Do You Support Stephen Hawking who said "God did not create Universe"?

[DeletedUser]

all we as humans have is EVIDENCE for and agianst both sides but nothin that can prove either sides as absoloutly true or false

No evidence/proof whatsoever in support of any religion, only wishful thinking.

its beyond our current technology and scientific knowledge to prove or disprove either side

They aren't sides. There is scientific studies, which are "based on evidence," and thus proof, and there is religion, which exists without evidence/proof. They aren't in opposition, they aren't on "sides." It is religion that tries to claim science is in opposition, but science merely ignores religion, because it is irrelevant to their fundamental process of collecting data, examining data, and presenting answers based on said data. No data in religion, so it's not on the table for them to dissect.

insulting eachothers beleifs is inexcusable and childish

Religions have beliefs... science does not.

and yet agian you prove that its the athiests that are completely closeed minded and disrespectful of others beleifs

And yet again you ignore completely that atheists are a minority who have, historically and to this present day, been ostracized, maimed and murdered specifically because they don't "believe." It is religious folk that don't respect atheists. And really, what's there to respect about religions that advocate slavery, murder, killing of their wives and children? Why should any sane person respect that?

 

[DeletedUser]

and again another example of athiests being completely intollerant of others

evidence has been clearly given for many religions and beliefs wehater or not u choose to accept it or not is irrelevent the fact is there is evidence for many religions as well as science your welcome to beleive what you want and others are welcome to view the evidence and choose there own beleifs athiests try to pin christians and other religions as intollerent but in a consistant debate here and in other threads not once have i argued that science is wrong only that both sides of the debate have merit and should be shown equal respect and rather than being open minded and respectful all the athiests here have done nothing but christan bash and religion bash ( but mostly christan bash )

its that kind of shallow minded disrespectful attitude that makes any kind of honest dialoge possible

while there are some religous indivduals that are disrespectful of "non beleivers"
it seems to be a mass majority of athiets ( in my personal experince and that of many others) that are completely intolerant of any views other than there own which makes the athiest comunity just as bad if not WORSE than the religious zelots of centuries ago


oh and fyi ( http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html )
as the third largest group one could hardly say that there a minority athiests and agnositics make up a huge block of individuals behind only christianity and islam

 

[DeletedUser]

evidence has been clearly given for many religions and beliefs wehater or not u choose to accept it or not is irrelevent the fact is there is evidence for many religions as well as science your welcome to beleive what you want and others are welcome to view the evidence and choose there own beleifs athiests try to pin christians and other religions as intollerent but in a consistant debate here and in other threads not once have i argued that science is wrong only that both sides of the debate have merit and should be shown equal respect and rather than being open minded and respectful all the athiests here have done nothing but christan bash and religion bash ( but mostly christan bash )

Talk about a ramble. Yo spider, you already said you weren't Christian... so we're not bashing Christians when we're bashing your opinions, hehe.

it seems to be a mass majority of athiets ( in my personal experince and that of many others) that are completely intolerant of any views other than there own which makes the athiest comunity just as bad if not WORSE than the religious zelots of centuries ago

Let's address something here. You keep using the term "atheist" as a label of some sort of cult, and you interchange that with "non-believer." A non-believer isn't necessarily an atheist.

oh and fyi ( http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html )
as the third largest group one could hardly say that there a minority athiests and agnositics make up a huge block of individuals behind only christianity and islam

And here you demonstrate exactly what I'm talking about. Non-believers, listed on that pie chart, account for 16%, and yet, if you bothered to review the report for which that chart was created (Click Here), you'll see --- of that 16% --- only 1.6% are Atheist, with 2.4% being Agnostic, 6.3% being Secular Unaffiliated, and 5.8% being Religious Unaffiliated. Unequivocal demonstration that atheism is, indeed, a minority.

while there are some religous indivduals that are disrespectful of "non beleivers"

Some?!?

In my book, I don't believe or disbelieve in a god. I, personally, do not believe in the stories and fairy tales presented by people 2000+ years ago. That doesn't make me an atheist, it just makes me not gullible. You see, I live by the credo of evidence. That which is before me, that which is evidence, that which is proven, is valid. That which is not, is invalid.

