… “And sleep comes with a fork, knife, and spoon… Goodbye, lay the blame on luck.”
Whew! I have not updated much this week, and for that, I apologize. Although, I have no idea as to who I am apologizing to. So, uh, yeah. *chikapow*
This week has been pretty mellow. Except for the fact that one of my best friends now has a crush on some dude that I *kind of* gave up a crush on. I am not offended or anything, but if she gushes over how wonderful he is, I will gouge my eyes out. I admit, this is a little unfair, considering that she hears me gush over the boys I like all the time. Maybe I should invest in some ear plugs. Or some time in learning how to deal with these kind of situations. That way she can get it out without me telling her to shut up (I know! It is unfair for me to act this way!)
… But I do give her alot of credit, though. From my estimation, she’s liked him for a few weeks now, and it was more or less an indulgence for her to tell me since she hardly tells anyone these kind of things (I had to ask her about it. And I definitely did not expect the answer that came forward.) She looked like she regretted saying it afterward, and she tried to remedy the situation the next day by confidently stating, “I guess I don’t like him that much anymore.”
I don’t buy it. I give her credit for it, but I definitely do not believe it. (AKA- she was just trying to get on my good side, just in case.)
So, freshman is, indeed, upon us. And I have decided I will recon one of the dresses I received from my family friend. The fabric is nice, but I’m not sure if it is *too* dressy for the occasion. It’s a cross between burgandy and maroon. It’s some form of satin fabric, maybe. It has some netting underneath for poofiness (which I am going to remove promptly- netting rubbing against your legs is the worst feeling in the world.) There’s another fabric that is stiffer and is blue (but from the side, it looks black.. You know? )
Anthony and I are still battling (which is a word that is verryyy loosely used) over creationism vs. evolution. Do you want a small portion of my arguments? Okay, what I’m going to write here is not that small. But it is small compared to the other arguments I have brought forth. And keep this in mind all the while- Anthony only sent me two paragraphs. Oh. And- I’m not even done yet; nowhere near it. I think I cited most of the things that I copied and pasted (normally I would not do that, but the way they worded it was so great, I couldn’t think of a better way to state it.) and I will bold everything that came out of my own brain.
4. Argument against omnis -
A supernatural being cannot be omnipotent or omniscient. If a god is supernatural, then it is by definition immaterial. But this causes a problem with omniscience. If it knows everything, it also has all physical knowledge (including knowledge of physical actions). But a god is immaterial, and cannot have any physical knowledge. Therefore a god cannot be omnipotent. An example of this is walking. We have physical, muscular knowledge of how walking is done, and said knowledge is unconsciously used every time we walk. A god cannot acquire this knowledge because it is incorporeal. Also, being omnipotent causes a problem with omniscience.
If a god is omniscient, then it also has moral knowledge (including knowledge of emotions). But a god is omnipotent, and therefore cannot be frustrated, angry, or have any other negative emotion - for it can change the nature of the universe and solve its problem instantly. A god cannot be both omnipotent and omniscient for this reason.”
3. Science, morality and logic presuppose the absence of gods.
Scientific inquiry always assumes that the nature of entities is uniform and therefore that there are no such things as miracles (a miracle being usually defined as a break from the law of identity applied to the behaviour of objects, i.e. to causality). As science’s track record so far is excellent, there is reason to cast doubt on the notion of miracles and divine intervention in general. Morality and logic both depend on reality, as any form of knowledge does, and they are necessarily what they are. But if they were created by a god, then they become conditional (be it directly on the god’s nature or his decisions), which is a contradiction. Furthermore, particular religious moralities are contradictory, since religious texts are contradictory on points of morality. To resume : since religion’s epistemological basis is against knowledge, there is good reason to disbelieve in gods, otherwise we have to reject all forms of “secular knowledge” like science, morality and logic (and banning logic effectively bans all of cognition). http://www.objectivethought.com/articles/nogod.html -
God is not a person or a powerful being. God is an idea.
