Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

steelharbor9 said:Whose conclusion is that, anyway? Yours?

I guess it doesn't exist. I'm not claiming anything, though—I don't have any proof.

Man, I really hope you're just trolling.

So, you're basically telling me you're leaving the door cracked open just a little bit, like maybe God actually does exist after all?

Maybe there’s an honest headline about Barcelona buried somewhere in LP, but I certainly can't prove it.

Fresh sausages just landed over at Primer, if anyone's looking to grab some.

restlesssurfer97 said:So, you're basically telling me you're leaving the door cracked open just a little bit, like maybe God actually does exist after all?

I mean, I’ve never really ruled it out! For everything where I don't have hard proof, I just leave the possibility on the table, I guess. It’s up to me to weigh things out for myself, right?

I'm definitely ruling out the idea that God's existence could be proven through science. That’s just impossible—and I think I've already explained why three different times now (even if you argued the opposite a few posts back!). But, honestly, if such a proof were possible, it would be kind of ironic... it might actually kill off the concept of God for believers. I mean, faith wouldn't really be "faith" anymore, would it? It would either be a fact or it wouldn't, and then the whole point of believing would just vanish.

brightpilot6 said:Maybe there’s an honest headline about Barcelona buried somewhere in LP, but I certainly can't prove it.

There really isn't.

Back in 2015, I remarked that the expansion of Islam and Christianity followed a remarkably similar trajectory... if you'll allow me to be somewhat blunt, though I suppose "audacious" might be a more polite term...

Now, Byron is going to weigh in with his take on those two standout talents emerging from the youth academy.

steelharbor9 said:I mean, I’ve never really ruled it out! For everything where I don't have hard proof, I just leave the possibility on the table, I guess. It’s up to me to weigh things out for myself, right?

I'm definitely ruling out the idea that God's existence could be proven through science. That’s just impossible—and I think I've already explained why three different times now (even if you argued the opposite a few posts back!). But, honestly, if such a proof were possible, it would be kind of ironic... it might actually kill off the concept of God for believers. I mean, faith wouldn't really be "faith" anymore, would it? It would either be a fact or it wouldn't, and then the whole point of believing would just vanish.

Nope.

restlesssurfer97 said:Nope.

And what about the other half of this post?

Oh, and you totally mentioned having broad views, whereas I guess mine are pretty narrow since I'm certain science just can't prove the existence of God.

steelharbor9 said:And what about the other half of this post?

Oh, and you totally mentioned having broad views, whereas I guess mine are pretty narrow since I'm certain science just can't prove the existence of God.

I’m leaving the door open for the possibility that science might eventually advance enough to actually prove whether God exists or not.

I'm not making any hard claims here. Unlike you. And honestly, that's the whole difference.

steelharbor9 said:Honestly, Christianity is pretty much the same crap. In the Bible, they're killing people left and right, going on Crusades to spread the faith, and forcibly converting entire nations. It's kind of the same deal, I guess.

Or yeah, exactly that.

There isn't any killing in the New Testament, which happens to be the only book that actually matters to Christians. Those Crusader Wars weren't about spreading faith, but rather liberating conquered territories; the only ones who actually used the sword to push religion were the Spaniards in the New World, and maybe a few Germans, Estonians, or Poles in Eastern Europe before things went south for them...

restlesssurfer97 said:I’m leaving the door open for the possibility that science might eventually advance enough to actually prove whether God exists or not.

I'm not making any hard claims here. Unlike you. And honestly, that's the whole difference.

Okay, so what if I said I was leaving the door open for science to eventually prove that a giant floppy-eared rabbit wearing a Real Madrid jersey is actually God?

The odds of any of our theories actually coming true are basically the same, if you ask me, because we're talking about the same thing—something that just doesn't have anything to do with actual science.

steelharbor9 said:Okay, so what if I said I was leaving the door open for science to eventually prove that a giant floppy-eared rabbit wearing a Real Madrid jersey is actually God?

