103 replies to this topic

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

So tell me Redzera, what evidence exists that there isn't God?

 

You don't have to prove a negative.  The onus is on those who claim God exists to prove it.  Ultimately, when all attempts to do so using logic and reason inevitably fail them, they resort to some variation of "because I have faith."  And that is simply not good enough.

[Alyster]

Hey guys, I'm back

Just thought you should know, that no, I have no respect for your beliefs. I respect your right to believe them, sure. But I'd still call the astrologist a fool, or a scientologist an idiot. You get no concessions for being the largest religion, or for being cool guys I know. If you say something dumb, ima call you on it.

I have provided more than sufficient evidence to point out that at the very least, I'm further to the truth than you. Whether or not I'm right on the semantics is irrelevant. Belief in a theistic god is illogical, hypocritical, and stupid. Don't like hearing that? Calling me evil or full of shit or whatever? You're a pathetic coward, who's also illogical, hypocritical, and stupid. You all know already that *nobody* can fight me and win. I hold all the cards because I'm *right*. And conversely, your beliefs are *wrong*.

Anyway, if you'd let me, I'd work with you on an individual basis to point out everywhere you're wrong, and help you learn the truth, which is pretty nice I think. I'm usually pretty civil. Call me full of shit though, and I reserve the right to tell you to "fuck off back to your hole you worthless Iron Age sack of shit". I'm looking at you arikus. Don't like what I say? Just try to prove me wrong.

I'm sorry for icking up your thread PV, you know I <3 you :3 but I think you know better than a whole bunch of these guys how people have allergic reactions to the truth.

 

Well, I guess she proved us wrong.

 

So tell me Redzera, what evidence exists that there isn't God?

Theist or deist? God or god? Cause disproving Judo-Christian God's existence is my favorite hobby. 

 

We did have an awful fight about in January. 

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

We did have an awful fight about in January. 

 

I am letting it go because that seems to be the direction it has taken naturally.  But I have my watchful, ready-to-be-punitive hat on.

 

It's blue.

[Manoka]

So tell me Redzera, what evidence exists that there isn't God?

 

You don't have to prove a negative.  The onus is on those who claim God exists to prove it.  Ultimately, when all attempts to do so using logic and reason inevitably fail them, they resort to some variation of "because I have faith."  And that is simply not good enough.

 

Says who?

 

Everything has to have proof for it to be verified.

 

 

I can say cats don't exist!

 

That doesn't mean I'm right just because I don't have to prove it.

 

 

In reality you don't have to prove anything.

 

But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:05 PM.

[Manoka]

 

Hey guys, I'm back

Just thought you should know, that no, I have no respect for your beliefs. I respect your right to believe them, sure. But I'd still call the astrologist a fool, or a scientologist an idiot. You get no concessions for being the largest religion, or for being cool guys I know. If you say something dumb, ima call you on it.

I have provided more than sufficient evidence to point out that at the very least, I'm further to the truth than you. Whether or not I'm right on the semantics is irrelevant. Belief in a theistic god is illogical, hypocritical, and stupid. Don't like hearing that? Calling me evil or full of shit or whatever? You're a pathetic coward, who's also illogical, hypocritical, and stupid. You all know already that *nobody* can fight me and win. I hold all the cards because I'm *right*. And conversely, your beliefs are *wrong*.

Anyway, if you'd let me, I'd work with you on an individual basis to point out everywhere you're wrong, and help you learn the truth, which is pretty nice I think. I'm usually pretty civil. Call me full of shit though, and I reserve the right to tell you to "fuck off back to your hole you worthless Iron Age sack of shit". I'm looking at you arikus. Don't like what I say? Just try to prove me wrong.

I'm sorry for icking up your thread PV, you know I <3 you :3 but I think you know better than a whole bunch of these guys how people have allergic reactions to the truth.

 

Well, I guess she proved us wrong.

 

So tell me Redzera, what evidence exists that there isn't God?

Theist or deist? God or god? Cause disproving Judo-Christian God's existence is my favorite hobby. 

 

We did have an awful fight about in January. 

 

Sure, go ahead!

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Your logic is faulty.  You can say cats don't exist.  I say they do, and I can prove it.  The onus is still on the positive assertion.

[Manoka]

Your logic is faulty.  You can say cats don't exist.  I say they do, and I can prove it.  The onus is still on the positive assertion.

 

Aliens.

