Is life without God possible?

[GLASNOST]

The Bible has, in many instances, been proven correct by science.
http://i.imgur.com/LWMj2F5.png

...and you are right: there is no proof of a god, nor is there a proof that there is no god.
To some the Bible is "superstitious mumble-fuck" (and, to some degree, I agree with that) but the Bible has many lessons we can all learn from.
I think the two biggest problems with the Bible are 1) those who have rewritten it, edited it and changed it to fit their wants, and 2) those who believe its every word.
Believing in something can be a dangerous thing. All wars start with "I/We believe..."

The Bible offers only superstition when it comes to the creation of life. "Creation" ..... that is the main subject. I don't give a fiddler's hemorrhoid if there really once was a prophet by the name of Jesus or not. He wasn't God's offspring ..... the son of a virgin mother and a cuckold father. The Bible is a piece of cheap fiction.

 

[yiostheoy]

The Bible has, in many instances, been proven correct by science.
http://i.imgur.com/LWMj2F5.png

...and you are right: there is no proof of a god, nor is there a proof that there is no god.
To some the Bible is "superstitious mumble-fuck" (and, to some degree, I agree with that) but the Bible has many lessons we can all learn from.
I think the two biggest problems with the Bible are 1) those who have rewritten it, edited it and changed it to fit their wants, and 2) those who believe its every word.
Believing in something can be a dangerous thing. All wars start with "I/We believe..."

The Bible offers only superstition when it comes to the creation of life. "Creation" ..... that is the main subject. I don't give a fiddler's hemorrhoid if there really once was a prophet by the name of Jesus or not. He wasn't God's offspring ..... the son of a virgin mother and a cuckold father. The Bible is a piece of cheap fiction.

Hope there is a lightning rod on your house.

If not you may want to install one fast.

 

[yiostheoy]

God would take energy
Evolution would take energy

Science makes more sense

Then explain to us from whence life began. The first rule of biology states that life can only come from life. Now, all you have to do is use your science to explain exactly what or whom was the first life from whence life began. I will await your use of your science to explain this.

It wouldn't do much good offering you any explanation as your English comprehension is lacking enormously. You failed to understand what the sentence, "Science makes more sense" means, so what would be the point in nudging you back on the path of discussion? You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

A lot of sincere Agnostics have made Science their Religion.

This however is like mixing apples and oranges.

It is just another drunken rider falling off his horse.

 

[GLASNOST]

A lot of sincere Agnostics have made Science their Religion.
This however is like mixing apples and oranges.
It is just another drunken rider falling off his horse.

Either you meant to say "atheists" or your personal definition of "religion" is not the same as mine.

 

[Buck111]

The Bible has, in many instances, been proven correct by science.
http://i.imgur.com/LWMj2F5.png

...and you are right: there is no proof of a god, nor is there a proof that there is no god.
To some the Bible is "superstitious mumble-fuck" (and, to some degree, I agree with that) but the Bible has many lessons we can all learn from.
I think the two biggest problems with the Bible are 1) those who have rewritten it, edited it and changed it to fit their wants, and 2) those who believe its every word.
Believing in something can be a dangerous thing. All wars start with "I/We believe..."

The Bible offers only superstition when it comes to the creation of life. "Creation" ..... that is the main subject. I don't give a fiddler's hemorrhoid if there really once was a prophet by the name of Jesus or not. He wasn't God's offspring ..... the son of a virgin mother and a cuckold father. The Bible is a piece of cheap fiction.

Perhaps the Bible is superstition; Perhaps what the Bible tells us about creation is true; Perhaps you have an alternative to how everything began? What would it be? Not saying I agree or disagree with the Bibles version, just saying there is no concrete evidence as to creation from any direction.

I am not real familiar with the term/word "cuckold", but I believe it means a person who watches their spouse having sex with another human being. I don't believe the Bible makes any such claim.

 

[GLASNOST]

Perhaps what the Bible tells us about creation is true

Science has proved this is false.

Perhaps the Bible is superstition; Perhaps you have an alternative to how everything began? What would it be? Not saying I agree or disagree with the Bibles version, just saying there is no concrete evidence as to creation from any direction.

I agree.

I am not real familiar with the term/word "cuckold", but I believe it means a person who watches their spouse having sex with another human being. I don't believe the Bible makes any such claim.

Joseph's wife had sex with someone else. Joseph is, therefore, a cuckold. "Watching" isn't necessary.

 

[the_human_being]

God would take energy
Evolution would take energy

Science makes more sense

Then explain to us from whence life began. The first rule of biology states that life can only come from life. Now, all you have to do is use your science to explain exactly what or whom was the first life from whence life began. I will await your use of your science to explain this.

It wouldn't do much good offering you any explanation as your English comprehension is lacking enormously. You failed to understand what the sentence, "Science makes more sense" means, so what would be the point in nudging you back on the path of discussion? You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

In other words, you cannot do it as we all kniw science cannot explain who or what was the first life. Unless you can do that, your argument for science is no better than anyone else's argument without science.

 

[the_human_being]

There is simply too much argument among scientists themselves about the origin of life and of the universe even. They cannot agree on anything themselves. Mathematics proves all their theories are wrong. The first law of biology proves their theories are wrong. You simply do not get life from something that is not alive in the first place. The mathematics of probablities is a thorn in the side of evolutionists.

 

[GLASNOST]

... your English comprehension is lacking enormously. You failed to understand what the sentence, "Science makes more sense" means, so what would be the point in nudging you back on the path of discussion? You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

In other words, you cannot do it as we all kniw science cannot explain who or what was the first life. Unless you can do that, your argument for science is no better than anyone else's argument without science.