Atheism proof:Here, I show that the god of the Bible (hereafter, called God) is a being for whom existence is logically impossible. To begin, I define a concept, specify the concept of God as such, and examine that concept’s claim to intelligibility as an object of faith. Let us begin by exploring the definition of a concept. A concept is defined by Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary as “something conceived in the mind,” like a thought or notion, and “an abstract or generic idea generalized from particular instances.” 1 The concept of God requires a finite array of mutually dependent properties derived from the Bible. Properties include, but are not limited to, the following: * Creator of universe (Genesis 1:1) * Omnipotence (Genesis 17:1) * Omniscience (Psalm 139:1-6) * Omnipresence (Psalm 139:7-13) God as the creator of the universe is self-explanatory. Omnipotence means all-powerful, omniscience means all-knowing, and omnipresence means everpresent everywhere. Omnipotence entails omniscience and omnipresence. The concept becomes incomplete or unintelligible if:
1. At least one of these properties is shown to contradict one or more other properties, or 2. At least one of these properties is shown to be internally contradictory I find a number of cases in which (1) and (2) prove true. I will consider one case proving (1) in which the property that God as creator of the universe contradicts the property that God is omnipotent and one case proving (2) in which the property that God is omniscient is internally contradictory.
First, consider God’s creation of the universe. It is necessarily true that a creator creates for a purpose. To have a purpose is to have a desire. To have a desire is to lack the object of that desire. Yet, God is omnipotent and one who is omnipotent has no desire to create, given that such a desire entails a lack of attainment or power. Thus, it necessarily follows that God cannot simultaneously be a creator and omnipotent. Second, consider the property of God’s omniscience. Omniscience is the knowledge of everything. This implies that knowledge is composed of a finite set of knowable things. Yet, God cannot know that he knows everything without knowing something about everything, and this metaknowledge must necessarily exist outside the set of all knowable things.
Metaknowledge is knowledge about knowledge, so it is a form of knowledge in its own right. Thus, to know everything that can be known, God must know everything that can be known plus the fact that he knows everything. This presents a contradiction. Therefore, omniscience is an internally contradictory property and God cannot be omniscient. Given these contradictions, the concept of God is unintelligible. Other properties of God are given in the Bible, but those I have listed suffice to prove that God cannot be known at a basic, conceptual level. The statement “God exists” is not only unproven, but also unprovable, since the concept of God is unintelligible. No unintelligible concept can exist. To use a common example, no square circles can exist, because the properties of squares and circles are fundamentally incompatible, leaving the concept of a square circle internally contradictory. Since that which is actual must be known conceptually, that which is internally contradictory in concept cannot be internally consistent in actuality. In short, an unintelligible concept cannot exist, God is such a concept, so God cannot exist. -http://uberkuh.com/node/271
A Perfect Creator Cannot Exist
1. If God exists, then he is perfect.
1. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
1. If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.
1. But the universe is not perfect.
1. Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe.
1. Hence, it is impossible for God to exist.
[5] The Paradox of Omnipotence
1. Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift.
1. If God can create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.
1. If God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent.
1. Therefore god is not omnipotent. [8] -http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Godless/Summary.htm
- The concept of god varies from religion to religion. The concept of god also varies from culture to culture, judging from the way he supposedly “works his magic”. The concept of the same god molds itself to accepted cultural norms and values. Does this prove the concept of god is ridiculous? That god does not truly exist, but is just formed within the mind?
- If dead infants go to Heaven, shouldn’t theist parents sacrifice themselves to hell by killing their children?
- God is not moral for creating evil, whether it has free will or not.
- Anyone who thinks of Satan as evil should consider all the men, women, children, and animals who have died because it was “God’s will”.
- The bible was created during the first millenia by a group of people trying to make sense of the world around them. It has absolutely no scientific basis or even moral basis- it is a story and should be referred to as such. It has as much credibility as “Alexander’s Absolutely Terrible, Horrible, No-Good, Very Bad Day”
-It is not like there are two laws of probability — one for Christians who pray and the other for non-Christians. There is only one law of probability because prayers have zero effect. Jesus has no effect on our planet no matter how much we pray.
-Exodus Chapter 21, verse 32: If the bull gores a male or female slave, the owner must pay thirty shekels of silver to the master of the slave, and the bull must be stoned. Not only does God condone slavery, but here God places a value on slaves — 30 shekels of silver. Note that God is not sophisticated enough to understand the concept of inflation. It is now 3,000 years later, and a gored slave is still worth 30 shekels of silver according to God’s word.
