NationStates Jolt Archive

Go on humor me.

What part of "proof denies faith" don't you get?

Prove to me how the Laws of Physics were made.

If you do that, I'll prove how God exists.

Prove that God doesn't exist.

It's a moot question either way and you know it.

What part of "proof denies faith" don't you get?

Don't answer. He's trying to destroy god.

Before I can prove that God does exist, you also have to prove he doesn't exist. Otherwise, you're no more right than I would be.

I can prove mathematically that God exists/doesn't exist, if you like. The answer depends on one thing.

The universe is constantly expanding. Does that make it finite or infinite in size?

The universe is constantly expanding. Does that make it finite or infinite in size?

Yes...

I can prove mathematically that God exists/doesn't exist, if you like. The answer depends on one thing.

The universe is constantly expanding. Does that make it finite or infinite in size?

Depends how you measure it.

Go on humor me.Your lack of content is disturbing. There are, and have been, plenty of threads in here on this subject that contain lively debate. This does not appear to be one of them, largely because it appears that you have no interest and are posting just to do so. Or announce that you're an atheist. Congratulations.

Seriously... let's try to have at least a little substance.

Your lack of content is disturbing. There are, and have been, plenty of threads in here on this subject that contain lively debate. This does not appear to be one of them, largely because it appears that you have no interest and are posting just to do so. Or announce that you're an atheist. Congratulations.

Seriously... let's try to have at least a little substance.

Exactly. A gratuitous thread. Snooze...

I can prove that logically an omni-potent god cannot exist:

"Can god microwave a burrito so hot that he cannot eat it?"

But last time I said this, the answer was simply that we small humans with our small human brains can't understand.

So I concur...there is no point to this debate either way.

Go on humor me.


Best describes the post) ----------------------------->
http://www.angelfire.com/md3/strongfist1/cgp/Troll.jpg

(Trolling for the slower people ;) )

Anyways had this topic not been sooooo over done perhaps it would have been intresting but by starting the very thread with the comment "Humour me" you've trashed it from the very beggining and done nothing more than attempted to do nothing more than start a flame war..... ( An no to answer your question I'm not a Christian Zealot or Atheistic Bible burner to put any of those thougts to rest I simply find these flame wars immature especially considering they have nothing to do with philosophy or theology they are usually made up of little children playing with big ideas......and yes I am intrested in this subject usually as an agnostic but that's an entrily diffrent thread on its own):headbang:

I am god, prove me wrong

Before I can prove that God does exist, you also have to prove he doesn't exist. Otherwise, you're no more right than I would be.
That settles it. Both questions are impossible to answer. The end.

What part of "proof denies faith" don't you get?

What's so important about faith? If you know for a fact he exists, do you love him any less? A God that gives us a rational mind and expects us to just believe something blindly is clearly an idiot.

"Can god microwave a burrito so hot that he cannot eat it?"
There is no answer. The only one who can answer this is God, and unless he rends a hole in the sky and presents this burrito or says "No can do.", I'm afraid we'll never know. Being an omnipotent being, he's the only one who'll ever know.

Go on humor me.

You sir, are an idiot. Don't ever post anything like this again.:headbang:

There is no answer. The only one who can answer this is God, and unless he rends a hole in the sky and presents this burrito or says "No can do.", I'm afraid we'll never know. Being an omnipotent being, he's the only one who'll ever know.
See, and so you present the best case for why these discussions are useless.

If you argue that our logic and reason is not sufficient to perceive reality, then there is no point. We have nothing else, so why even try?

See, and so you present the best case for why these discussions are useless.

If you argue that our logic and reason is not sufficient to perceive reality, then there is no point. We have nothing else, so why even try?
Exactly, this question is basically a logical paradox. It's something you'd ask a robot so its head would explode. Sort of like this:

The answer to this question is yes: was everything before the colon mark a lie?

Look:

a) Reality is perception
b) At least one person who believes in God exists

So...

God exists. Can't argue with that logic.

I am god, prove me wrong
*shoots at Luporum* :sniper:

*Luporum collapsed, dead*

Well, looks like I proved him wrong. :D

What part of "proof denies faith" don't you get?
Any of it.

Don't answer. He's trying to destroy god.
...Can't be done, for the agnostic theist.

*shoots at Luporum* :sniper:

*Luporum collapsed, dead*

Well, looks like I proved him wrong. :D

I'm omnipotent and forever, not invincible dammit! *cries before dieing*

I can prove mathematically that God exists/doesn't exist, if you like. The answer depends on one thing.

The universe is constantly expanding. Does that make it finite or infinite in size?
Unknowable in size. Thanks for playing.

Exactly, this question is basically a logical paradox. It's something you'd ask a robot so its head would explode.
It's something you would ask if you want to know whether something or someone can be all-powerful.
This Burrito is a real, physical thing. Either it can exist or it can't - and in both cases omnipotence cannot exist.

