"I've never been to Ireland. I guess it doesn't exist." Science doesn't claim anything without and facts backing it and all hypotheses are tested to see if they are right or not. There is tangible proof. Read a science book, and you will see a why and a how. If something is not yet known to be true, then that will be stated. If something is found wrong, that will also be stated. Heck, you can observe things in life that can be explained by science. Also, science is a central part of medicine. I hope you trust your doctor.
I don't believe half of the theories proposed in a science book. The other half would be very acceptable based on other information. And your argument makes it seem like everything about science exists only in textbooks just so you can throw it back at us, relating it to the Bible. Science is all around us, in essence.
Exactly, you have never seen God so you assume he does not exist! Obviously, I believe in science too, I just wanted to try to get you to understand that just because you don't see it does not mean it does not exist.
We have never seen proof of god. Every science textbook that I have ever read in school has had a wealth of written evidence and sources, as well as many experiments that you can do in the classroom to have a hands-on experience with the concepts. An utmost importance is placed on the proof being what writes the conclusions, and that is made clear. God, on the other hand, is the opposite. The proof of god is found to specifically fit what is needed. If we looked at the evidence first, we would not find proof of a god - we would find random chance. What you do, instead, is find those few pieces of evidence that you believe support your god and claim them to be proof.
Yeah, but I have no proof of your religion. Why would I believe it? Because you claim there are miracles? Theories in science are supported by information we know to be fact.
No, I think he exists. However, there is no proof behind it, so it's still something of a... "hypothesis" in terms of science. It's fine to think something is true as long as you don't automatically think you're right. And let's say God came down one day, sat at a bar, and refused to talk to anyone. We'd all believe in God then, right? Fine. The question that you have to ask then, is "Whose religion does he represent, if any?"
Why must we constantly bring up the "Prove God does/doens't exist!" statements? It completely goes against everything this debate was created for. Prove π (3.14..) ends!
It could all still be lies, just because a scientist says that there are microscopic atoms that make up all living things does not mean it exists, you assume it exists the same way you assume God does not exist, you only look at logic, obviously that is great and is a good decision but it won't really solve all your answers. You know, how do you know that there are White Holes? Because you read it in a book? I believe he represents and accepts everyone from every religion, obviously I have my own distorted version of God. "I believe" that as long as you are willing to have faith in any type of God he will accept you. I just hope for your sakes that he does not exist... So why don't you believe in God? In a debate, there is an attacker, and a defender. The defender must be proven wrong by the attacker not the other way around. Welcome to a debate my friend go grab a seat and join us.
No. It's not a hypothesis because you cannot test it. How would you know it was God and not just an alien? A sufficiently advanced alien race would probably posses powers that seem god-like to us.
Because, God would never come down to Earth I believe he comes on the last day. But I dunno, I'm not new to Christianity but I don't know much.
See? You have your own view, I have mine. Why does someone have to be right? Why is one religion better than another (or no religion)? You know, some think you have to believe all the Bible, or "I just hope for your sakes that he does not exist..." I don't need to join a religion to think. I can think God exists, I can think there are aliens, I can look up at space and think of a whale floating about. However, why should I believe I'm 100% right without proof? 1. That was for want of a better word. 2. That's wasn't the point, you're nitpicking. This is a better way to put it: "Assuming God is real, whose religion would he accept if any?" But I've said such things before, I don't know why I decided to again. Main reason I post less.
I told you already. Science is testable. If I don't believe scientists when they talk about atoms, I can just use a cathode ray and test it.
Yes, but your view is basically the complete opposite of my view. I can like Whites, but since you share your own view you like Blacks (Not trying to sound Racist). There is a radical difference between my believing that God accepts all and you not believing about him at all. I grew tired of hearing Atheists complain about Christians trying to Brainwash them so instead of saying "Join us for your sake" I say "Better for you he does not exist". I always thought an Atheist would not find it offensive if I said it like that. Although I'm not sure you are an Atheist by what you are saying. Scientists have been wrong about a lot of things that they tested. Ways Scientists Were Wrong: Top 10 Science Mistakes: Science Channel A nice link because I'm feeling happy today. (I'm a sophomore) ^.^
I've been in this debate for quite a while now, I just like to see peoples views. Also, yes, in a debate there is an attacker and defender. Either can be proven wrong in a debate with valid evidence, however in this topic, that is very difficult to do so. I didn't ask, "Uhh.. what's a debate?" No, I was saying how people continuously bring up the same statement all the time, but just in different terms. The 'Prove God does/doesn't exist!' statement is usually brought up when the defender begins to slip on his/her claims, and they aren't really debating anymore, as there has been PLENTY of facts and resources in this thread. Don't come at me like I'm ****ing stupid again.
Well I haven't been offended by anything posted here lol. But essentially what you said is the same, "Join or something bad might happen." If you think people can go to Heaven or whatever as long as they have a religion, then I don't see what's bad about being good while not having a religion.
I'm sorry it came out the wrong way, the last part was me trying to be funny. But I failed... badly... What I meant was that the Instigator is supposed to prove to us God does not exist, that is the core of the debate. If we wanted to win the debate we would have to prove God exists but if you are to win the debate you are to prove to us that God does not exist. So I guess there is no actual debate since god can neither be proven or disproven.
Have you looked at those? One of them is that the earth is 6,000 years old. People believed that because that's what the Bible said. Yes, science has been wrong about many things. But that's how science works. A hypothesis is tested and a theory developed. But once more evidence supporting a different outcome is found, then the theory is changed. Unlike religion, science is capable of change because its advancement depends upon its adaptation.
LOL Many of these comparisons have already been talked about it's just the Zeitgeist Movie. I'll just post this website you can check out. Here I would like to point you to the second part of that same movie, see if you agree with the whole thing. Here
What's bad is you don't have faith, if you had two children. Let's say you died and you could somehow watch over them. Before you died you told your children to be good and believe in you. So they behave perfectly, but then they start saying that they never had a father and started comparing you to flying spaghetti and invisible unicorns all you asked was for good behavior and to have faith in you, they behave well but they also neglect you. Would you not be angry?