- If god is omnipotent/onmiscient/etc, wouldn’t god impregnate another woman to bear another son so he won’t be lonely in heaven while his “only begotten son” is sent to earth? It really is quite amazing when you think about it. We take Jesus, the Ten Commandments, heaven and hell completely for granted. Nearly every person in America has heard of them, and few would question their existence. The place where these core concepts originate is the Bible. Without the Bible, these concepts would not exist. The Bible has a gigantic impact on the lives of people around the world. The only reason it has this impact is because Christians believe that God is the author.
Let’s say that the Bible were not the word of God. Imagine that it was written by a group of random men 2,000 or 3,000 years ago and God had nothing to do with it. Would you believe in heaven and hell? Would you believe in the Ten Commandments? Would you believe in Jesus? No. Of course not. If primitive men wrote the Bible rather than God, no one would care about the Bible. Homer was a primitive man, and 3,000 or so years ago he wrote a book called “The Odyssey.” In this book Homer talks about a Cyclops, a goddess named Athena and a place called Hades, along with many other things. Do we believe any of it? Of course not — it was a fanciful story written by a man. We ignore the Odyssey in our daily lives because the author was human.
- If you are going to believe that the Ten Commandments came from God because they are in God’s Bible, then you must also believe that all of these slavery passages came from God as well. Therefore you, Justice Scalia and everyone else who believes that God wrote the Bible should be perfectly comfortable with the slave trade. Christians must believe that all the laws that forbid slavery in the United States defy God’s word, and we should be actively working to repeal them.
- If you do not believe that God wrote the slavery passages in the Bible, then the obvious question to ask yourself is this: How can you possibly know which parts came from God and which parts were inserted by primitive men? How can you pick and choose like that? You have absolutely no way to know whether the slavery passages came from God or primitive men.
- Here is the logic expressed in Leviticus chapter 5: “Today I accidentally touched something that was ‘ceremonially unclean,’ and I didn’t know about it at the time, but fortunately a priest brought it to my attention, and I am guilty. Now, I can’t afford a lamb. But I can get two young pigeons for a shekel over at Saul’s bird emporium, and then I can take them both to the priest. He will wring the head from the neck of one of them, but not sever it completely. And he will sprinkle the blood, and drain the rest. And then the priest will burn the other pigeon. Then I am forgiven. Thank God!” What does your common sense tell you about this? It probably tells you that it is impossible to imagine an all-loving, all-knowing God demanding this, and you are correct.
- In Numbers 31:14-18 we find: “Moses was angry with the officers of the armym the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds who returned from the battle. “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD’s people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.” Making sex slaves of women apparently is God’s will.
- Have you ever thought about how bizarre the crucifixion story is? Imagine the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the universe sitting on his magnificent throne in heaven. He looks down onto earth and says to himself:
Those evil humans down on earth. I hate what they are doing. All this sin… Since I am all-knowing I know exactly what the humans are doing and I understand exactly why they commit each sin. Since I created the humans in my own image and personally programmed human nature into their brains, I am the direct author of all of this sin. The instant I created them I knew exactly what would happen with every single human being right down to the nanosecond level for all eternity. If I didn’t like how it was going to turn out, I could have simply changed them when I created them. And since I am perfect, I know exactly what I am doing.
But ignore all that. I hate all these people doing exactly what I perfectly designed them to do and knew they would do from the moment I created them… So here’s what I am going to do. I will artificially inseminate a virgin. She will give birth to an incarnated version of me. The humans will eventually crucify and kill the incarnated me. That will, finally, make me happy. Yes, sending myself down and having the humans crucify me — that will satisfy me. I feel much better now.
It makes no sense, does it? Why would an all-knowing being need to have humans kill himself (Jesus is God, after all) to make himself happy? Especially since it is a perfect God who set the whole thing in motion exactly the way he wanted it? The whole story of the crucifixion is absurd from top to bottom if you actually stop to think about it.
- At some point, Christians have to accept the evidence that we all can see: Either God wrote the Bible, or he did not. If he did, then he is wrong, and we should reject the Bible and him. If he did not, then we should reject the Bible.
