Re: Questions for Kermit ...
I understand fully what you are trying to say, I disagree with it in context. I made the alien from mars thing to make that point. He isn't really there, I made him up. But you have to take the suggestion as plausible (even if remotely so) That is your belief system, you can argue against it all you like but it is.
Why maybe in a parallel universe and not this one?
Anyone can make up anything and base it on "well you can't prove or disprove it" that is what I believe was done with gods. It was made up by man to explain something they don't understand.
Your belief system is that anything that can't be proven one way or the other has a degree of credibility.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SnnY
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
So do you believe in god or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY View Post
EDit: @ Dave:
Not really, seeing as how I don't believe in God either.
And this because there's no proof that he exists.
sounds like you made a choice to me
Poor choice of words then, I'da thunk you knew what I meant.
However: I know the possibility exists, but I don't know that's it's true or false.
Why would I have known what you meant if it differs from what you say?
you made a statement that matches my reason for not believing in god.
If you wish to change that now to "I don't know if god exist" instead of you don't believe I have no problem with that, it's not a big thing and I respect your belief
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
I guess, in a sense, that all scientific data, which is what I'm trying to say that this is (empirical data, science, astronomy, etc.) has a component of belief in it, in that nothing may be what we think it is, but even so, I don't agree with it being on par with what is traditionally classified as a religion, which is what I think atheism comes close to.
I know that nothing can is proven, because it just can't be proven, it's a constant, the same as what we think the speed of light is today.
And I know enough of the science involved to, in my mind, know what is unprovable, and that nothing is impossible. And if the science changed, it would most likely only prove my point, that the nature of reality isn't well definable beyond a certain point.
Sort of a cornerstone of reality, it's as real as the ground I walk on (although that may not be real either).
As for your martians, the possibility of them existing never ceases to exist, no matter how slim a chance gets, it's still a chance, which I admit can do anyone's head in.
The reason it's more improbable, or at least more likely to happen somewhere entirely else, is because the time (now), and the space involved (this solar system), is a lot smaller than all of what borders on infinity, which you have to take into account when it comes to notions of God.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SnnY
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
So do you believe in god or not?
sounds like you made a choice to me
Poor choice of words then, I'da thunk you knew what I meant.
However: I know the possibility exists, but I don't know that's it's true or false.
Why would I have known what you meant if it differs from what you say?
Since I'd defined what I do know earlier in the thread.
Bit of a bastard to read tho', I know, and I'm sorry about that.
Quote:
you made a statement that matches my reason for not believing in god.
I don't agree with that, but there you go, you believe what you do about it.
Quote:
If you wish to change that now to "I don't know if god exist" instead of you don't believe I have no problem with that, it's not a big thing and I respect your belief
If you read something of what I've been saying on here off and on now for years (and earlier in this thread than that post, at that), you'd know that I really didn't change anything.
Granted, that was a poor choice of words, but what I was saying, was that I know that each possibility may be true, but that I don't believe or believe in a God the way (you) religious (-ish) people do.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
To save you wasting your time typing the same thing again
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
I understand fully what you are trying to say, I disagree with it in context. .
I fully understand the concept. That doesn't mean that I agree it is valid to use to defend a belief in the supernatural.
I would like to pin you down though on the not believing in god
there can only be one of three answers
1.you believe
2. you don't believe
3. you are undecided.
My choice is #2.
If you say you don't believe but it's possible that he may exist then the answer is #3. The same goes with if you say you believe but it's possible he doesn't exist.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
To save you wasting your time typing the same thing again
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
I understand fully what you are trying to say, I disagree with it in context. .
I fully understand the concept. That doesn't mean that I agree it is valid to use to defend a belief in the supernatural.
I would like to pin you down though on the not believing in god
there can only be one of three answers
1.you believe
2. you don't believe
3. you are undecided.
My choice is #1.
If you say you don't believe but it's possible that he may exist then the answer is #3. The same goes with if you say you believe but it's possible he doesn't exist.
So you believe that God is an impossibility?
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
We are typing in between posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SnnY
Quote:
you made a statement that matches my reason for not believing in god.
I don't agree with that, but there you go, you believe what you do about it.
You don't agree that you made a statement that matches my beliefs or you don't agree with the reason for my beliefs.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Busyman™
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
To save you wasting your time typing the same thing again
I fully understand the concept. That doesn't mean that I agree it is valid to use to defend a belief in the supernatural.
I would like to pin you down though on the not believing in god
there can only be one of three answers
1.you believe
2. you don't believe
3. you are undecided.
My choice is #1.
If you say you don't believe but it's possible that he may exist then the answer is #3. The same goes with if you say you believe but it's possible he doesn't exist.
So you believe that God is an impossibility?
actually i've just noticed my mistake, i choose #2...i don't believe
:frusty:
to answer your question.....yes... although I could accept the theory that god isn't a "supreme being" or other such thing that would respond to worship, but is instead just a word to describe "nature" and the process that created. Even then I would call it nature and not god.
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Yes.
I'm open to both possibilities, until such a time that one or the other is disproven, or I expire, whichever comes first (my money's on the latter).
Why isn't it a valid defense for belief in the supernatural, and isn't not equally supportive of your belief, btw?
Not that I want to go through this again or owt, but, why pick one over the other when you don't know? :unsure:
I suppose I know why some people are motivated (believe or go to hell), but why do you believe in what you do, exactly, what prompted it do begin with?
What did you see to make you decide that that was the likelier of the two? :unsure:
Re: Questions for Kermit ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vidcc
We are typing in between posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SnnY
I don't agree with that, but there you go, you believe what you do about it.
You don't agree that you made a statement that matches my beliefs or you don't agree with the reason for my beliefs.
I don't think my statement matches your beliefs, because I know the context I posted this within :pinch:
It is, however, almost three in the morning, and my brain feels less than intact for various reasons, both related and unrelated, so what I see as clear as day, might not be to you. Might not be to me later on, either.
