900 million
5. Chinese traditional religion 394 million
6. Buddhism 376 million (see also buddhism by country)
7. Primal indigenous 300 million
8. African traditional and diasporic 100 million
9. Sikhism 23 million
10. Juche 19 million
11. Spiritism 15 million
12. Judaism 14 million
13. Bahá'í Faith 7 million
14. Jainism 4.2 million
15. Shinto 4 million
16. Cao Dai 4 million
17. Zoroastrianism 2.6 million
18. Tenrikyo 2 million
19. Neopaganism 1 million
20. Unitarian Universalism 800,000
21. Rastafari movement 600,000

and many of these are again subdiveded in adversory groups to make different religions climb to thousands. Which one is really the church of god?

The vast majority of those people are "followers", but in reality lean towards being agnostic. Listing those stats I think wrongly justify people to pretend that religious conservatives still run the world. Also, the argument that separation of a religion makes in illegitimate is outdated, comes from people who don't understand those religions, and is usually false. I know that in Christianity the Vatican and a hick church in South Dakota truly believe in the same religion.

 

[LeBrok]

But I always was beliving in God. Not because someone taught me that, but because it is logical.

Wherever we go on this we find people believing in god, gods or spirits, voodoo, no mentioning super beings in UFO vessels. Whatever they believe it seams very "logical" to them. I'd say, if logic had anything to do with it, they logically would believe in exactly same thing, the only true thing.

99% (if not more) of people believe in god(s) of their parents. I think we can find logic in it, but it has nothing to do with existence or not of true god(s).

 

[LeBrok]

...........and what about the desolation of Samaria for being perceived as rebelling against her God had was stabbed with a sword and the baby in her womb was dashed to pieces + all pregnant women will be ripped up. (Hosea 16.13) How sick and macabre :banghead:

Why we don't have prophets in modern times?
Because we keep them locked in Psychiatric Institutions.

 

[Maleth]

Why we don't have prophets in modern times?
Because we keep them locked in Psychiatric Institutions.

etrified: we have grand Cathedrals, Mosques and Synagoges, I love the amazing arts, music and chants that go with it, even the bells bring warmth to my heart, but PLEASE not in the name of this madness. They make us kiss this literature and take oath on it, probably everyone have these psychotic teachings on the shelve somewhere and many baost that these books are the best sold in the world. For hundreds of years no one could question and still BULLIED in a BIG WAY in the Islamic world Do people know what they are doing?

 

[Aberdeen]

A God doesn't have to fall under the rules of human "theology" and understanding. Who are you to say a God separated from his creation doesn't make sense? It's pathetic in my mind that humans put their rules and understanding of the world onto spirituality. It contradicts the whole idea of the supernatural.

As usual, you seem to have misunderstood what you read. I didn't say that a god that is separated from his creation doesn't make sense, I said I didn't think Rethel understood the theological implications of his claim that his god exists outside its creation. A god that is external to the universe will have a very different relationship to its creation than one that is part of its creation. One cannot argue that one has a meaningful personal relationship with a god that is not a part of this universe unless one wishes to ignore all logic and reason. Of course, that is exactly what many religious people do, and I don't take such people seriously.

 

[Aberdeen]

The vast majority of those people are "followers", but in reality lean towards being agnostic. Listing those stats I think wrongly justify people to pretend that religious conservatives still run the world. Also, the argument that separation of a religion makes in illegitimate is outdated, comes from people who don't understand those religions, and is usually false. I know that in Christianity the Vatican and a hick church in South Dakota truly believe in the same religion.

Actually, the folks at the Vatican generally have extremely different core beliefs than the average member of a hick church in South Dakota, so while they may both say they practice the same religion, it looks to an outsider to be two different religions using some of the same terminology. The Catholic church doesn't teach fundamentalism or the idea that science contradicts their faith and most American fundies do believe that. The Catholic church teaches that the Pope is the head of the christian religion, and Protestants don't believe that. The Catholic church teaches that there are seven sacraments, while Protestants believe that there are only two. Catholics believe that the Virgin Mary physically ascended into heaven, and Protestants don't. Fundies usually believe that people have to be "born again" to go to heaven, but Catholics don't. Catholics believe that the baker made god, with the help of a priest (transubstantiation) whereas Protestants don't. And in fact some Protestant groups, such as Oneness Pentacostals, don't even believe in the trinity. So, are they actually practicing the same religion?

 

[Sile]

Wherever we go on this we find people believing in god, gods or spirits, voodoo, no mentioning super beings in UFO vessels. Whatever they believe it seams very "logical" to them. I'd say, if logic had anything to do with it, they logically would believe in exactly same thing, the only true thing.

99% (if not more) of people believe in god(s) of their parents. I think we can find logic in it, but it has nothing to do with existence or not of true god(s).

IMO, religion is a personnel thing, not shared............the more your talk about religion or listen to clerics, priests etc, the more retarded and confused one gets

 

[Fire Haired14]

As usual, you seem to have misunderstood what you read. I didn't say that a god that is separated from his creation doesn't make sense, I said I didn't think Rethel understood the theological implications of his claim that his god exists outside its creation. A god that is external to the universe will have a very different relationship to its creation than one that is part of its creation. One cannot argue that one has a meaningful personal relationship with a god that is not a part of this universe unless one wishes to ignore all logic and reason. Of course, that is exactly what many religious people do, and I don't take such people seriously.

IMO, you can makeup whatever you want about spirituality. It's open game. Of course there are clear boundaries, where eventually it doesn't make sense, but still alot of room for ideas.