 

You could plug in any theoretical thing and it doesn't matter; how do you know cats aren't really aliens masquerading as cats to try to trick us and get close to us, while getting us to let our guard down?!

 

 

You don't.

 

And you can't prove I'm wrong, either.

 

 

That's just a fact of life you have to deal with.

 

I guess the simplest explanation is this; the universe is unbiased and impartial.

 

 

There are no inbetweens; either cats exist, or they don't.

 

Human knowledge on the subject is irrelevant to the truth and thus, the question of, does something exist or nor exist does not require evidence at all, since it exists regardless of the feeble human attempt to grasp the mere existence of such an entity.

 

 

But, the question I asked was specifically for evidence.

 

Since I have no belief, of a Not God, or for a God, I don't really have an assumption one way or the other.

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:34 PM.

[Alyster]

Sure, go ahead!

So lets see what do we have in support of Judo-Christian God?

a) The Bible.

First of all lets start with the fact that it's written by men. I hope we can establish that. Then lets go on with the fact that there are controversies between different gospels. And we'll finish with the fact that numerous gospels were left out of the Bible. And ofcourse the selection was made by men again.

b) The miracles.

Virgin birth you say?

First of all I'd call Mary a lier and a slut. But that's just me. However even if virgin birth happened, it doesn't make Jesus a son of God. It's impossible to make such a logical connection. We can make virgins pop out babies as much as we want nowadays.

Resurrection?

It was witnessed by women. No offense to ladies here, but at the time women were less educated than men, believing in all sorts of superstition. They're not the most reliable source. Moreover one of the gospels says that many graves in Jerusalem opened and the people who had died walked among the living. That doesn't make Jesus' resurrection anything special, it's merely a zombie apocalypse.

These are one of the most classical arguments in favor of God and their classical counters. But look at the thing logically. Humanity is roughly 200 000 years old or more. For 200 000 years your God just watched how we were savages. Then he sent his son/himself down to Earth 2000 years ago to set things straight. What took him so long? Moreover he sent his son/himself to Israel - among low educated desert tribes. While we had more developed and desnly populated places like China and India. Those would have been much more effective places to spread his word. Thus we're lacking logic in Christianity.

Thing is Christianity is a set of rules with lies as their justification; just like all the other religions: Islam, Buddhism, ancient religions. Christianity originates from several places. The idea of after life, the idea of heaven and hell clearly come from Egypt for an example. However some stuff were invented later. The thing called Holy Spirit originates from a munk in 3rd century AD. How did the early Christians manage to believe in anything remotely similar to us if they didn't even have the holy trinity? Or rather how come can one munk say "This just in from God. We now have Holy Spirit".

This is the part where the logic kicks in. It's a set of rules made up by men to control men. For long time the lie was a easy justification why to keep things civil. Now the atheist do have moral high ground - we're more tolerant.

[Manoka]

Sure, go ahead!

So lets see what do we have in support of Judo-Christian God?

a) The Bible.

First of all lets start with the fact that it's written by men. I hope we can establish that. Then lets go on with the fact that there are controversies between different gospels. And we'll finish with the fact that numerous gospels were left out of the Bible. And ofcourse the selection was made by men again.

b) The miracles.

Virgin birth you say?

First of all I'd call Mary a lier and a slut. But that's just me. However even if virgin birth happened, it doesn't make Jesus a son of God. It's impossible to make such a logical connection. We can make virgins pop out babies as much as we want nowadays.

Resurrection?

It was witnessed by women. No offense to ladies here, but at the time women were less educated than men, believing in all sorts of superstition. They're not the most reliable source. Moreover one of the gospels says that many graves in Jerusalem opened and the people who had died walked among the living. That doesn't make Jesus' resurrection anything special, it's merely a zombie apocalypse.

These are one of the most classical arguments in favor of God and their classical counters. But look at the thing logically. Humanity is roughly 200 000 years old or more. For 200 000 years your God just watched how we were savages. Then he sent his son/himself down to Earth 2000 years ago to set things straight. What took him so long? Moreover he sent his son/himself to Israel - among low educated desert tribes. While we had more developed and desnly populated places like China and India. Those would have been much more effective places to spread his word.

Thing is Christianity is a set of rules with lies as their justification; just like all the other religions: Islam, Buddhism, ancient religions. Christianity originates from several places. The idea of after life, the idea of heaven and hell clearly come from Egypt for an example. However some stuff were invented later. The thing called Holy Spirit originates from a munk in 3rd century AD. How did the early Christians manage to believe in anything remotely similar to us if they didn't even have the holy trinity? Or rather how come can one munk say "This just in from God. We now have Holy Spirit".

