God
- Thread starter danielfitzgerald99
- Start date
SaiyanHajime
CF Legend
Flat Earth is relevant Sam. Because, like everything, there is an argument for and against. Because you may only think there is proof one definite way, because that's all we've been shown or choose to take notice in. There are people who seriously believe that the "proof" that the Earth is round is all a big conspiracy. And it's no different to arguing the existence of God. In fact, it's more logical, since at least they have some (lame) evidence that the earth isn't a globe. I still haven't seen a reason to believe in God. Evidence that you or anyone else has witnessed to bring you to the conclusion that he must exist.
100 reasons why the Earth cannot be a Globe.
How the laws of perspective explain ships disappearing over the horizon on a flat Earth.
100 reasons why the Earth cannot be a Globe.
How the laws of perspective explain ships disappearing over the horizon on a flat Earth.
^Guess that's another topic (should I make one?), but most things on that "100-reasons" list are very easy to explain and most of it contradicts itself or overlooks the laws of physics.
EDIT: Wiki'ed it, and found out that that list was written in 1896 at latest (the guy who wrote it died in 1896, so it's propably even older than that). No wonder why he overlooked some laws of physics. Most of the proofs of a round Earth were not yet discovered.
But that's another topic (writing this to avoid people buzzing at me). While the roundity of Earth is a fact, God's existence can't be as easily disproven or proven. I mean, the definition of Heaven may be everything outside Earth, and that volume is quite big, so finding it won't be as easy as travelling around Earth in every possible direction.
EDIT: Wiki'ed it, and found out that that list was written in 1896 at latest (the guy who wrote it died in 1896, so it's propably even older than that). No wonder why he overlooked some laws of physics. Most of the proofs of a round Earth were not yet discovered.
But that's another topic (writing this to avoid people buzzing at me). While the roundity of Earth is a fact, God's existence can't be as easily disproven or proven. I mean, the definition of Heaven may be everything outside Earth, and that volume is quite big, so finding it won't be as easy as travelling around Earth in every possible direction.
SaiyanHajime
CF Legend
You can't one minute say that the list is contradictory or overlooking the laws of physics when you're looking over the fact that nothing can be proved or disproved.
Fact is only based on what we know right now. If the first premise of a conclusion is incorrect, then the conclusion is more than likley to be very incorrect. That is what is argued in that link. If one of the laws of physics is actually a misunderstanding and is incorrect or incomplete, it's going to affect everything else which balances on it. Don't you see that?
We have to prove or disprove within our limited knowledge of the time, yes, and the argument that God is currently outside of that is lame.
But there is a wrong assumption that things like flat earth are proofs of our limited knowledge of the past - but this dumb logic is based on myth.
"Myth of the Flat Earth or Flat Earth mythology refers to the modern belief that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical. During the early Middle Ages, many scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. By the 14th century, belief in a flat earth among the educated was essentially dead.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of “flat earth darkness” among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the earth’s roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[1] David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers also write: "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference."[2]
In 1945 the Historical Association listed "Columbus and the Flat Earth Conception" second of 20 in its first-published pamphlet on common errors in history.[3]" Wiki
Fact is only based on what we know right now. If the first premise of a conclusion is incorrect, then the conclusion is more than likley to be very incorrect. That is what is argued in that link. If one of the laws of physics is actually a misunderstanding and is incorrect or incomplete, it's going to affect everything else which balances on it. Don't you see that?
We have to prove or disprove within our limited knowledge of the time, yes, and the argument that God is currently outside of that is lame.
But there is a wrong assumption that things like flat earth are proofs of our limited knowledge of the past - but this dumb logic is based on myth.
"Myth of the Flat Earth or Flat Earth mythology refers to the modern belief that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical. During the early Middle Ages, many scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. By the 14th century, belief in a flat earth among the educated was essentially dead.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of “flat earth darkness” among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the earth’s roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[1] David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers also write: "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference."[2]
In 1945 the Historical Association listed "Columbus and the Flat Earth Conception" second of 20 in its first-published pamphlet on common errors in history.[3]" Wiki
Sam said:
Ah, but the asylums are full of people who believe they are Christ, or Napoleon, or a tree. If you asked them about it, they would be sincere and utterly convinced of their belief. You could find hundreds, if not thousands, who claim to have been victimised by aliens. If you gathered them all together, and examined all the claims, would you give their beliefs more credence?