A lot of people hold to the same notion I do, albeit they don't present it in such a fashion. Anyway, the point I'm making here is that you're far too busy trying to draw lines in the sand that you don't even realize just how jaded you are in your perception of things, and in so doing you demonstrate yourself to be far greater a basher than those who simply point out, albeit enthusiastically, that believing in something without proof is the definition of gullible.

You see --- I do not say there is no god, I say there is no proof!

It is you who takes offense to us stating the obvious. It's you who keeps playing this little game of saying there is proof in science and in god when there is no proof in god. And yes, you may want to take offense to someone saying there is just as much evidence of the existence of leprechauns as there is evidence in the existence of god, but guess what, they're telling the truth, because zero = zero. No evidence of the existence of leprechauns = no evidence of the existence of god. Woohoo, Eureka!

And yet, even after these comments, I'm pretty sure you're going to say I'm bashing religion.

 

[DeletedUser1121]

evidence has been clearly given for many religions and beliefs wehater or not u choose to accept it or not is irrelevent the fact is there is evidence for many religions

Please tell me what your definition of evidence is because i think we aren't speaking the same language here.

I'll start by giving mine:
evidence = ground for belief or disbelief; data on which to base proof or to establish truth or falsehood

Now, can you for once and for all give me evidence that religion isn't based on fairytales, but that there actually is a devine power. Please provide me with data on which i can establish the truth that a God exists.

And please do not try to ask me to proof that i can't provide evidence that there isn't a devine power because the burden of proof isn't up to the ones who don't believe.

 

[DeletedUser]

ok agian first let me start with i am not christan but i was raised christan and as such i have a strong understanding of there beleif systems and since most chrsitans have been driven off these boards by the constant malicous attacks agiasnt them and there religion im the only one here left to defend there side of the debate

and yes BASHING christian beliefs and ideals no matter whos debating them is still christian bashing

secondly athiest is a beleif system you believe in evolution and the lack of a creator just like christans believe in god and muslims in allah and scientologists in zenu or w/e etc etc etc its simply a catigorization being a " non beleiever " as the religous might call it means simple that you beleive there is no creator the why is irrelevent for that as its simple a term to represnt what group you fall into not a comentry or faith or anything of the sort


athiests are part of a large group with some shared ideologies much in the same way all christians are lumped together in spite of drastic and often extreemly differing beleifs

since most agnoiscis are rarely true agnostics and accualy believe in evoloution and most " general non bleivers" while they don claim to be athiest beleive in evoloution are still for all intents and pourposes athiests weather they claim it or not



next agian your bashing commetnnon fairy tails directly goes after chrsitans not religions in general so you show your anti chrsitan bias


lastly theres many scources of evidence you dont have to accpet it personal but the fact is its evidence for creation you may completely ignore it or choose to diregaurd it but evidence is evidence weather you choose to accpet it or not or wether it sways your beleif or not the fact is tehy have evidence to support there beleif for them and therefore to bash them or there belief shows closed mindedness and a complete disregaurd for others



a simple google search finds many scources of evidence presented for a belief in god
agian it doesnt requirre that you accept these peoples interpitation of said evidence in your personal beliefs but you have to respect that they DO have evidence to support there beliefs otherwise one proves themselfs to be an intolerant bigot
http://www.godandscience.org/

http://www.icr.org/God/

http://www.toptenproofs.com/article_godsexistence.php




(and forthose that dont understand the term bigot

Definition of BIGOT

: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance )

 

[DeletedUser]

ok agian first let me start with i am not christan but i was raised christan and as such i have a strong understanding of there beleif systems

My mother was a Catholic, with a strong Christian family background, my father was an Atheist, with a devout Christian grandmother and an agnostic grandfather. My cousin, who I lived with for a time, is Hindi. Does that provide me with a strong understanding of each? Well, no. What provided me with an understanding of each was my willingness to listen, learn, and research beyond what was presented to me. So please, don't act like knowledge comes with association, it doesn't. It doesn't anymore than you can say you know women's menstruation because you went out with woman. Without making a concerted effort to study the subject, your knowledge would be superficial. And that is my argument here. You have repeatedly demonstrated a superficial understanding of many issues.