 

A) There could have been a bible written by God, but it is simply distorted/never was found now.

 

B) There's nothing to suggest it wasn't a miracle, just because there is a possible alternative; for all we know she was impregnated by aliens, so it doesn't really matter if there is an alternative, since having an alternative is not the same as disproving something.

 

 

God being a Dick by human standards does not prove he does not exist. xP

 

So while that's decent conjecture that's hardly proof in it's own right.

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:39 PM.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Once again, your logic is flawed.  If you make the assertion that cats are aliens the onus is on you to prove it.  And extraordinary claims require extraordinary truth.

[Manoka]

Once again, your logic is flawed.  If you make the assertion that cats are aliens the onus is on you to prove it.  And extraordinary claims require extraordinary truth.

 

Based on what?

 

I don't have to prove anything.

 

 

I asked for proof God doesn't exist.

 

All you've done is tell me I need evidence, not you, which doesn't really make any sense.

 

 

It's an extraordinary claim that no God exists, in my mind, so like, pssft, you need the evidence.

 

You're assuming a default that doesn't exist to the constraints of the infinite, which is where we are in terms of potential outcomes without evidence.

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:43 PM.

[Redezra]

Yeah we did. It was depressing.

 

 

Anyway, the best argument for the dis-proof (rather than just "Get me conclusive evidence you lazy bastard") I have is the logical impossibility. Why would an all loving god be so much of a dick? Why would an all knowing god test? Why would an all powerful god be jealous of others? Why does god shift it's point of view so much? Why is it always affirming the beliefs of whoever is invoking it? Why did it's miracles stop with the beginning of properly recorded history? Why has it's power drasticaly fallen the more we know? Does there even need to be a first cause to the universe? Why can it's literary history be drawn to the gods of Babylon and Canaan?

 

Is it simpler to believe that a single god, that has been intentionally misinerpreted for thousands of years, did nothing for millions of years, has decided to weave together a tapestry of its history constructed of said misinterpretations, that is interpreted by your pastor, a literal nobody, in the only correct, verbatim version... or that there was never a god, and this is the latest in the long line of myths of the style of the Greeks, Romans and Egyptians?

 

Is it simpler to believe that a single god made all of this shit up to make you disbelieve (and how incredibly convoluted is all this anyway?), even though he's all knowing and know if you're bad or good anyway, and all good so won't punish you even if you're bad, and all powerful so he doesn't need a test the length of life to do it.... or that there is no god and life is this bad?

 

Occams razor states the simplest answer is often the right one. In this case, the simplest answer is so far less convoluted, and actually makes sense, and is backed up by what we observe, while the non simple one is not. So its logically, and probabilistically impossible for God to exist.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

But again, you don't have to prove a negative.  That's faulty logic.  The onus is on the one making the positive assertio...

 

Eh, never mind.  We're just going round and round.

[Alyster]

A) There could have been a bible written by God, but it is simply distorted/never was found now.

B) There's nothing to suggest it wasn't a miracle, just because there is a possible alternative; for all we know she was impregnated by aliens, so it doesn't really matter if there is an alternative, since having an alternative is not the same as disproving something.


God being a Dick by human standards does not prove he does not exist. xP

So while that's decent conjecture that's hardly proof in it's own right.

 

a) lol sure, did he fax it down here?

b) I said those "miracles" are what Christianity offers as evidence of the existence of God. You admit them in both Apologetic and Nicene creeds. They're not miracles and even if they are miracles, it does not prove that Jesus was a son of God, hence no reason to follow that mad man.

[Manoka]

It's possible that after all of God's really bad interventions he decided to just leave us to our own works, or that he just set everything into motion.

 

Occam'z razor is now your God, then, although Occamz razor is not always right.

 

 

Not to mention "God did it" seems simpler to me. xP

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:46 PM.

[Manoka]

But again, you don't have to prove a negative.  That's faulty logic.  The onus is on the one making the positive assertio...

 

Eh, never mind.  We're just going round and round.

 

Based on what though?

 

Why don't you have to prove a negative?

 

 

If you state something is true without evidence than it's still unproven, and still lacks evidence.

 

So far you have presented no evidence.

 

 

You just keep saying you don't have to.