An individual who believes in the impossible is called insane. A hundred people together who believe in the impossible is called a congregation
Mark
Strata Poster
Because if it helps people get through the day believing in an all powerful being that is watching over them and guiding them (as such) then what difference does it make. Ultimately, if you took away faith from some people, what would they have left...
(ooooh shut up George Michael!)
I believe in something outside of our planet and our recognition (not necessarily God in the biblical sense) but I am no scientist, nor philosopher, nor priest, so I have no scope to make any assumptions. I wont hear any arguements to the contrary either... why? Because it is what I believe and therefore, unless you can give me exact, 100% concrete, scientifically proven evidence (so strong even Sams farts couldnt destroy it) that it is otherwise, I am still not going to believe or be swayed by you, because I have faith in that theory.
(ooooh shut up George Michael!)
I believe in something outside of our planet and our recognition (not necessarily God in the biblical sense) but I am no scientist, nor philosopher, nor priest, so I have no scope to make any assumptions. I wont hear any arguements to the contrary either... why? Because it is what I believe and therefore, unless you can give me exact, 100% concrete, scientifically proven evidence (so strong even Sams farts couldnt destroy it) that it is otherwise, I am still not going to believe or be swayed by you, because I have faith in that theory.
Bitter
Mega Poster
Well this topic started again, and the majority of the posts seem to be regarding "evidence" or lack thereof and how that is or isn't a problem. This is a huge topic, and a bit of a validity mine-field. There is no such thing as 100% undeniable scientific evidence, everything can be disputed, as evidenced by the flat Earth society, and so to say that you will hold your beliefs until presented with the above is basically to say you will believe your beliefs no matter what is presented to you.
Besides, it doesn't matter if that's "Just what you believe", you should have reasons for believing it, not be waiting for others to prove you wrong, which is nigh on impossible to do as proving a negative is all but impossible as evidenced by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
On the point of having reasons to believe, many people say things such as they believe because of "personal experience". Unfortunately this is meaningless, and does not count as evidence in any way, shape or form. All it says it that you are disregarding all other evidence in the world because of one thing which happened to you. This is the anti-thesis of science and evidence, and there is so much more to say on the subject, but to keep this post shorter than my others I'll save it for another post or 10.
Finally, a controversial quote, and one I agree with from one Christopher Hitchens:
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
Besides, it doesn't matter if that's "Just what you believe", you should have reasons for believing it, not be waiting for others to prove you wrong, which is nigh on impossible to do as proving a negative is all but impossible as evidenced by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
On the point of having reasons to believe, many people say things such as they believe because of "personal experience". Unfortunately this is meaningless, and does not count as evidence in any way, shape or form. All it says it that you are disregarding all other evidence in the world because of one thing which happened to you. This is the anti-thesis of science and evidence, and there is so much more to say on the subject, but to keep this post shorter than my others I'll save it for another post or 10.
Finally, a controversial quote, and one I agree with from one Christopher Hitchens:
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hixee said:
Its because he allows us to make our own decissions. He created us with a free will do to bad things and this created a way for evil in the world. In some cases he allows for bad things to happen but normaly it is meant to humble or strengthen his people. And btw there is alot less rules in Christianity that u might think there are. Me and my christian friends always go to parties, concerts, and other things.
A
Anonymous
Guest
OK this is 4 all u ppl u think there is no proof of God.
- All 333 prophesies about Jesus's birth, death, ressurection were true.
- Modern day events have been predicted (Recreation of Isreal as one example)
- It predicted the fall of the Roman Empire and the regathering of it under a different name (The United Nations of Europe)
- It has continually beat science on everything (Meteors, Earthquakes, heck the bible even refences fighter jets and nuclear weapons in the book of Revelation)
Alot of this stuff I got from a class on Revelation (end of the world) and its really creepy how acurate this stuff is and how soon the rapture could come!
- All 333 prophesies about Jesus's birth, death, ressurection were true.
- Modern day events have been predicted (Recreation of Isreal as one example)
- It predicted the fall of the Roman Empire and the regathering of it under a different name (The United Nations of Europe)
- It has continually beat science on everything (Meteors, Earthquakes, heck the bible even refences fighter jets and nuclear weapons in the book of Revelation)
Alot of this stuff I got from a class on Revelation (end of the world) and its really creepy how acurate this stuff is and how soon the rapture could come!
SaiyanHajime
CF Legend
Lolurfunnay.thedesigner2484 said:
