Viewing Thread:
"Unbelievably Infuriating"

Maybe this forum isn't the place for this...no, actually, I think it is.

I went to play football tonight with some friends from my Christian Youth Group, and unfortunately, some people from Queens Park (basically the poor estate where all the idiots live.)

It was a good night, I played reasonably well and it's always a joy to just play a good game of football. But just one person had to ruin it.

I came prepared. I brought a drink. This guy, Kyle I think (or Arsewipe as I call him) tried to intimidate me, knowing I wouldn't do anything. He then intimidaded my mate, who's about twice his size, proving his stupidity.

Now, I didn't like him before tonight. He smokes (nothing wrong with that, but he's only 14 years old), he has his ear pierced and is basically a punk. He's always got this sly look on his face which really annoys me...

Fortunately, I was on the opposite team. And you know what I did? I took his legs out, the son of a w***e. He had the ball, and I was suddenly filled with rage. I sprinted towards him (I'm pretty fast so I wouldn't of been able to stop myself anyway) and a while before I got to him he played the ball. However, I didn't stop. About 2 seconds later I smashed into him, my right leg sticking out. I took both his legs from underneath him and he landed harshly on the ground. He didn't say anything, probably too scared when it finally comes down to it.

I was smiling gleefully, until the end of the match. I didn't get the chance to have a drink during the match so I was looking forward to finding my bottle. I heard a conversation from a few metres away.

"What's that on the ground?"

It was Arsewipe who replied, "Looks like someone's taken a pi$s. Oh no, wait," he looked at me smugly, "that's your drink."

I found my bottle, completely empty. B*****d. I'm 99% sure it was him, that piece of crap. Of course, as always, I didn't say anything. I'm just glad he's going home tonight to his council house, where his Dad will probably beat him up, if he hasn't already left.

Grrrrrrr...

Thanks Goatboy.

Acceptance of opinions with no judgement. Wouldn't the world be a better place if we could all be like this.

Gangsta Hamsta wrote:

> Another tricky explanation. Basically, its seems your argument applies
> more to the correctness of faith than to the existence of God?

--

Yeah, I was going off on a tangent there, sorry.

The existence of God?
I don't know.
For me he doesn't exist.
For nh he does.

Other than that, I don't *even* have a clue.

Sodding Idiot wrote:
> You can prove neither of the, you just havemy word for it. But whether
> you think they're true or not doesn't alter the truth of the
> statements.


----

But the question of faith would evaporate on proof.
You say you have 3 arms, and I believe that.
You show me and I am proven to be right.

You say you have 3 arms, and I don't believe that.
You show me and I am proven to be wrong.

Whatever the result, the whole element of faith has been removed and replaced with irrefutable fact.
The whole issue I'm trying to talk through is the one of faith.

Faith can only exist with evidence.
Show the proof, and regardless of your belief, that subject has now moved from a trusting acceptance of your word into utterly real and unquestionable fact.
There can no longer be the idea of faith.
But religion is based on faith and belief, purely because there is no proof.
If god were to show up, then all that faith and belief would become fact.

And that's where your 3 arm thing comes into play.
You tell me about your arms and you can show me.
It is fact.
Whether I choose to accept that is one thing, but there is no question as to the validity and existence of those arms.
Doesn't matter what I choose to belief, it is wit...

I'm utterly lost here now with what I wanted to say.

Gah

God does exist...he chose to take the guise of Roger Moore!!

You are correct in your understanding of what I said

Having read your argument (I may be wrong here), its sounds as I you are questioning faith more than God's existence.

I say this because you are arguing that faith is only correct when God is proved to be in existence. I agree, the bible says faith is the assured expectation of things not yet beheld (or similar words - Hebrews 11v1). Until those things are beheld, you cannot say whether your faith was correct.

However, God MUST either exist or not. Its not altered by faith. He cannot exist with some people and not with others. If he does, those who don't believe are wrong. If he does not, those with faith are wrong. The problem is, you can't tell for sure.