 

True, no-one does, but that's still not evidence.

 

 

It's hard to prove a negative.

 

But If I had infinite and total knowledge I could prove it, at least to myself.

Edited by Manoka, 08 April 2013 - 09:47 PM.

[Manoka]

A) There could have been a bible written by God, but it is simply distorted/never was found now.

B) There's nothing to suggest it wasn't a miracle, just because there is a possible alternative; for all we know she was impregnated by aliens, so it doesn't really matter if there is an alternative, since having an alternative is not the same as disproving something.


God being a Dick by human standards does not prove he does not exist. xP

So while that's decent conjecture that's hardly proof in it's own right.

 

a) lol sure, did he fax it down here?

b) I said those "miracles" are what Christianity offers as evidence of the existence of God. You admit them in both Apologetic and Nicene creeds. They're not miracles and even if they are miracles, it does not prove that Jesus was a son of God, hence no reason to follow that mad man.

 

Maybe that's not proof for Jesus, but it's not proof that Jesus doesn't exist.

[Redezra]

It's possible that after all of God's really bad interventions he decided to just leave us to our own works, or that he just set everything into motion.

 

Occam'z razor is now your God, then, although Occamz razor is not always right.

 

 

Not to mention "God did it" seems simpler to me. xP

 

 

 

Now either give us at least one instance of God existing that I can't smack down without turning back on my principals (hint, use facts and not conjecture), or admit defeat according to Occam's and Hitchens' Razors and go back to being bloody irrelevant.

[Alyster]

 

A) There could have been a bible written by God, but it is simply distorted/never was found now.

B) There's nothing to suggest it wasn't a miracle, just because there is a possible alternative; for all we know she was impregnated by aliens, so it doesn't really matter if there is an alternative, since having an alternative is not the same as disproving something.


God being a Dick by human standards does not prove he does not exist. xP

So while that's decent conjecture that's hardly proof in it's own right.

 

a) lol sure, did he fax it down here?

b) I said those "miracles" are what Christianity offers as evidence of the existence of God. You admit them in both Apologetic and Nicene creeds. They're not miracles and even if they are miracles, it does not prove that Jesus was a son of God, hence no reason to follow that mad man.

 

Maybe that's not proof for Jesus, but it's not proof that Jesus doesn't exist.

Oh Jesus most probably existed. I'm just arguing there was nothing divine about him. 

 

He was Jesus, but he was not Jesus Christ. 

 

Anyway I'll leave you people to it atm and go to sleep. 

[PrinceVegeta]

Manoka, there is evidence, and I can show you using History(Something most of you have yet to do). Only science I will use is Human Nature because that really is the only thing that is here at the moment that can provide evidence to the evidence.

 

You start with the beginning of the first organized religions. Those we would call Mythology. In those, were the first organized set of ideals saying that:

 

1. God(s) existed.

2. Man was created by the God(s)

3. There is an afterlife

4. There is a heaven, example, Mount Olympus

5. There is a hell, example, Erebus

6. Some God(s) had human offspring, known as Demi-Gods examples, Hercules, Achilles, Odysseus, etc.

 

Now if you trace those ideals all the way up to today's religions, that carry Gods, are they the same? Yes.

 

I'll explain the similarities and since Christianity is the main topic of focus I'll use it.

 

1. They believe in a God.

2. They believe God created mankind

3. They believe in life after death, given to them by God.

4. They believe in a heaven, the home of God.

5. They believe in a hell, where sinners are sent to pay an everlasting visit.

6. One of God's human offspring is Jesus. Whom is the "Son of God"

 

Now you come back to Mythology and ask, how did Mythology come to be. Human Nature answers that. We are creative. We put things where there was once nothing. The unknown scares mankind, but mankind counter-attacks its fear by creating a world within a world that he can understand. It comforts him, and allows him to go about his day with peace of mind.

 

That persisted for a while until another part of mans nature arose. Curiosity. Some Men, overthrew their fear of the unknown and instead pursued it. This lead to a vast amount of knowledge being gained, which also led to the dark ages since, the established order needed dumbed down people in order to attain and keep authority.

 

To me, we are in another period of the dark ages. No real development anywhere, because the established order wishes to keep its power at the expense of technological, cultural, and ethical stalemate. However in this day and age, with the more civilized system, they aren't killing us non-believers, they're just promoting good business at the expense of everyone, even themselves. 

 

I can explain even further if anyone likes.