REALIGION based on "UNIFYING THEORY OF GOD" proves atheists/agnostics are TARDS!

[AllieBaba]

"and science has done nothing so much as prove God must exist. "

That was what I was replying to. It seemed that you were saying that science proves that God exists?
did I misunderstand?

I was trying to say that with all of our science we still haven't disproved God..I know that personally, the more I learn about the world, the more amazing God seems to me, and the stronger my faith.

Not the opposite. I don't substitute science for God, I don't understand why non believers think it has to be one or the other.

 

[artk]

"and science has done nothing so much as prove God must exist. "

That was what I was replying to. It seemed that you were saying that science proves that God exists?
did I misunderstand?

I was trying to say that with all of our science we still haven't disproved God..I know that personally, the more I learn about the world, the more amazing God seems to me, and the stronger my faith.

Not the opposite. I don't substitute science for God, I don't understand why non believers think it has to be one or the other.

I have yet to see any proof god exists. I have yet to see any proof god doesn't exist. Science and god are 2 separate entities. One has proof of it's existence. The other requires faith to believe in it.

 

[jillian]

apparently the o/p failed logic...

science is incomplete
because science is incomplete, it can't explain everything
if something can't be explained, it must have been done by G-d.

really?

you know, it makes believers look really stupid when i see things like that. and i'm a believer, and i'm not stupid...

so please stop trying to prove the existence of g-d by using pathetic syllogisms like that.

and what's with the cya stuff? are you 12?

 

[artk]

To simply say that because we don't understand something, that it is god's work is to stifle human creativity, and quest for knowledge. And yes, there are many things in the universe that at this point in time we don't know or understand. But look how much knowledge we have gained in just the last 100 years. Things that in the past that were attributed to god have turned out to be scientific phenomena. I'm not saying there is no god, because honestly I can't say with 100% certainty that there is or isn't. But I have yet to see a religion that doesn't take what is believed to be the word of god, and create rituals and ceremonies that's main purpose is to control the masses.

Oh look another clueless and narrowminded ignoramus....

Is this how you talk to people you disagree with? Well, at least you are showing you are not a christian.

 

[SW2SILVER]

Let's see If I understand this assertion: Incomprehension = proof. Is that right? So the lack of proof IS proof? I am so glad that’s been clarified, otherwise I might have been confused about the need for empirical evidence. This makes any need to prove stuff passé. God bless you!

 

[BenMarbleMD]

I have found no evidence though in any supreme all powerful eternal being exists.

Neither have I but the problem is that when most people think of the word "GOD" they automatically think of a 'supreme all powerful eternal being' which is NOT correct! The Unifying Theory Of "GOD" is basically a way to REDEFINE the word "GOD" to a meaning that is applicable to ALL HUMANS
so whatever it is that led to our existence should be called "GOD"

 

[BenMarbleMD]

Prove god must exist?

Why? Just becuase there are things we cannot explain?
Heck it was around 100 years or so ago before we figured it was germs and not evil spirits that made people sick. And we were building the panama canal before we figured out that mosquitoes transmitted disease. A little over 200 years ago we were killing people for being witches.

Where will we be in knowledge in another 200 years? Providing we do not set ourselves back into another dark age or get smacked by a big cosmic rock or something?

clearly another person who didn't even read my posts...this IS not the normal GOD vs. EVOLUTION bullshit argument so try reading it...

 

[BenMarbleMD]

"and science has done nothing so much as prove God must exist. "

That was what I was replying to. It seemed that you were saying that science proves that God exists?
did I misunderstand?

If we choose to DEFINE "GOD" by TUTOG then here is what u get...

WHATEVER? created everything should be called "GOD"
I exist...you exist....everything in the universe exists....
so yes science proves "GOD" exists WHEN using the defintion as stated by TUTOG

 

[BenMarbleMD]

apparently the o/p failed logic...

science is incomplete
because science is incomplete, it can't explain everything
if something can't be explained, it must have been done by G-d.

I never said any of the above...
your reading comprehension skills seem very weak...so I'll dumb it down for ya

-you exist
-something led to your existence and to the existence of the universe as we know...
-whatever? it was that led to the creation of everything we should just agree to call it "GOD"

 

[BenMarbleMD]

I have yet to see any proof god exists. I have yet to see any proof god doesn't exist. Science and god are 2 separate entities. One has proof of it's existence. The other requires faith to believe in it.

well the problem is you are basing that on an old outdated definition of the word "GOD"

if we simply define "GOD" as:

whatever force(s) that led to our existence

then "GOD" does exist!

It is a REALITY based definition of "GOD" that applies to all humans!

 

[BenMarbleMD]

Let's see If I understand this assertion: Incomprehension = proof. Is that right? !

no it isn't...

it is a very simple idea...

whatever the force(s) are that led to everything should be called "GOD"

does NOT mean "GOD" is a conscious being~!

 

[amrchaos]

Using that arguement, then we should not look for truth for it takes away from our incomprehension of god and place our lives squarely in our hands.

Now, what is the purpose of religion? Or REALigion?

 

[G.T.]