A robot would simply say: "No, no one can make that Burrito", because it would come to the conclusion that omnipotence is the one weak link in this concept. A faulty assumption, so to speak.

It's a proof that logically, according to our senses and realities god is not all-powerful. That is not to say god doesn't exist, it merely suggests that there are boundaries to what this god can do.

And if you say this is not true, you basically say that our logic and reason is not sufficient to perceive the reality of an omnipotent god - thus declaring us not fit to find out the truth.
Which is fair enough but makes any discussion pointless.

Sort of like this:
The answer to this question is yes: was everything before the colon mark a lie?
This however is an abstract. It's of no relevance to this case, but it is a paradox, so much is clear.

I am god, prove me wrong
I don't know you.

D'uh.

This Burrito is a real, physical thing. Either it can exist or it can't...
And that means, existence in the physical world, in nature.

And that means, existence in the physical world, in nature.
Well yes...a Burrito that takes up a bit of the space-time continuum and that is so hot that god cannot eat it.

Look:

a) Reality is perception
b) At least one person who believes in God exists

So...

God exists. Can't argue with that logic.

Me with gun: I'm going to kill you.
Guy believes in god: I'm not going to die!
Me: How?
Him: Beause god is going to protect me, he's inside me right now. So therefore, I can't die.
Me: Okay. *shoots him*
Him: Oh god! *Collapsed*
Me: *Checking if he's dead*
Him: *dead*

Yeah sure, god DO exist. :rolleyes:

I can prove that logically an omni-potent god cannot exist:

"Can god microwave a burrito so hot that he cannot eat it?"

But last time I said this, the answer was simply that we small humans with our small human brains can't understand.

So I concur...there is no point to this debate either way.

Mind if I give another answer? God may have infinite power, but it doesn't mean He will do everything with it, otherwise He would be able to violate His own nature. For instance, God can NOT do something evil, He can NOT stop knowing everything, He can NOT stop being infinitly good, just, loving, etc. etc.. If He could violate His own nature, then He could not be infinitly perfect, which means His infinite power would corrupt Him, and then he might explode, and then everything goes downhill.

Go on humor me.
It's been pretty well established that "god" and "humanity" are a pretty poor compliment of company .... they can't stand being in the same paradigm at the same time.
Or shouldn't.

Mind if I give another answer? God may have infinite power, but it doesn't mean He will do everything with it, otherwise He would be able to violate His own nature. For instance, God can NOT do something evil, He can NOT stop knowing everything, He can NOT stop being infinitly good, just, loving, etc. etc.. If He could violate His own nature, then He could not be infinitly perfect, which means His infinite power would corrupt Him, and then he might explode, and then everything goes downhill.

Buddhist guy: Hey, where did half of us go?
Jewish guy: I dunno, all I know is Bethleham and half of Jerusalem disappeared.
Muslim guy: Yeah and most of the North American population mysteriously disappeared too, looks like no jihad for me. Btw, where's that Christian guy?

Photographic evidence of Gods existence may be found
here. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391792):D

Photographic evidence of Gods existence may be found
here. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391792):D

That doesn't look like Chuck Norris...

Look:

a) Reality is perception
b) At least one person who believes in God exists

So...

God exists. Can't argue with that logic.

Or how about;
Look:

a) Reality is perception
b) At least one person who DISbelieves in God exists

So...

God DOES NOT exist. Can't argue with that logic?

OR even better;

Look:

a) Reality is perception
b) At least one person who believes that REALITY IS NOT PERCEPTION exsists

So...
REALITY IS NOT PERCEPTION. Can't argue with that logic?

Before I can prove that God does exist, you also have to prove he doesn't exist. Otherwise, you're no more right than I would be.

No proving of negatives please - burden of proof is in principle on the theist.
However, as the words "believe" and "faith" already indicate there is no evidence. Asking for it is therefor rather moot: if they had evidence theists would not have to have faith in his existence - they would simply know.

I can shove 53, yes 53, Gummi bears in my mouth at once.

That alone proves God.

Go on humor me.
No one has to prove anything to you. You are unable to present a case to EXCLUDE God from existance. If you were to, say, write more than four words and make an argument based soley in logic (which pretty much any statement about God isn't), then you might have a case.

Since you do not, no action is necessary on the parts of believers.

You sir, are an idiot. Don't ever post anything like this again.:headbang:
That is, indeed, humouring him.