and since most chrsitans have been driven off these boards by the constant malicous attacks agiasnt them and there religion im the only one here left to defend there side of the debate

Ah, I see, so you're now claiming "most" Christians have been driven off these boards. Well it just so happens a number of the moderators are Christian, so that little claim just went down the toilet, now didn't it?

and yes BASHING christian beliefs and ideals no matter whos debating them is still christian bashing

Duh, of course bashing is bashing. What i'm saying is that I, at the least, have not been bashing Christianity. I have repeatedly said it, and will say it again, I merely argue the same point over and over and over again, which is that there is no evidence to support a belief, I live by the credo of evidence first because following notions without evidence translates to gullible, and I resist being gullible.

secondly athiest is a beleif system

I think we already discussed this, which is that 1.6% of people are atheists. Atheists believe there is no god. I hold to deduction, which is that if there is no evidence to support the existence of something, I dismiss it as invalid. It's important for you to understand that Valid and Invalid is not the same as belief, for or against.

See, what I'm trying to tell you here is --- I'm not an atheist, I'm also not an agnostic, and I'm definitely not religious. And from what I've seen, the majority of debaters you claim are atheists, are in fact secular unaffiliated or agnostic (I think we may have one atheist in the group). The problem here is, you're trying to make your debate easier by labeling everyone as atheists. Why? Because it's easier to bash extremes.

Also, I would like to point out that, based on what you just said, you're in the non-religious 16% as well, in that you're a "religious-unaffiliated."

you believe in evolution

And there we go again. Evolution is not a belief, anymore than a tree is a belief. Evolution is a fact. A tree is a fact. There's a buttload of evidence that they are both fact and theory (mostly fact). So get off your little podium of denial here. Evolution is NOT a belief... wake up, get it through that stubborn noggin'. Oh wait, if you can present a reasonable argument that a tree is a belief, then maybe I'll start agreeing with you on the whole evolution/belief nonsense.

athiests are part of a large group with some shared ideologies much in the same way all christians are lumped together in spite of drastic and often extreemly differing beleifs

And once again, atheists are not a large group. Once again, they constitute 1.6%. The notions held by atheists are not the notions held by the majority of "non-believers," as is evidenced by the report we both previously provided.

next agian your bashing commetnnon fairy tails directly goes after chrsitans not religions in general so you show your anti chrsitan bias

Nope, it wasn't a bash, and it wasn't addressed to just Christianity. A religion is non-evidenced, just as a fairy tale is non-evidenced. The distinction between the two is not in its substance, but in the amount of people who believe in it. So, if there's a lot of people, it is a religion. If there's a small amount, it's a cult. And if it's a very small amount, or none, it's a fairy tale. Do note, if at one time there were a lot of people that believed in it, but no longer, it is then a legend.

Do note, and you really must understand this, if there is no evidence, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It merely means there's no evidence to support its existence and, as such, nothing to verify if any, or some, of it is factual. In such a case, when there is no evidence, and you choose to believe it --- it's a belief.

But when there's supporting evidence, it's no longer a belief. And do realize, a man saying he saw Allah is hearsay. It is, for scientific purposes, inadmissable --- invalid.

lastly theres many scources of evidence you dont have to accpet it personal but the fact is its evidence for creation

Good, I'll review those links and demonstrate to you, in another thread, the fallacies presented. And no, it won't be bashing your religion, it will be a demonstration on the fallacies of the so-called proof of God. Wait for it.

 

[DeletedUser]

first you call an established religion a fairy tail belittlin it and the billions of people that follow it thats bashing


secondly

a·the·ist (

th

-

st) [SIZE=-2]KEY[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]NOUN:[/SIZE]