- In the New Testament of the Bible — God’s holy word to his creation — it says that it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. In 1 Timothy chapter 2 it says, “I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.” … Men in the first milennia were obviously very protective of their women. So much so that they would choose to stereotype woman as being submissive so their women will not go sleeping around. Either that, or god does not want his women sleeping around, or for them to teach, have authority over men, or speak their thoughts. The choice is yours- did god make the bible, or did slave-owning, women-oppressing men write it? The bible is the only “proof” of god- so if he didn’t make it, then there is no god. God is imaginary.
- If god knows EVERYTHING, then why does he say “For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” He obviously does not know his stuff. At all. You’d think he’d know this stuff after the whole Mary Magdelene + God = Jesus thing, but he does not.
- In Deuteronomy 22:28-29 we find this: “If a man meets a virgin who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are caught in the act, the man who lay with her shall give fifty shekels of silver to the young woman?s father, and she shall become his wife. Because he violated her he shall not be permitted to divorce her as long as he lives.” Note the third verb in the first sentence. Not “dates her for a period of time, and decides they are ‘ready’”, he “seizes” her. So God says if a man rapes a woman, he gets to marry her. Awesome. Just look at how men in primitive countries like Afghanistan treat women today. Those are the kind of men who wrote the Bible. God had nothing to do with this book.
- If god is all-powerful, all-knowing, etc. Then why did he not just write the bible himself, without hiring a group of people to do it for him?
… And Anthony send me this:
So, since we are indeed people pursuaded by logic and reason, I can clearly state that if the bible is true, then the entire Christian faith is in fact true, could I not? Well, there are several things that lead to the proof of the bible. First, let us delvge into the realms of logic. We can logically say that the smaller the time gap between the original work and the oldest existing copy, the more accurate it is, correct? Works including Aristotle’s Poetics, Caesar’s Gallic Wars, and Homer’s Iliad all have very large time gaps between the original and oldest copy, which alone compromises their accuracy (1400 years, 1000 years, and 500 years between the original and oldest copy, respictively) However, the New Testament of the bible has less than a 100 year time gap, proving to be one of the most accurate of ancient works to date. Another logical proof would be the greater number of copies, the more accurate it is. Well, works such as Aristotle’s Poetics, Caesar’s Gallic Wars, and Homer’s Iliad have a minimal number of ancient existing copies, only 5, 10, and 643 manuscripts, respectively. However, the New Testament has over 20,000 ancient manuscripts in existance. Every single one of these copies would mean nothing if they were hypocritical, or say the same thing. In Homer’s Iliad, a total of 764 lines (5%) are doubtful. However, the New Testament has only 40 lines (.5%) doubted, and this amount is due to translation errors, such as an “I” changing to a “We”, disagreements between the subject and the verb, and similar errors. Sir Frederic Kenyon, the Director of The British Museum stated “Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regardeds as finally established.” I have alot more stuff, but I’ll just leave you to ponder that ;D
… And this is what I told him. All of this is from my own brain, dude.
So, we are indeed people persuaded by logic and reason, and I can clearly state that if the bible is, indeed, false, then what could one assume of the Christian faith? The bible is rather absurd and very hyprocritical. Fundamentalism is also a hypocrisy because it denies god’s will, if god existed, that is. Why is the bible absurd and hypocritical? Because it contradicts itself. Alot.:
On the day Moses comes down from Mount Sinai with the stone tablets containing the Ten Commandments, he discovers that the Israelites have created a golden calf. To punish the people, Moses gathers a group of men and takes the following action in the book of Exodus, Chapter 32: Then he [Moses] said to them, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.’ “
The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. So… one minute we have God carving into stone, “Thou shalt not kill.” Then, the next minute we have God telling each man to strap a sword to his side and lay waste to thousands. Wouldn’t you expect the almighty ruler of the universe to be slightly more consistent than this? 3,000 dead people is a lot of commandment breaking. Obviously, that is a total contradiction. The reason why you find contradictions like that in the Bible is because God is imaginary.
Somewhere within the bible, it says to stone the people who do not believe in god. In the revelation, it claims that when the world ends, all the people who did not believe or worship god will be tortured in hell for eternity, because god only saves the people who believed in him (that’ll teach ‘em!)