With that reply it is best that repeat what I told you in my last response to you:

..... your English comprehension is lacking enormously. .... You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

You left the path of discussion exactly as I said you would.

 

[the_human_being]

Let's put the Christian view up here. Time is a quantitative measurement. We have clocks and other instruments which we use to measure time. When did time begin? Some claim it began with the big bang. Some claim the period before the big bang was negative time while what has occurred since is positive time. Christians claim time is without beginning and without ending. They claim time is infinity. The symbol for infinity has no beginning nor ending. Christians say the essence of God always was. God is infinity, without beginning or end. The Bible proclaims God to be life. Christians claim God was the life from which all life came and fully supports the first rule of biology that states that life can only come from life. Christians believe God always was, is, and always will be. This would declare that life, in the essence of God, has always existed even prior to the so called big bang.

 

[the_human_being]

... your English comprehension is lacking enormously. You failed to understand what the sentence, "Science makes more sense" means, so what would be the point in nudging you back on the path of discussion? You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

In other words, you cannot do it as we all kniw science cannot explain who or what was the first life. Unless you can do that, your argument for science is no better than anyone else's argument without science.

With that reply it is best that repeat what I told you in my last response to you:

..... your English comprehension is lacking enormously. .... You'll only wander off the trail as soon as you are left alone for a minute.

You left the path of discussion exactly as I said you would.

And my response to you for everyone to see is that you simply cannot answer the question.

 

[the_human_being]

Perhaps what the Bible tells us about creation is true

Science has proved this is false.

Perhaps the Bible is superstition; Perhaps you have an alternative to how everything began? What would it be? Not saying I agree or disagree with the Bibles version, just saying there is no concrete evidence as to creation from any direction.

I agree.

I am not real familiar with the term/word "cuckold", but I believe it means a person who watches their spouse having sex with another human being. I don't believe the Bible makes any such claim.

Joseph's wife had sex with someone else. Joseph is, therefore, a cuckold. "Watching" isn't necessary.

Explain how science has proven this is false. Back up what you claim.

 

[Buck111]

Perhaps what the Bible tells us about creation is true

Science has proved this is false.

Perhaps the Bible is superstition; Perhaps you have an alternative to how everything began? What would it be? Not saying I agree or disagree with the Bibles version, just saying there is no concrete evidence as to creation from any direction.

I agree.

I am not real familiar with the term/word "cuckold", but I believe it means a person who watches their spouse having sex with another human being. I don't believe the Bible makes any such claim.

Joseph's wife had sex with someone else. Joseph is, therefore, a cuckold. "Watching" isn't necessary.

According to the Bible, Mary did not have sex with "god", the Christ already existed and was placed in her womb to be born into this world. She remained a virgin.

 

[Buck111]

British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."

 

[GLASNOST]

Explain how science has proven this is false. Back up what you claim
And my response to you for everyone to see is that you simply cannot answer the question..

You understand neither my statement nor my reply This dialogue is finished.

 

[the_human_being]

Explain how science has proven this is false. Back up what you claim
And my response to you for everyone to see is that you simply cannot answer the question..

You understand neither my statement nor my reply This dialogue is finished.

I don't blame you for running away. You got caught. I'll even wager you really know very little about the science you champion. I already have proven you are all talk and no substance.

 

[GLASNOST]

According to the Bible, Mary did not have sex with "god", the Christ already existed and was placed in her womb to be born into this world. She remained a virgin.

 

[anotherlife]

It is easy if we assume a God, then we can say that your life starts and ends with God. But what if we assume that there is no god?

If there is no God, then your life starts and ends with your parents. Obviously it then starts with your parents. Within these constraints, everything that happens in your life that your parents don't control is selfish.

Every life has a dependency on its environment, and the individual personal capability of the life itself. So an atheistic imposition demands, that the parents also control all aspects of the environment and personal capabilities of the life they start.

Can this be guaranteed, and maintained continuously and unconditionally? In other words can an atheistic view in a school or family be maintained without failure?

Discuss.

Parents are there to help their children learn how to control their own environment and capabilities as much as possible. Only a monster would feel obligated to do what you claim. I'm not sure where you got your disgusting ideas, but they are nothing like what Jesus taught.

Usually parents have the actions described in the OP, especially when those parents are teachers or other academics. I find that perents think helping children is the same as helping themselves in their own terms, regardless of the environment of the children. Therefore, if we remove God from the idea of life, then we end up with a self destructive process, that is also judged predatorially.

 

[BULLDOG]

It is easy if we assume a God, then we can say that your life starts and ends with God. But what if we assume that there is no god?

If there is no God, then your life starts and ends with your parents. Obviously it then starts with your parents. Within these constraints, everything that happens in your life that your parents don't control is selfish.

Every life has a dependency on its environment, and the individual personal capability of the life itself. So an atheistic imposition demands, that the parents also control all aspects of the environment and personal capabilities of the life they start.

Can this be guaranteed, and maintained continuously and unconditionally? In other words can an atheistic view in a school or family be maintained without failure?

Discuss.

Parents are there to help their children learn how to control their own environment and capabilities as much as possible. Only a monster would feel obligated to do what you claim. I'm not sure where you got your disgusting ideas, but they are nothing like what Jesus taught.

Usually parents have the actions described in the OP, especially when those parents are teachers or other academics. I find that perents think helping children is the same as helping themselves in their own terms, regardless of the environment of the children. Therefore, if we remove God from the idea of life, then we end up with a self destructive process, that is also judged predatorially.

No, controlling all aspects of the environment and personal capabilities of the life they start is not a parent's job, and is the exact opposite of a parent's job of preparing their child to successfully function and prosper in the real world. You have some really twisted ideas.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
Is life without God possible?

there is no life possible ... either way.

the kind of life is what is possible with an Almighty.

.