Do you believe in God? If so/if no, WHY?

[tolstoi]

---

It is not even a question and
based ON the premises that you supplied if indeed i am evil. but the
main push of your acceptance of that simple logic i have presented is
the glaring fact that it rendered the concept of god impossible. the
mere existence of evil (or the non-existence of good in those cases if
you want to insist), and yes, the fact that Hitler existsted (and that
he was supposely allowed to exist by a supreme being) abolishes the
god concept in its entirety.

hahah. bai gareb this is kinda fun. i agree with u ON that.. so for a START, And i'll make everything simple here... DO U BELEIVE IN GOD? ?

wether U may view it as god possible, imposible, finite and infinite
or whatsoever concept of god. so DO U BELEIVE? ? ?
? Please Answer me directly in YES or NO. i'm begging u
man: )

If yur answer is YES then God is present in u. if yur
answer is NO then apparently it will boils down that God is definitely
not present (absent) in u for yu are a non-beleiver. when thats the
case here then your self-formulated logical premise that

Evil = absence of god.

can very well be
ATTRIBUTED to you. personally. hmmm: )

With regards to Hitler [and the likes ] I'll reiterate this again. and again..
Adolf Hitler wasn't Born evil . his evil becoming was merely shape up by false ideologies and cruel environment and family orientation he
was in.

I remember my college psychology professor (Sir Wadz Avila
d'great) once said that a person's brain as a child can be compared to
an empty slab of stone and wherein the individuality of it will always
depend ON the contents that will be written to it...

meaning to say, Adolf Hitler was once an innocent child being shape up by his cruel environment and family to be an evil being as he was...... fin

[Ir0nIc]

God = ?

[tolstoi]

Why does he allow evil? = 'free will'

Man's freewill + absence of God = Evil [evil = absence of God]
Man's freewil + presence of God = Good

'eternal and unconditional love' = cause of evil

absence of God in man = cause of evil

[tolstoi]

Hay naku. now dont tell me that the electro-magnetic theory is not real? And does that include the atomic theory as well? Grabe sad uy.

It is not as if only the things that you can see are the only things you can observeto throw the ball at you, do you now believe that you do not have a brain because, well and you cannot see it? It does not mean that if one things cannot be seen, it is not there. and no. this is not just about sight. this is about observation, which means that it includes measuring the effects of something and experimentation.

Ultraviolet and infrared radiation cannot be seen by the naked eye that includes bacteria and other mircoorganisms. but with the proper optics developed because of optical theory and we now can see them.

im not insinuating here that electromagnetics, atomic theory..etc are not for real, of course it works then it's for real..i've made that comment since u are making those scientist superior to God..if u praise those scientist who can't even fathom out all the mysteries of the universe like who made the atom, molecules and any other building blocks of life..then i can say that we have something in common here...why?...here's why..

Non-atheist [beleivers] could not fathom out the very nature of God, but we still beleive His existence...and that is FAITH.

Atheist [like u] praises/beleives in those scientist who can't even fathom out the very nature of the universe and their personal existence...and would that be FAITH also?

[n`gel]

Not all Catholics are Christians, they say they are but they don't really know the meaning of a true Christian.

[wicked_enchantress]

yes

[_lara_]

its not a matter of religion or belief....its not about devotion...its just GOD---the truth, reality and no matter how we convince ourselves that he's just one of manmade-superheroes-whatever---HE exists...somewhere there in your heart...

[ViolentFemme]

which god? zeus, ra, the god of the jews, xians, muslims, hindus, rastafarians, zoroastrians, et al ? they're dang too many...

[gareb]

tolstoi:

do i do not believe in the existence of a divine supernatural, therefore i do not beleive in religious dogma.

lemme get this straight, if one disbelieves something, does that mean that it does not exist in him? pure logical fallacy. and when one believes in something, that does not exactly make it exist either. try the pink elephant example. one cannot conjure something into existence because one believes so. existence is pre-determined. according to Sartre, 'existence over essence'. there has to be existence first before one can determine its essence.

Man's freewill + absence of God = Evil [evil = absence of God]
Man's freewil + presence of God = Good

if indeed this is true, then the power of human choice(freewill) supercedes the power of god, as humans can actually will god's existence or non-existence inside themselves. of course, u can argue that god gave humanity this power out of unconditional love... and then again,

absence of God in man = cause of evil

absence of god in man = result of free will
free will= god's gift out of unconditional love
unconditional love = cause of evil

the tabula rasa concept is false. indeed, culture is learned. but to suggest tabula rasa, one erases the significance of genes. but anyway, i agree that hitler was shaped by his experiences. yet this is not even significant.

the mere use of the phrase "who made the atom" suggest that you have already rendered the force that made the atom as a person and not just a mere natural force. now why is that? is it a result of a preconcieved notion? why should it have human attributes?

so much for rationality and using our brains to know what we are and the world around us. so much for human progress. so much for science that has helped us so much to understand us, only to be rejected when it tries to disprove very latent dogma of social control and mysticism that surrounds humanity. if one cannot understand one thing, then why believe? what is the basis of a belief grounded on nothing? can it be security? what then is the difference from the now and the long ago when humanity worshipped the sun and the moon?

atheists believe in what science says because it can be illustated. it can be proved real. it can be experimented upon. it can be observed. it can be experienced. it can be measured. it can be independently confirmed. it is objective. it is tangible. we have unlocked the mysteries of the universe. theists cannot accept it because god is not present in the picture. they want to include it/him/her in it, and still say we can 'never unlock the puzzle'. pure obscurantism.

to merely rely on faith, we might as well believe pink elephants on our heads. oh yeah, we cannot see it. but because we believe its there, then it is there no matter what other people say. it's faith that counts anyway.

[FK]

atheists believe in what science says because it can be illustated. it can be proved real. it can be experimented upon. it can be observed. it can be experienced. it can be measured. it can be independently confirmed. it is objective. it is tangible. we have unlocked the mysteries of the universe.

We? have you unlocked it? oh really? then why are they (or you if you really do experiment) still experimenting?