But would the god that we have come to know and love, be more compassionate than that? Isn’t killing people who do not believe in him a bit selfish? And you know, this video really helps prove my point:
http://godisimaginary.com/video2.htm
Thus, we can logically state that it does not matter the time gap between the original copy of the bible and the reproductions. If the content is false, then it’s pointless to discuss. If I were born a hundred years ago and I created a copy of my spanish project, La Creacion Del Mundo, which involves a magical spaghetti monster creating the world to amuse himself, claimed it were to be true, distribute it, and have the most ancient copy be fifty years later, then what would that prove? Absolutely nothing, because my book would be a complete lie (though, it would be comparable to the bible, since God and the FSM are, indeed, imaginary.)
Another thing: what do we know about the creators of the bible, seeing as we are assigning them such credibility? I understand that some pope or something created book of revelation, but just so you know- the dude who created that book was exiled in an island by the dude who was in charge of Rome at the time, and this was during a huge war. The pope wrote the book to bring hope to the Christians, so they understand that even though the world may have been terrible at the time, god was still there for them.
Given this piece of information, interpreting the bible literally would be illogical. The credibility of the bible and the amount of bibles distributed have nothing to do with each other. You know the metaphor I used earlier? Exactly. http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/index.html
I believe you’d like to read that, as well. Sure, it’s an AOL homepage, but it’s freaking great.
And here is my list why god does not exist, it’s a very rough draft that I came up with yesterday, but I suppose it works.
1. the idea of a deity helps people cope with life. It makes people feel better and that things are, ultimately, worth it. Of course, if someone does something bad to me, I would love to think that they are going to get avenged in the future because of it, despite the low probability of it happening. Of course, I would like to believe I will be rewarded for all the good things I have done when I die, and ultimately go to heaven. And yes, I would also love to believe there is one person who cares about everybody so much, and me specifically, to help me get through life. Who would not like to think this? But, sadly, one cannot will such beings into existence.
2. The idea of a deity is based on the ignorance of man trying to explain the world in terms he can understand. There has never been proof of God ever existing.
3. If everyone believed that there is no ultimate being, the world would be a hopeless place. What is there to live for if there is no reward at the end? What is there to live for if you have no means to prove yourself to this ultimate being?
4.”All of [the religions] are trying to heighten man’s place in a world of catastrophe and pain. “
5. There is no real proof why these beliefs are “good for you”.
- People once believed that common ailments such as headaches, were caused by evil spirits locked away in your skull. These people practiced “bloodletting”, which included draining a person of their blood to get rid of the bad spirits thriving inside them.
- People have sacrificed animals and other people, in hopes of getting on god’s good side. Wouldn’t they be so disappointed, that no god exists? - People have mutilated their childrens’ genitals, for the same reason.
6. Living by a doctrine must really suck.
7. If everyone believes in a god, then why do they all believe such diverse things? Christian scientists do not believe in medication at all, yet their other religious neighbors use medicine all the time.
8. The whole idea of god is a lazy explanation for how the world works. The idea of science is out the window, while “God did it.” is embraced.
9. Man is an animal and not a special creation or divinely destined creature. I believe someone once said that humans are just a group of really lucky primates, which is completely true.
10. Theism manifests self-centered arrogance, the height of unfounded pride, and pompousness egotism.
- Heaven is a reward for living and doing well in life. (but, have you ever wondered… there is a theory that every person is good at heart. so would that mean that everyone goes to heaven? )
- Hell is where the people who do bad things go (but have you ever wondered.. If hell really worked the way people think, then wouldn’t we all go to hell? Or the small (or even, big) inconvienence someone caused us is not enough for them to go to hell? What is defined as a big enough occurrance to go to hell, or one that is small enough to receive a get-out-of-jail-free card? )
- “The arrogance of Christianity is seen in the purpose of God for man. I must ask why the omnipotent creator of heaven and earth needs lowly me to do anything? The child likes to play in his backyard and pretend that the general has called him on a secret and very important mission to accomplish. The same type of childish motive is found in Christianity. I am commissioned to bring a message to those around me who do not have it, in order to establish their hearts as dwelling places for God. Souls are at risk! The mission is crucial! Why didn’t the almighty bother to take the time and implant his important knowledge in everyone’s mind? Why does the almighty need me to do anything he could do by the slightest of thoughts? If there is humility in serving God and trusting some unknown higher power to reveal the deep mysteries of life, then where is the humility in believing in only one God? Why not a god for the trees, the animals, the different rocks, and the seas, and mountains? Are polytheists more humble?”
