beowulf

Then who was Jesus praying to??

Who said God is "physical?" JC said God was "spirit." There are a few different problems here. 1. How do you know JC actually said that? All you have is one written account. Not much go on. 2. If God can show himself to Moses, why can't he show himself to us today? 3. If God can do anything then why can't he take on physical form? So many questions with no answers.

It still suggests something physical that can be shared with others and leads to the conclusion that there is a god. Everything that has been suggested as evidence of god has not proven to be evidence of god once the logic has been tested.

Wow I didn't notice that! It must be a sign from God!

Then it isn't evidence, it's a personal reason. Many people have what they consider reasons to believe in god, but no one has any evidence of god. ev·i·dence /ˈɛvɪdəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-i-duhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing. –noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof. 2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign: His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever. 3. Law. data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects. –verb (used with object) 4. to make evident or clear; show clearly; manifest: He evidenced his approval by promising his full support. 5. to support by evidence: He evidenced his accusation with incriminating letters. —Idiom6. in evidence, plainly visible; conspicuous: The first signs of spring are in evidence. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Origin: 1250–1300; ME (n.) < MF < L évidentia. See evident, -ence]

By a similar argument: Just because we don't have full knowledge of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Right but if there is no evidence then there is no reason to believe it exists. Kind of like the boogie man. Do you believe the boogie man exists? "full knowledge" isn't necessary, but some evidence is necessary to believe something exists. Right now there isn't one bit of evidence of any god.

How do you know that without a doubt? What happened before the "big bang" in your opinion? I don't necessarily know with out any doubt at all that gods don't exist. Since there is no evidence of any gods I can only conclude that gods don't exist. Now if there were to be some evidence then I would change my conclusion. Just because no one knows what happened before the "big bang" does not mean there is a god. That type of conclusion is what ancient people came to when they came across anything they didn't understand. Just because we don't understand something or don't have full knowledge of something doesn't automatically mean there is a supernatural reason.

And the answer is God or god or gods don't exist. People made them up to satisfy their need to explain everything.

Nice plane! Where is the motorcycle?

If there really was a god don't you think he would be a little less ambiguous? Why can't he just communicate with us directly instead of through an old book that can be interpreted in many different ways?

So for god to be God he has to be unknowable and mysterious?? Yeah that really makes me want to believe!

That is the way things are for normal people. Those with severe depression don't have just a few "down" days, they have months or years of feeling depressed. Often times people who suffer from depression do everything they can to hide it from everyone. They appear fine till one day they aren't there anymore.

hmm well let me add this to it. The first accident I was wearing a seat belt and would have most likely died if I wasn't, the second I wasn't wearing a seat belt and would have been trapped under the vehicle if I were wearing a seat belt. So should or shouldn't I wear a seat belt? People tend to forget their mistakes after awhile and continue on doing things they way they have always done. I know, because I have been guilty of that before.

I thought I was going to die a couple of times. In one car accident I only had a second or two where I thought that I was going to die. I didn't have time to really think about it. In another car accident I thought for sure I was going to die a really slow death and it was going to be long and painful. I had lots of time to think about it then. After a little bit I started to get mad. I felt that I had lots more to do then just die. But I was mostly right it was long and painful, just with out the dying part. I think the people who say they aren't afraid of dying would change there mind when they are really in a bad situation where their life is on the line. Your perspective on life really does change.

Apparently he didn't tell that to cats. Ever see a cat play with a bird it just caught?

yup city boy You better hope you don't ever get stuck out in the wilderness somewhere and have to fend for yourself.

So are you a vegitarian?

I grew up around Chritianity. I was taught to believe in God. It never really made any sense to me. As I got older I the more I thought about God and the more questions I asked the less sense it made. I used critical thinking to analyze this idea of God. It didn't add up. I have since tossed the idea of god or any gods to the side. I never looked up atheism or agnosticism up or studied them. I made up my own mind. I have never read any book on atheism or agnosticism. I simply asked questions and used logic to try to make sense of the answers I was given. I came to the conclusion God or any gods do not exist. You ask enough questions about religion and sooner or later you get down to faith. I can't believe in something with out evidence and that is what faith is. I must have a reason to believe in something. I can't just believe in God because the Bible says so. I need more then that or else I think someone is trying to scam me.

They are Americans subject to American laws. They can now vote just like everyone else. The fact that they are black doesn't make them exempt from American laws.

Science isn't a new thing. It is a way of thinking logically. It is about critical thinking and questioning what we think we know and trying to understand the world around us. So with that said science has always been there. It may not have been given the label "science" till recently, but there have always been people developing critical thinking. Science is the product of critical thinking. sci·ence /ˈsaɪəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sahy-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences. 2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. 3. any of the branches of natural or physical science. 4. systematized knowledge in general. 5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study. 6. a particular branch of knowledge. 7. skill, esp. reflecting a precise application of facts or principles; proficiency. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Origin: 1300–50; ME < MF < L scientia knowledge, equiv. to scient- (s. of sciéns), prp. of scīre to know + -ia -ia] —Synonyms 7. art, technique, method, discipline.

Quite a few of the new cameras from Sony don't have the LANC port.

Very nice editorial. It makes a lot of sense.

Some people might have but I don't think I ever said science will prove god doesn't exist, if you can show me where I did then I'll admit that it was an incorrect statement. I have asked you what it would take for you to abandon your belief in god but that's not the same thing. I have also said that some gods are logically incoherent and disbelief in them is justified on those grounds. But God is a positive assertion and before anyone believes that positive assertion it needs to backed it up with evidence otherwise you'd have to disprove every absurd assertion ever made that some entity exists or be forced to believe it. In principle you can prove a negative. For every set S there is a set Not-S, and vice versa, so every negative entails a positive and vice versa. All one has to do to prove a negative is rewrite the statement asserting the negative of set S into the positive of Not-S. If you can show Not-S to be true, you've automatically proved S false and vice versa. If I were to give you the statement "there are no crows in this box" you could restate that as "there are crows in this box", then open the box and find crows or no crows. If you find no crows, you've proved the statement "there are crows in this box" to be false and thereby proved "there are no crows in this box" to be true, thereby proving a negative. Now substitute crows for god and box for universe. The problem being, the universe is a hooking great big box and we can't look everywhere at once. So proving that negative would be devilishly difficult to do and for all practical purposes impossible. Especially when no one can define sufficiently accurately what constitutes a god and he probably isn't confined by the box anyway. It makes it even tougher since crows are not invisible and god is. But really with god we are not asking the same question that you used. With God we are asking "Does God exist?" With the crows example you used you were asking the question "Are there any crows in the box?" assuming that crows exist. We know that crows exist somewhere so we can easily look into a box and see if there are or are not crows in it. This you can not do with god even if you could just as easily search the entire universe all at once. How do you prove something doesn't exist when by definition there is no way to physically see it or even test for it's presence? As you can see crows are much easier to prove to exist. God on the other hand has no evidence and can not be seen therefore the logical conclusion is he doesn't exist. Now proving a crow to exist it pretty easy you just have to search the world for a crow, catch it and bring it back.

There is no evidence of life after death.

You need more then passages from a book that can not be verified to convince me. All of your "evidence" is in one book. That isn't much at all and all it means is that someone wrote words on paper.