One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.
you deny that god exists therefore you dont beleive in god therefore you are an athiest by teh very definition


thrid since you OBVIOUSLY have no clue what the word beleif means

Definition of BELIEF

1
: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing

2
: something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group

3
: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence



all of these apply to science as well as religion

learn to seperate the differnce between beleif and faith
belief has nothign to do with religion

i BELIEVE the sun will rise tommow because based on all evidence and observable fact the sun will rise tommorow

i beleive the earth orbits the sun becaus the evidince shows it does

see how that works belief and blind faith to which you keep aluding beleif to mean are 2 very seperate things

you continualy argue semantics yet always fail to study the definitions of the words to see how they have multiple meanings im begining to wonder if english isnt your primary language by the way seem to lack understanding of its complexities and minutia



lastly weather or not you can argue the evidence presented isnt the point its the simple fact that contrary to your statements there IS evidence to support there beliefs

everyone can make arguments for and agianst eachothers evidence of there beliefs if there were no arguments to be made there would be no debate but the point is there is in fact evidence

so try learning a little tolerence



and just an aside i wasnt raised by a christan i was raised in a christian family i attended and was involved in church most of my life so i have a far deeper understanding of christianity then most non christians or those with casual church experince

when i left home at 16 i as a rebelious teen rejected christianity more out of spite than anything else

then i spent years studding science and a miriad of religions from various forms of christianity ( babtist ,chathlic , mormon,) to alternative religions like wicca , humanism, budism, zen taoism, and even to a degree satanism ( the last being just studdy not participation)

i come to my personal beleifs from YEARS of study and research and personal experince

 

[DeletedUser]

oh and just one more thing i came across by chance

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx


kinda blows your minority thing all to hell

 

[DeletedUser]

I find it funny you keep posting dictionary definitions so much considering the way you write and express yourself.

Hellstromm has pretty much said all I wanted to say in answer several times over to your inane posts.

You provide zero evidence, several fallacies, and lots of claims without backing.
Honestly, if your words had a ring of laugh to them I'd say you were slinging bullcrap, but this reeks of horsecrap.

Why exactly did you post that statistic?
It only supports what "we" have said all along about education level, acceptance of scientific fact, and ignorance.

 

[DeletedUser]

agian you totaly miss the point

im not arguing FOR christianity im simply showing that it DOES have some evvidentiary support weather you agree with the evidence or not is irrelevant but you all cant seem to seperate those two distinctions


at john rose ive had a collage masters reading level and comprehension since 5th grade my friend but i suffer a condition called dyslexic disgraphia well technically both dislexic disgraphica an dto a degree motor disgraphia . i was readin shakespere and ens in elementry school yet my writing level was always several grades back
(sadly in those days no one knew what disgraphia was they were barely coming to understand dislexia )

so when your addressing the way i " write and expres myself" understand that ive had to dumb down what i want to say by an exponential factor jsut so that i can type it out coherntly but understand that i likely know the english language and all its minute far far better than you can even begin to realize sadly im only able to comunicate it properly verbaly . you guys constantly frustrate me time and agian in your lack of understanding the finer points of words and ther multiple meanings frequently fizating on one possible definition and completely ignoreing a dozen others relevant ot the point at hand . understand that i dont say alll this to brag or to make some kind of claim at being super smart or better tehn anyone i simply am a gifted reader in addition to reading advanced literature i can also read upside downa nd mirror script almost as easly as i can normal writing
when that little article came out a while back about the supposed cambrige studdy about reading things even when the letters are all out of order i read it 2 dozen times before i understood why everyone was facinated with it as it looked perfectly normal to me its jsut how my brain is wired . but i only bring this up to help you understand that in spite of the way i type and write i have a far far stroner grasp ont he english language than you realize



as far as posting the statistic it was to show that athiest and non beleivers make up a huge percentage of the population in the us even by a very liberal polls standards so his claim of them being a minority are absurd
people can debate hte rest of hte polls stats else where as its not relevent to teh conversation the poll in this case was only used to counter hells fasle statement



in the end most of you have only served time and time agian to completely prove my point without realizing it

the only point ive tried to make is that ALL beleifs that includes religous and scientific and non religious have there merits and flaws have there evidence and counter evidence

this isnt about debating those its about being tolerant and respectful of others views

you dont have to accept there views jsut respect that every views teh evidence at hand and makes a personal judgement on how they choose to view it based on what feels right to them weather it be logicaly emotionaly or some combitation of hte two
to do anything less is a diservice to onesself as it only expresses a closed minded bigotry that had no place in modern society and yes that goes both ways

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually, spider, it's not evidence. Just because people think what they're presenting is evidence doesn't "make" it evidence. I reviewed the links, Desi made good arguments in another thread, and I plan to participate in that thread as well, reviewing those links you posed. But be assured, what they presented was not evidence.