- Most good scientists are atheists. That is because the idea of religion clouds up ones’ mind, thus making valid conclusions a difficult task. What does that say about religion?
11. If God created the world, then who or what created god, then?
12. If there is an all-powerful god, why would such a god need to create the world? The god could satisfy himself all he wants.
13. And if you’re wondering, I have two theories of how the world was created. The first, is the scientific, and the world was created accidentally. The latter, is the world is an illusion created by the viewer (which is me.)
14. The whole religion idea is contradictory. I am told that God is love by people who have ruthlessly killed other people. I am told to stay a virgin until I am married by priests who rape little boys. I am told to stay faithful to my future husband, by the same men who rape little boys. So many crimes have been committed in the name of god- why should I give in and believe the contradiction?
15.ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN:
“Now, when authority fails, theists bring in reason and science. I have to admit I was impressed at some of these arguments first, but a fundamental flaw is evident. The argument from design claims that all the order and complexity we see in the universe around us cannot originate spontaneously and must therefore come from the hand of a Designer. They cite the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which must be the most abused of the laws of nature… The law says that the total amount of “disorder” (entropy) in a closed system must increase over time (my physics might be lacking here, but you get the idea). Theists understand that the Second Law doesn’t allow life and galaxies (for example), which are complex, to emerge spontaneously from anything; therefore God must have created them. This is all very nice, but the Second Law says “the total amount”. It doesn’t forbid a local decrease of entropy, such as life emerging on Earth (an open system); the total amount of entropy in the universe does increase, but variations are allowed. (As for galaxies, bear in mind that most of the universe is vacuum, in an almost completely disordered state; and the stars in all galaxies will eventually die out too and join it.) In any case, suppose you need a creator to wind everything up. What does that say about the creator? Does it say It is omniscient or omnipotent? Does it say It is the supreme Good, Wisdom and Justice? Does it say It can communicate with us? Of course not. The argument from design impressed me because it showed me how many things modern science can’t explain (such as how exactly life assembled itself from simple chemicals, or how the laws that govern star formation are as they are), but I instantly saw (and I’m really not a “think fast” person) that it proved nothing: it only sowed doubt and presented a nebulous hypothesis which didn’t deserve its name, because it explained nothing. I could use the same argument to “prove” the existence of any kind of god, but only to people who already believed in It and needed some pseudo-scientific reassurance.”
16.MOTIVES FOR BELIEF
”I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” (Stephen Roberts) The theist believer might at this point, understandably, be tired of philosophy and arguments. I agree. This is not why I don’t believe in God, actually. These are the reasons I can give when people don’t understand anything else, even though they sound like complicated excuses. The Bible says one must reject worldly wisdom and become a simple person who takes what God gives and tries to follow His Will. Unfortunately, I have a strong interest in worldly wisdom, and I understand I can be simple and enjoy what surrounds me (such as the beauty of nature, love and friendship) without having to renounce to reason and science, which only increase the respectful awe I feel before the universe and its infinite web of cause and effect. The existence of God is difficult (I’d say impossible) to prove. God is an incredibly complicated hypothesis. God cannot be felt with our normal senses except when He performs a miracle — and then we may not know whether it was a miracle indeed. It’s more economical (in scientific terms) to suspend belief in God, since He’s so difficult to prove and seemingly so difficult to understand. Therefore, we atheists are on the good side of the argument — we don’t need to prove anything. That burden rests with the believer. Are you a believer? If so, answer me: why do you believe in God? (You already have an idea of how difficult it is to explain it.) Is it because you were taught so? That’s indoctrination. Is it because you saw Him or a manifestation of Him? If so, how can you be sure it was not a natural phenomenon, or a hallucination, or mere self-delusion? You prove God to me! The explanations for my disbelief are only intended for clarification, to put things in order, and to expose them to doubters who need help (as I did). I don’t need any of them, really. It’s not that I don’t believe in God because I have studied those complicated arguments; they came afterwards. So what are my motives? I don’t believe in God for the same reason I don’t believe in things people don’t believe, such as Santa Claus or spontaneous generation. Santa Claus doesn’t exist; he cannot exist in our universe, for a number of reasons. If you believe in God, ask yourself how He is different from Santa. After you have somehow refuted the natural and philosophical arguments, you can still say you feel God in your heart — but then, when you were a child, did you not feel Santa in your heart, late at night in Christmas? (take your pick from other religions, if you will; you will surely find appropriate examples). This is not blasphemy. Don’t take offence where none is intended. These are honest questions. I have already answered them for myself, after much pondering.”
