faith (3 Viewers)

[boris]

is it the most retarded concept in history

science says yes

 

[cheese_cheese]

Religion and human belief says no.

 

[boris]

religion says kill the non believers

 

[Riproot]

Shun the non-believer.
Shuuuunnn.
Shhhhhhhhuuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnnn.

 

[jess 94]

to all the non believaz!

 

[Sammydubbs]

As far as I'm concerned it takes just as much faith to believe in god as it does to not believe their is a god. So yeah faith may seem retarded but we all have it, just in different things

 

[Garygaz]

okay

as far as i'm concerned it takes just as much faith to believe that we are not simply life created by a superior alien intelligence then we are created by a superior alien intelligence??? if you claim something you must have the onus of proof?!?

 

[abbeyroad]

As far as I'm concerned it takes just as much faith to believe in god as it does to not believe their is a god. So yeah faith may seem retarded but we all have it, just in different things

no you dumb fuck, while it takes faith to believe in pink unicorns, it does not take faith to not believe in unicorns. faith essentially is belief not based on proof. i think that looking everywhere and finding not a single unicorn is proof that they probably don't exist.

 

[Sammydubbs]

okay

as far as i'm concerned it takes just as much faith to believe that we are not simply life created by a superior alien intelligence then we are created by a superior alien intelligence??? if you claim something you must have the onus of proof?!?

If their is one thing I learnt in physics is that scientists have claimed alot of things and at that time they had absolute zero proof and yet back then they took it as the gospel truth.

 

[Sammydubbs]

no you dumb fuck, while it takes faith to believe in pink unicorns, it does not take faith to not believe in unicorns. faith essentially is belief not based on proof. i think that looking everywhere and finding not a single unicorn is proof that they probably don't exist.

So your telling me that you have scoured the entire universe in search of a pink unicorn????? I don't think so so obiviously you have FAITH in that you don't think there is. Faith is defined as the substance of things hoped for and certain of what we cannot see.

 

[Blastus]

So your telling me that you have scoured the entire universe in search of a pink unicorn????? I don't think so so obiviously you have FAITH in that you don't think there is. Faith is defined as the substance of things hoped for and certain of what we cannot see.

What is asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

 

[Sammydubbs]

Yep I'd say your right.

 

[boris]

imagine trying to reason with someone who bases their beliefs off a system that literally requires no proof

 

[Sammydubbs]

imagine trying to reason with someone who bases their beliefs off a system that literally requires no proof

I can see how that would be quite frustrating

 

[boris]

If their is one thing I learnt in physics is that scientists have claimed alot of things and at that time they had absolute zero proof and yet back then they took it as the gospel truth.

there* you dumb fuck

yeah of course, scientists just assert something based on zero proof oh give me an example of someone in history asserting something based on *zero* proof and using in it to prove a hypothesis

So your telling me that you have scoured the entire universe in search of a pink unicorn????? I don't think so so obiviously you have FAITH in that you don't think there is. Faith is defined as the substance of things hoped for and certain of what we cannot see.

you're* you fucking illiterate cunt

no of course we haven't searched the universe for a pink unicorn, but we also have no proof that one exists so until we find proof of its existence, it can be inferred that it doesn't exist.

 

[noworriez1]

thats a load of boris

 

[Sammydubbs]

there* you dumb fuck

yeah of course, scientists just assert something based on zero proof oh give me an example of someone in history asserting something based on *zero* proof and using in it to prove a hypothesis

Alright well in the space unit of physics we had to learn about this thing called an 'ort' cloud, it is believe that this cloud spews out comets for example hayleys comet because if hayleys comet had been around for the past supposed 13 billion years the size of the comet would have been so big that it would have destroyed our planet earth hence why they think it came from this cloud. This cloud has NEVER been seen and is used to aid the theory of the big bang.

 

[boris]

it has been hypothesised because it explains a certain phenomena while still obeying the laws of physics etc
it may well be dis proven one day or proven
it is nothing but a hypothesis at the moment

it hasnt been used to prove the big bang theory either, it just supports that hypothesis

ergo god is just a hypothesis. one that doesn't satisfy any law of science. one that isn't even logical. for example if you want to hypothesise that god exists to explain the origins of the universe, then where did god come from?

 

[mirakon]

Alright well in the space unit of physics we had to learn about this thing called an 'ort' cloud, it is believe that this cloud spews out comets for example hayleys comet because if hayleys comet had been around for the past supposed 13 billion years the size of the comet would have been so big that it would have destroyed our planet earth hence why they think it came from this cloud. This cloud has NEVER been seen and is used to aid the theory of the big bang.

Proof doesn't have to be observable, but it can be based on mathematical concepts that for such and such to occur a certain thing needs to happen.

ORt clouds are based on logic and science.

God is based on faith.

 

[Sammydubbs]

it has been hypothesised because it explains a certain phenomena while still obeying the laws of physics etc
it may well be dis proven one day or proven
it is nothing but a hypothesis at the moment

it hasnt been used to prove the big bang theory either, it just supports that hypothesis

ergo god is just a hypothesis. one that doesn't satisfy any law of science. one that isn't even logical. for example if you want to hypothesise that god exists to explain the origins of the universe, then where did god come from?

First of all I didn't say it proved the theory of the big bang I said it aided the theory of the big bang. Also I never said god was logical I believe he is beyond this reality, he's supernatural and the natural course of thinking cannot be used to explain the supernatural. And I'm not gonna lie I can't explain the origins of god I don't know all the answers and I font pretend to know all the answers, I'm just a young Christian dude trying to find my way, but I honestly would like to talk about this all day but I have to study for physics peace and dare i say it god bless.