Also, spider, claiming we proved your point doesn't "make" it true. You have failed to prove your points. In fact, you have failed to provide any proof whatsoever in support of your points. For that matter, I'm not even sure you have any points...

Just saying

 

[DeletedUser]

lol its pointless to continue this discusion with you any further as youve shown a complete inability to be objective or open minded not an insult mearly a crystak clear observation

 

[DeletedUser]

lol its pointless to continue this discusion with you any further as youve shown a complete inability to be objective or open minded not an insult mearly a crystak clear observation

There seems to be a lot of that in this thread.

 

[DeletedUser]

There seems to be a lot of that in this thread.

well when i try to argue for simple respect of other peoples views and numours people continuously attack other peoples beliefs ....

 

[DeletedUser]

well when i try to argue for simple respect of other peoples views and numours people continuously attack other peoples beliefs ....

Would that be like the starter of this thread...

http://forum.the-west.net/showthread.php?t=40473

Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.” Koran 2:191
“Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood.” Koran 9:123
“When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them.” Koran 9:5
“Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.” Koran 3:85
“The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them.” Koran 9:30
“Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam” Koran 5:33
“Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies.” Koran 22:19
“The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them.” Koran 8:65
“Muslims must not take the infidels as friends.” Koran 3:28
“Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an.” Koran 8:12
“Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels.” Koran 8:60
ANYONE ELSE WANT TO DISCUSS THE PEACFUL MUSLIM RELIGION?

You're attacking beliefs right there.

Do you really not even see that you do this?

 

[DeletedUser]

the startre of this thread was hell using a post completely out of context

that post was simply ment as a counter to the constant statements people were making about islam being a peacefull religion

quoting people out of context can always be made to look differnt


besides even though i do in fact view islam in general to not be a peacfull religion i dont atttack there beleif in allah or there views on how the world was created i simply disapprove of the violent asspects of there religion ( that have nothing to do with creation or there religions core beliefs as the more violent aspects of the koran were added later after islams initial formation

its like the differnce between not aproving of fundamentalist morons polgamy while still respecing there religion i simply disaprove of a specific practice


i dont approve of the old babtist ban on dancing yet i dont disrespect there beliefs i simply choose not to follow it as it doesnt directly effect me



however with radical islam those violent verses are used as justification for violent terrorist actions
so i disaprove of tham and dont agree witht he blanket staement that islam is a peaceful religion

it CAN be when followed by openminded forward thinking individuals but when followed by fanatics from third world countries it rare seems to be

so i respect muslims and there right to choose there beliefs

i dont approve of the violent aspects of islam that are used by many to effect terrorism and barborism throughout the world

and its not jsut the radicals theres also teh sharia law aspects where a woman is stoned to death for being raped and parents honor killing there children for dating non muslims etc

these are cival rights issues however not religious ones

 

[DeletedUser]

the startre of this thread was hell using a post completely out of context

that post was simply ment as a counter to the constant statements people were making about islam being a peacefull religion

I didn't matter whether it was taken out of context, your post was self-supporting and you presented false information, which I demonstrated in my first post on this thread. You posted false information. Because it is false, because it is hurtful, and because it is about a religion, it's religion-bashing, which you so hypocritically claim others are doing.

 

[DeletedUser]

besides even though i do in fact view islam in general to not be a peacfull religion i dont atttack there beleif in allah or there views on how the world was created i simply disapprove of the violent asspects of there religion ( that have nothing to do with creation or there religions core beliefs as the more violent aspects of the koran were added later after islams initial formation

Tell us what Islam believes about the creation of the world.

 

[DeletedUser]

well considering im not islamic and ive never been islamic i cant very well say but id asume something to teh effect that allah created it


@ hell the context is extreemly important and you know it
in the context of the post it was showing why many people beleive that islam is not a peacefull religion

 

[DeletedUser]

well considering im not islamic and ive never been islamic i cant very well say but id asume something to teh effect that allah created it

Ah yes, so you admit not knowing a great deal about islam at all then?
How oddly convienient considering the angles of your rpevious posts on Islam.