17. The existence of God is unfalsifiable, therefore, it is unscientific.
________________________
This is just the tip of the iceberg, dude. I could keep on writing, but it’s time for me to sleep. Ah, aren’t I such an ambitious person? I’ve been so competitive over this- I told you- he will be proven wrong. Oh, and realize those are not all the arguments. I wrote some up and gave them to him during math. I think those arguments were more thought-out than these and better. But whatever. All this overwhelms his two-paragraphs. And I’m going to keep on trucking.
I had two tests today. But that is not interesting so I am not going to elaborate.
Uh. I cannot think of much else to say, so I’ll try and squeeze out a paragraph out of nothing:
“You know, Amanda, your smile really illuminates a room.”
That is what Ms. Mygatt informed me of within the first hour of the bell ringing. Hmm. What can I say? Oh, I said “Awesome.” back. Maybe I should have said “Thank you so much!” or something of the sort, but I obviously was way too interested in the boy that was about to come into the classroom.
Gene is now in our first period class. That dude is rad. I hardly know him and I have had miniscule conversations with him throughout the year (mostly pertaining to what is going to happen in english class. I suppose this ritual is about to abruptly end.) but he seems cool. He’s been hanging out with me and everyone else quite a bit lately, which is neat because he’s a really cool dude to have around.
My brother is about to have braces installed upon his pearly whites. Therefore, my mother and I have been spending hours on end inside the orthodontist’s office, been forced to converse with the people at the desk, and I have certainly been placed in a few awkward situations (I saw Paolo. And Cullen. And Katarina. I only said hello to Cullen because he’s someone that I have actually conversed with within the last six months.)
Total hours spent at the orthodontist’s office this week (most specifically, the waiting room): Roughly in the area of 3-5 hours.
Yeah. Now do you get it?!
Laurie is still absent and I have virtually no way to communicate with her twin brother. Or Laurie. I really hope she’s feeling kind-of okay, she’s never been gone from school this long. She never uses her e-mail and I lost her number so… =(
And you know what makes me almost feel like I’m on methamphetamines?! This does. Oh, but TSL, you will just have to wait for a few hours. I’m on a different computer! =(
But YES! This summer is going to be so rad.
05-08-07: VA - Punk Goes Acoustic 2
05-22-07: We Are The Fury - Venus
05-29-07: Firescape - Dancehall Apocalypse
06-12-07: Firescape - Dancehall Apocalypse (I guess they are not sure yet, xD)
06-26-07: Boys Night Out - Self Titled
06-26-07: My American Heart - Hiding Inside the Terrible Weather
07-10-07: Down To Earth Approach - Come Back To You
07-17-07: The Rocket Summer - Do You Feel
07-17-07: Motion City Soundtrack - Even If It Kills Me (And guess what? YES! MY BIRTHDAY!!!! =D)
But what do you not see on the list? Exactly! THE STARTING LINE! /teeny bopperness.
And with the summer nearing its head… I’m not quite sure. I admit- I am pretty darned scared about the whole going-to-high-school thing. It’s not that bad, but it’s still pretty scary. I guess it’s just the anticipation of another year, with the addition of going to a new school and, most importantly, leaving CKJH.
When I started going to jr. high, I expected to go back to elementary school every now and then. I don’t do that. But I know that it just takes some getting used to. (No, I’ll be really honest here. I’m dreading summer because it means that school ends. I don’t know why, it’s not high school starting really, it’s just that… Well, things change, and given the last two summers, I feel a great distance between my friends as the summer comes. Oh, and the horror of summer school.) But yes, the wonderful summer approaches.
Warm weather, unlimited time to do ANYTHING (summer school is excepted..) and despite the hard work- summer school is much better than what we receive at school. Oh, and El Paso at the end of the summer. *squeals* Note the length of this blog entry. Yes. Just for you (whoever you may be.)