The Unifying Theory of God doesn't at all prove that Atheists or Agnostics are "tards," but in fact, your description of TUTOG almost exactly describes what an Agnostic believes. Someone is a tard.

 

[jillian]

apparently the o/p failed logic...

science is incomplete
because science is incomplete, it can't explain everything
if something can't be explained, it must have been done by G-d.

I never said any of the above...
your reading comprehension skills seem very weak...so I'll dumb it down for ya

-you exist
-something led to your existence and to the existence of the universe as we know...
-whatever? it was that led to the creation of everything we should just agree to call it "GOD"

you don't need to dumb your posts down further. they are already dumb.

and you're just restating your false syllogism.

i'll stick with my initial point.

you're a putz.

 

[rikules]

I have no idea what you're getting at. I didn't say I personally need to prove the existence of God. I said that science hasn't disproved the existence of God.

nor will it ever....

science will NEVER EVER be able to "prove" there is no god....

nor will it be able to prove there is no flying spaghetti monster

or big foot

 

[G.T.]

I'd say, logic doesn't/couldn't dictate "what we should all agree to call it," either.

Logic dictates that if we can't comprehend our beginning, we call our beginning incomprehensible. Not "God."

 

[MHanson]

Why create a reality based realigion? Well the past several THOUSAND years have been a de facto real world experiment wherein humans were allowed to propagate non-reality based definitions of "GOD" via textbooks written by humans leading to war after war after war ad infinitum! Einstein would argue that humanity as a whole is 'insane' for allowing this experiment to continually repeat itself when we can easily create a plan to make it stop! So let me explain....

#1-Humans did NOT create everything that exists.

#2-Since humans do NOT possess the ability to create everything that exists then
HUMANS can NOT comprehend the exact nature of the FORCE(s) that did.

(fixed the scratch in the record)

#3- Therefore an INCOMPREHENSIBLE force(s) led to our existence and everything that exists so we should call these INCOMPREHENSIBLE force(s) "GOD"!

#4-We know "GOD" is real but we also know that "GOD" does NOT write books so it really doesn't make much sense to put faith into a book written by humans on a subject they can't possibly comprehend. (Would you try to learn to speak French from a teacher who didn't COMPREHEND French?)

In summation, humans do NOT currently know the exact nature of the FORCE(S) that led to everything that exists! The Unifying Theory of "GOD" states that for the betterment of humanity we should all agree to call these FORCE(S) "GOD" & in so doing create a REALIGION! Why not believe in that which is real?
cya
Ben

Einstein thought this up? Or just that he thought humanity was insane?

I don't find a need to change anyone's belief system, as I am responsible only for my own. So this reply is in response of what you said I should do, or believe.

Now why should I call incomprehensible forces "God?" Why can't I call incomprehensible forces "incomprehensible forces?" For what reason "should" I call them "God?"

What led me to my existence were two people who got together. It is true I don"t fully comprehend all the facts and theories of biology and evolution, so is it this process you say I should call "God?"

Come to think of it, I don't know calculus either. Therefore it is "God?"

Yes, incomprehensible forces can"t write books, but people can write of their experiences and their beliefs about them. Put them together and we have the opportunity to understand each other.

So no, sorry, I don't believe that we need to adopt any concept of "God" for the "betterment of humanity." My belief is that people need to leave others' belief systems alone and work on their own. By all means, communicate what you believe, but please don't tell me to adopt yours. Not without giving me a better argument for it.

Thank you very much.

 

[BenMarbleMD]

Now, what is the purpose of religion? Or REALigion?

religion's purpose is allegedly to unite people with a common goal/theme...
and so far the world's non-reality based religions (Judaism,Christianity, Islam,etc.) do unite the people who are members of said religions but at the same time they guarantee never ending conflict with non-members thus defeating the alleged goal of uniting people....a reality based realigion should theoretically unite all humanity thus ending the holy war after holy war after holy war insane experiment that has been ongoing for the past several thousand years

 

[BenMarbleMD]

The Unifying Theory of God doesn't at all prove that Atheists or Agnostics are "tards," but in fact, your description of TUTOG almost exactly describes what an Agnostic believes. Someone is a tard.

well all 3 of the world's major religions define "GOD" as the 'creator of everything' so it is a natural conclusion to say that whatever? 'created everything' could/should be called "GOD"

over 90% of humans believe in "GOD" so there must at least be some evolutionary benefit in the belief alone

creating a reality based definition of "GOD" that applies to all humans is the natural end point humans must come to understand....

The problem is NOT that "GOD" doesn't exist....
The problem is the way the average person defines "GOD" is simply wrong bc the big 'spirit in the sky' is not verifiable leading to neverending arguments/wars/etc....
TUTOG's definition of "GOD" applies to everyone....
you can say you don't believe in it but the simple fact is you are merely LYING TO YOURSELF bc 1-you do exist and 2-whatever the force was that created everything(including you) is "GOD"

 

[BenMarbleMD]

i'll stick with my initial point.

you're a putz.

I'd rather be a putz than a Jew(or a Christian/Islamic)...Anyway that's so sweet especially coming from an uppity pseudo-intellectual dust filled juterus hag like yourself