Another tricky explanation. Basically, its seems your argument applies more to the correctness of faith than to the existence of God?

That's cool nh.

nh has said that God does exist for him and I don't doubt that for a single second.
The only point I'm trying to make is, for me, he does not exist.
I do not have faith and I do not have proof.
It is an abstract concept for me.

But that is not to say I deny the existence of god.
I deny the existence of god in *my* life, there is a difference.
In my world, in my everyday life, there is no god.
But for nh there is.
He exists for nh, yet is nothing for me.

Aw dammit, I don't even know what I think anymore.
I'm off for a smoke.

And all because I got my Dogma DVD this morning.

Two statements:

I have three arms.

God exists.


From where you lot sit now, you can't prover either of them. You have to decided whether to believe me.

Whether you believe or not does not alter the truth of either statement.

If I have three arms, and none of you believe, I still have three arms. If I have three arms, and all of you belive, I still have three arms.

It does not matter how many people believe, my number of arms remains the same.

Same with God.

Assume he exists (whether you belive that or not doesn't matter - just using it as an example). So God exists. EVERY single person on this planet belives in him. He still exists.

Now, imagine NO ONE believes in him. He still exists.

It doesn't matter how many people believe. He either exists or not, irrespective of the amount of belief.

So, going back to my two first statements.

You can prove neither of the, you just havemy word for it. But whether you think they're true or not doesn't alter the truth of the statements.

See?

This is where I get accused of being a nutter but hey..

I know God exists. I have seen him and I have spoken to him, in fact I speak to him every single day. We all can if we want to.

I have been through things in my life and done things in my life that I could not have done by myself. I was reading Goatboys post (Gone but not forgotten) and some parts reminded me of my own past - my mother left and I was brought up my father, he thought the whole world was against him and took most of it out on me. After much conselling I have forgiven him now and also forgiven my mum for leaving me.

I needed something to help me get through it all and I belive that it was God that helped me through and now I know that it was.

That is my belief and I am not going to shove it on anybody.

I also know that Goatboys pen exists - I have enough faith to believe that !

I do get what your saying:

Think what you want, it can't alter something that is fact.
(I think that's your point?)

And I agree, but I think you can't apply such solid reasoning to the question of whether God exists or not.
For the simple fact that you'll never find out until you are dead.
The day that somebody can give me absolute proof-solid that god exists, then I'll admit I was wrong.

But as soon as you prove the existence of god, then there can no longer be faith, as faith is the belief in something without evidence.
Faith is the personal belief that you are right.
However, if suddenly God shows up then he exists with no question of it being a matter of faith.

Am I explaining what's in my head well enough? I know sort of what I want to say, but I can't quite verbalise it.

Religion is faith and belief in the existence of god.
But faith can only exist without absolute proof, that's why it's faith.
Remove that element by god being proven to exist, and you instantly lose that whole faith and belief aspect - because it is unequivicable that he exists.
You couldn't deny it anymore than you could deny the colour of your book.
I could deny the colour of your book, because I cannot see it.
I could have faith it is blue and not red, because I have no proof otherwise.
As soon as you show me your book, then it is obviously red and I cannot have faith otherwise.

I see what you are saying. Its just that, on a grand scale of things, beliefs can't alter existance can they?

Example, imagine for a sec that God is actually up there looking down. This isn't whether you believe it or not, just imagine that there is actually some spiritual entity of some sort who is an all powerful creator etc

The fact that you don't believe he is there, does not mean that he isn't - we have just established that he is. You may go through life never giving one thought to God but he is still there. The fact that in your head, there is not God changes nothing.

Same the other way round. Ant evidently strongly believes that God exists so imagine now that there is noting up there looking down on us. Ant's strong belief that he exists does not mean that he does.

This is hard to explain....

errm, ok try this.

I have a blue book in front of me. I can believe with all my mind and soul that this book is infact red. It doesn't change the fact however, that its blue.

Hope you see what I am trying to say