Gman

BUT but but, nothing created god so you do believe nothing created everything.

No it doesn't, it just points to we don't have all the answers. This has already been covered, if I don't know the answer and I do care to know it I will search for an answer or I will resign myself to the fact that the answer as of yet is unknowable. What I will not do is explain it all away as proof of god, might as well give credit to the mickey mouse club (I know those little buggers are up to something). Additionally, you still always come to the undeniable question, if god explains what is unexplainable then where did god come from? To which you will say, well he was just always there which is ridiculous and the exact same answer I could give (well that is just the way it is) to anything unexplainable which you attribute to god.

Correct, and yes the mask is awesome.

I think most of this thread covers things pretty well but in the simplest of terms. I will not believe is any explanation that cannot be proven, I would rather admit I do not know, continue to look for answer and keep an open mind. I think that probably covers the mindset of almost anyone who has examined a problem, eventually found an answer to that problem and advanced our knowledge as a people on this planet. I believe if everyone were of the thought that it is all god's work and beyond understanding we would still be living in the 10th century. Second, I wouldn't follow any god who gives us free will and logic and then says believe in me to have everlasting you need to believe in me....what? If we exercise the logic and free will you have given us there is no way (in my mind) we could believe in an explanation such as god and for that this god is willing to let otherwise good people spend an eternity in hell. No thanks to that.

I get a lot of people feel this way. Religion has been so ingrained in society for so long and we have been told we need to have respect for it but why? Let me use an example from earlier in the thread. If I taught people the world was created by raunchy-mouthed drunken leprechauns, I can feel their presence and they "speak to me" and get the required number of followers to be considered a religion would you respect that?

And he has since clarified and explained his arguement. Like I said go back and read it again. We can also read between the lines when you say "wow this happened and cannot be explained, I wonder what it could be?". You are simply not in sync with what is going on here and points are way off base, just give it a rest. The worst part is the guy who's logic you are relying on who has been mostly been going back and forth with us on this doesn't believe in god either, he's just been playing devil's advocate.

Go back four pages and read it again. You are the one making positive claims there is a god who explains all the unexplainable things, where is your proof?

Agreed, just not worth the time going through is because it is not in line with the point.

Does it mean a rainbow coloured unicorn who plays a mean electric guitar and speaks five languages made them all happen? No, it doesn't which is not any more absurd than saying god made them happen. You are just not following here at all, nobody is saying things that cannot be explained don't happen.....but what you are doing is giving them a FALSE explanation. See cause and effect, you are talking about effects in your above post and asking how did that happen, without doing any research I can say "I don't know" but you are saying you know the cause an it is god. I can say to many many things that I don't know how or why something happened but you can bet your last dollar if I say I know the cause of it happening I am going to have some PROOF.

Dude, we're talking about apples and you are talking about kangaroos or something and are somehow trying to draw a parallel between the two.

No not logic, there is no PROOF. The entire logic part of this conversation has not been about the existence or god or not but the PROOF behind either case and who owns the burden of PROOF.

You're obviously completely missing the point but let's take another stab at it. Nobody has said if something cannot be logically explained then it is not real so get that entire idea out of your head. There are things that cannot be explained. Here the difference, you are making up an explanation to give you an answer, we are not.

Derek Sanderson?

Sami Salo

Oh Ohh, I'm adding one too.

Lonny Bohonus, wtf? That's Jarko Ruutu.

I saw the spaghetti monster too, he loaned me 5 bucks for cab fare.

We get it just fine. We just prefer to say "we don't know" when we don't know and leave it at that rather than believe in/make up some convenient fairy tale to answer the question.

See what I mean. It's funny it's so bad.

Bad Lieutenant -10/10, second worse movie ever made. First worst ever made: Sharknado -15/10 (Cage not in this movie)

WTF, no competition in wrestling, this is not a sport.

You made me pause my PVR for this, really? First, the OP doesn't have religious problems, he has a religious friend who shows no respect for the fact that he does not share his beliefs and keeps pushing his own into his face and he does not want to talk about religion. Your answer is coming in here preaching about religion to help him with his friend who is also preaching at him about religion when he doesn't want to hear it? The OP, much unlike how you read it, completely setup the course this thread has taken, I suggest you read it again. Second, you're right, I have no respect for the belief in a supernatural, all knowing, all powerful being. Despite that, I treat people on their merits based on interactions I havde with them. You have chosen to take me not liking your preaching post as a personal attack on you and have retaliated like a child having a fit. Good on you, how very christian of you. Tell me, do you respect the Branch Davidians, Heaven's Gate or The People's Temple? They are all religious groups that deserve respect no?

Funny thing is he doesn't believe in god either, he's just playing games with pseudo logic,

And again I disagree, by asking for proof that he does not exist you are by default standing by the arguement that he does exist. Yes, I am aware you really are not and that you are playing devil's advocate here and using what you are least presenting as a logical arguement to do so, I find your logic faulty and invalid and your request for proof invalid.