Religion has no idea what it's talking about

[Tycoon]

Depending on what your defining as prayer could you not at least even benefit from the same placebo effect resulting from calm and mental relaxation.

Prayer is not the only way to get mental relaxation. And as you say, whatever results is only a result of the placebo effect, not a result of God's intervention.

Your expression indicates you that Creator needs to exist within the Universe we live-in all the time. Am I correct?

No. Gela was indicating that it is ridiculous to try to prove atheists wrong by suggesting that God has existed forever, but dismissing the suggestion that all mater has existed forever and has not been affected by God.

[Tycoon]

It's sort of like reflexology which I enjoyed while staying in NY. It came as a second part of a massage. I asked the spa lady if it really works and her answer was clinically no, there is no connection between the feet and organs, but for many people it appears to have an impact. She said it most certainly won't work if you close your mind to it in advance.

Of course there is a connection between the feet and the other organs. Your feet have very sensitive thermorecepters, so when you are not wearing socks your whole body feels cold even though it's just your feet. That's just one example.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon Of course there is a connection between the feet and the other organs. Your feet have very sensitive thermorecepters, so when you are not wearing socks your whole body feels cold even though it's just your feet. That's just one example.

Care to prove that then

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon No. Gela was indicating that it is ridiculous to try to prove atheists wrong by suggesting that God has existed forever, but dismissing the suggestion that all mater has existed forever and has not been affected by God.

How is that far fetched. Atheists don't believe in a god and further there is no method of proving that something didn't always exist. Can you even prove with certainty that all matter has always existed.

[gela]

Can you even prove with certainty that all matter has always existed.

Read the entire argument.

No, we can't prove that.
But at the same time, its meaningless to say that 'matter can't creat itself, therefore it must have been created by a creator'

Because under that logic, the creator must have been created by a creator.
If your open to the idea of something that has always existed, and always will exist, then its meaningless to say it can't be matter, but it can be a 'creator'.

I wasn't trying to prove that there is no creator, I was disproving that there is a creator, under the reasoning presented.

[Tycoon]

Care to prove that then

You can prove it yourself. Go stick your feet in a bucket of ice or something, and your whole body will get cold.

How is that far fetched. Atheists don't believe in a god and further there is no method of proving that something didn't always exist. Can you even prove with certainty that all matter has always existed.

We were saying that you should not back your entire argument with the idea that God has always existed but at the same time dismiss the idea that matter has always existed. It's like being a hypocrite.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: gela No, we can't prove that. But at the same time, its meaningless to say that 'matter can't creat itself, therefore it must have been created by a creator' Because under that logic, the creator must have been created by a creator. If your open to the idea of something that has always existed, and always will exist, then its meaningless to say it can't be matter, but it can be a 'creator'. I wasn't trying to prove that there is no creator, I was disproving that there is a creator, under the reasoning presented.

I think we come back to the same point, which goes as follow :
- are you questioning (mem)Branes Theory ?
If "yes", present your arguments, please.

Neither side has arguments to support their view - using scientific means, today, so far.
The core factor is :
- an atom possesses No ability and/or characteristics of self-creation
This is a fact, according to the Science. That is the key element that makes the whole case stronger for Theists.

In contrary, Atheists await for new developments and/or discovery that would deliver a completely new data on an atom's structure and/or characteristics and/or attributes, etc.
That is why Atheists reject Creator existence. And that points to Psychology and/or Sociology related issues, instead and indeed.

And the winner is ?
(Obama) :-)

[Jack]

That is the key element that makes the whole case stronger for Theists.

Only if the only viable alternative to current theories was theism. It's not. Theism isn't a default position. It still requires validation.

That is why Atheists reject Creator existence.

Some of us reject it as unproven conjecture.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Jack Only if the only viable alternative to current theories was theism. It's not. Theism isn't a default position. It still requires validation. Some of us reject it as unproven conjecture.

#1
Neither side may be taken as a default approach.

#2
Errata
Some Atheists.
Sorry :-)