:)

Me with gun: I'm going to kill you.
Guy believes in god: I'm not going to die!
Me: How?
Him: Beause god is going to protect me, he's inside me right now. So therefore, I can't die.
Me: Okay. *shoots him*
Him: Oh god! *Collapsed*
Me: *Checking if he's dead*
Him: *dead*

Yeah sure, god DO exist. :rolleyes:
And how do you know he doesn't? :)

No proving of negatives please - burden of proof is in principle on the theist.
However, as the words "believe" and "faith" already indicate there is no evidence. Asking for it is therefor rather moot: if they had evidence theists would not have to have faith in his existence - they would simply know.
Well, this is entirely a semantical point, but "faith" is knowing, of a sort.

The person with faith would not lose their faith by being shown proof; their faith would just be justified.

I can shove 53, yes 53, Gummi bears in my mouth at once.

That alone proves God.
I can't believe no one's already praised God for this miracle.

Prove that God doesn't exist.

It's a moot question either way and you know it.
No; that's the useless question. :)

One question.

Do you believe that god does not exist just because it is physically impossible? If you answer yes than consider this. We know very little of physics. We can't even agree on one string theory. What we know may be relatively large it is still very little. God may be possible and we just haven't discovered or are unable to discover that fact.

I can't believe no one's already praised God for this miracle.
LOL!
*hugs*

One question.

Do you believe that god does not exist just because it is physically impossible? If you answer yes than consider this. We know very little of physics. We can't even agree on one string theory. What we know may be relatively large it is still very little. God may be possible and we just haven't discovered or are unable to discover that fact.
If you consider that "physics" is what we know about physics, then we know a lot!

I cooked Chicken and the juce was clear, the juice was clear....
THE JUICE WAS CLEAR!

If you can't prove your God does exist than we shouldn't have to live by what you claim are his rules.

One question.

Do you believe that god does not exist just because it is physically impossible?
I don't believe god exists because of his followers. Remember this: There are a thousands of different religions, with millions of gods. There are different denominations for many of those. Their stories have change time and time again.
For many of the religions of more "primitive" tribes and so on we have looked at their religions and their explanations for phenomena they couldn't understand. We know the answer, to them it's supernatural. I don't make that difference between those tribesmen and the tribesmen who made up stories in Israel all those years ago.
And there remains the point of the earth being round. The church said "The earth is flat. We know it, you can't prove otherwise". Turned out false.
Same with "Earth is 3000 years old, and people don't come from monkeys."
Today we have "God made the Big Bang happen." We'll see how long that claim lasts.

That adresses why I don't follow any god, ie I'm not religious.

Now, to why I don't believe such a thing exists:

1) I have to assume that my reason and my logic can give me an accurate picture of the world around me. Without that, I would be blind and incapable, and my existence would be questionable.
As I have said before, logically it is not possible for an omnipotent being to exist. Only if its power had limits could it even be imaginable - that eliminates the monotheistic god.

2) I have never in my life seen or heard of anything that would require the existence of some sort of god. Even if I assumed that for some reason a god would not make himself obvious to the people (a silly thing to do really - all this god would get is killing people about whether or not, and how, he exists), then a god would still be superfluous to the way the world works. You don't need a god to explain how things happen. People just superimpose another level because they want to believe in some sort of reason, some sort of "why". But there is nothing really that requires a reason to exist - and if you take that into consideration, the universe is a set of coincidences. And if things had happened differently, for a coincidence didn't occur as it happened to, we'd be different or non-existent. Why do we need a reason for that?

If you answer yes than consider this. We know very little of physics. We can't even agree on one string theory. What we know may be relatively large it is still very little. God may be possible and we just haven't discovered or are unable to discover that fact.
Sure, a god may be possible (but not in the Judaeo-Christian sense)...but why again would I bother believing?
It's not like little kids are born and believe in god. It's something their parents teach them. And as such, I think it probably is wrong.

If you can't prove your God does exist than we shouldn't have to live by what you claim are his rules.
Um, YOU dont' have to live by His rules. You have to live by the rules of your country/state/city/etc. We simply choose to live by His rules.

If you can't prove your God does exist than we shouldn't have to live by what you claim are his rules.
I see no rules.

Unless you mean the whole don't kill people thing and be nice to other people. :)

I cooked Chicken and the juce was clear, the juice was clear....


I'd assume you didn't add broth/spices/both then? ...

I can shove 53, yes 53, Gummi bears in my mouth at once.

That alone proves God.
I can't believe no one's already praised God for this miracle.

Hallelujah!

Or "Allah Akhbar!", if you prefer, Keruvalia.

If you can't prove your God does exist than we shouldn't have to live by what you claim are his rules.
I agree entirely.

I agree entirely.

So do I. But then, I don't think I've ever badgered someone about living by the rules of any of my gods. I don't like it when other people bother me about living by the rules of THEIR god or gods, so why would I do this to someone else?

Society's rules are a completely different matter.

That doesn't look like Chuck Norris...

here, let me fix that:


http://totalworkout.homestead.com/files/chuck2.jpg http://www.universomarcial.com.br/galeriafama/fotos/chuck2.jpg