Thread:Lowkey done with life/@comment-37869175-20181224194711/@comment-37530514-20190109205108

AGH SORRY SOMEHOW PART OF IT IS STUCK ON BOLD IDK WHY

@KaleTheEmpath, ah, now I see the differences in what you and I believe. I'm really curious- Why do you believe that some people who spend their lives doing the right thing go to heaven? I'll explain why I don't believe that after I hear your reasons. Also, that's interesting that you think not everything in the bible is absolute truth, I do have a viewpoint on this but I've wondered about that too. For instance, if we took everything literally, that wouldn't make sense, and that's a lot of the problems that the Pharisee's caused a long time ago. I guess what I'm asking is, which stories do you think are "just stories" with no real correspondence to reality?

(Btw, MAN I so agree to what you said in the paragraph that starts with the sentence "And you said that babies don't come..." Also, what you said about hell being the punishment. Great essay-thingamijig)

'''@Lowkey, firstly, thanks for answering my questions!! That helped a lot'''

Okay, because I don't have much time I'm only going to hit on two things right now, and I'll finish after I get school done for today.

So this is in response to when you said this-

"The ability to prove God exists, without a shadow of a reasonable doubt, is part of it. I could not summon God to a court of law if he were to violate a law. Naturally, I'm inclined to not believe in Him - after all, babies don't pop out of the womb theistic. It's taught. And by saying God exists, you're placing the burden of proof upon yourself; you have to defend it with evidence that cannot be logically refuted. As someone who is a very earnest follower of science, proof, and fact, I need the absolute, undeniable evidence of God's existence. I'm not saying an incomplete equation can have God slipped in as the missing cause and suddenly it all makes sense - that's not how it works. Romans used to believe the god Vulcan made volcanoes erupt. Now that's obviously not true."

'''So this next arguments are going to be somewhat cliche arguments. What I'm going to say isn't necessarily to argue for the existence of God, just to point out a flaw in your reasoning. Now if this argument I'm about to use is overused to the point that it can be easily refuted, please let me know.'''

Let me start with, what does it mean to prove something?

And what does it take for you to accept something as true?

What is proof to you?

Because see, if you think about it, proof is very subjective. What some people may accept as undeniable proof, others see as nowhere near. When it really comes down to it, can we ever really prove anything, at all? We can accept things as true, but everything has an element of faith and blind belief. For instance, you believe that God doesn't exist. That takes faith. There's always a risk, in everything. Are we really alive? Am I really typing right now, or could this all be an elaborate simulation? I believe that I'm typing, and it would be silly not to believe that, but there is ALWAYS a risk. No matter how much proof someone is shown, if they are determined not to believe something, they can convince themselves they are right. (Yes, I realize this can be used against the belief in God, too. I'm merely pointing out that everything takes faith, and nothing can really be proven, so it's a bit of a fallacy to say that God doesn't exist because he can't be proven.)

(Also, this doesn't mean that in context, things can't be true. For instance, we have our senses that tell us things. But that doesn't mean they aren't deceiving us. It may be true that I feel myself touch something, but that doesn't mean what I think I touch is actually there. Does that make sense, or is that too far of a stretch?)

Okay so, you said that you "'need the absolute, undeniable evidence of God's existence." '​​​​​Now, just because something can't be proven doesn't mean it can't have evidence for it's existence. Like if you walk in an empty house, that has signs of life all over it. Name tags. A diary. Fingerprints. Dirty dishes. You can't see the person, but you can logically deduce that someone probably lives there. (That example has a lot of flaws, but I think you see what I mean.)

Well, it's the same way with the world- but I think we've gotten numb to it. To us, the world is just ''there. ''We take it for granted. But when you really think about it, it's crazy that we even exist at all (which I think you know). Now, do me a favor and do some research. I'll do some too and post links on the page (most of what I've researched before is in books). If you're an "earnest follower of science", like you said, I think you should start to see what I'm talking about. If you look with an open mind, you'll find that there are a LOT of things that show intelligent design on this earth, from the human body and how incredibly amazing it is to...well honestly, everything. See, like with my house example, you can walk in the house and glance around and say "This is an elaborate trick, no one lives here". Yeah, you could do that. Definitely. You could read the person's diary and say it's lies. You could explain it all away, for sure. But that doesn't change the fact that someone set up the elaborate trick, so you have to blame it on chance. That's where it gets a little crazy. You can't deny the fact that everything is there, and everything fits together, and it looks like a house, and everything functions... but oh, somehow, over time, all of these things ended up in the house, set up, perfectly, working together, by random chance. Now which option seems more logical?

See, I think God left proof of his existence for us. Obvious, blatant proof. But we try to explain it all away.

Random note- you know what I think is kind of funny? When you said this- ' "an incomplete equation can('t) have God slipped in as the missing cause and suddenly it all makes sense - that's not how it works." 'Because in all the research I've done on evolution and explanations for why the world is how it is, that's exactly how scientists use time. Given enough time, they say anything is possible. Even against all odds. Their solution to missing something infinite is to blame it on something else they believe is infinite, which is time. The problem is, time isn't intelligent, it's random.''' Think about it. '''Replace "God" with "Time" in what you said, and you get the Christian viewpoint. But here's what we think, what using time is missing- a designer. (It's funny, with everything needing faith plus this, we're not so different.)

I have to go, but I'll reply to some other thigs you said later!!! <3 <3