The odds of any of our theories actually coming true are basically the same, if you ask me, because we're talking about the same thing—something that just doesn't have anything to do with actual science.

KBKK?

The odds of any of our theories actually playing out are, if you notice, pretty much identical because we're talking about the same fundamental thing here, something that just doesn't have anything to do with scientific data.

Sadly, I’m just not seeing it.

steelharbor9 said:I mean, I’ve never really ruled it out! For everything where I don't have hard proof, I just leave the possibility on the table, I guess. It’s up to me to weigh things out for myself, right?

I'm definitely ruling out the idea that God's existence could be proven through science. That’s just impossible—and I think I've already explained why three different times now (even if you argued the opposite a few posts back!). But, honestly, if such a proof were possible, it would be kind of ironic... it might actually kill off the concept of God for believers. I mean, faith wouldn't really be "faith" anymore, would it? It would either be a fact or it wouldn't, and then the whole point of believing would just vanish.

But I think we can say with total certainty that the God described in our records—and by "our," I mean all of humanity, though obviously I'm closest to the Christian tradition—just doesn't exist. I mean, if there really is something out there acting exactly like the Yahweh from the Old Testament, then that thing isn't God. At least, it's certainly not the kind of entity that deserves the title.

restlesssurfer97 said:KBKK?

The odds of any of our theories actually playing out are, if you notice, pretty much identical because we're talking about the same fundamental thing here, something that just doesn't have anything to do with scientific data.

Sadly, I’m just not seeing it.

Which part specifically? I mean, why would the Christian theory of God be any more valid than my own theory of God? I guess being stuck thinking "inside the box" is just such a common issue in these kinds of debates.

Missing obvious logical points seems to be becoming a bit of a habit for you! ☕

Btw, I'm a huge believer that Anderlon is going to pay for a better server soon, so maybe this forum won't be so slow anymore.

Black holes and stardust. It’s honestly kind of wild to think about the possibility that we all just emerged from cosmic debris. 😢

I guess it just feels a little more heavyhearted to think about how those literal stone tablets—you know, the actual foundation of the faith—were handed down by an old man who was talking to a burning bush.

steelharbor9 said:Which part specifically? I mean, why would the Christian theory of God be any more valid than my own theory of God? I guess being stuck thinking "inside the box" is just such a common issue in these kinds of debates.

Missing obvious logical points seems to be becoming a bit of a habit for you! ☕

Btw, I'm a huge believer that Anderlon is going to pay for a better server soon, so maybe this forum won't be so slow anymore.

It is actually quite interesting when you look at it. What evidence do we truly have that any of it exists? Perhaps a few saints who miraculously healed someone, though even that is debatable—and if they did, was it really God, or were they just exceptionally skilled healers?...

steelharbor9 said:Which part specifically? I mean, why would the Christian theory of God be any more valid than my own theory of God? I guess being stuck thinking "inside the box" is just such a common issue in these kinds of debates.

Missing obvious logical points seems to be becoming a bit of a habit for you! ☕

Btw, I'm a huge believer that Anderlon is going to pay for a better server soon, so maybe this forum won't be so slow anymore.

Keep up the good work. 👍:shuker:

Robin Fox2 said:It is actually quite interesting when you look at it. What evidence do we truly have that any of it exists? Perhaps a few saints who miraculously healed someone, though even that is debatable—and if they did, was it really God, or were they just exceptionally skilled healers?...

Miraculous healing isn't exactly solid proof. It’s not real evidence at all—I mean, true evidence should be unquestionable, right? Like, it shouldn't leave any holes or room for different interpretations. Maybe it's enough to just point to a reasonable intuition that medicine (which is science, after all) will eventually find a valid explanation for that "miracle."

And all those theories I was mentioning? They're basically all the same. If you have some free time, you should totally Google Russell's teapot (Russell's teapot).