Prove to me.... (622)
------ This thread is Archived ------
MikeHD: One of my dearest and closest friends is an atheist. I also consider Trish123 a dear friend (even when she is beat my butt in these threads). I can be friends with just about everyone. I love my friends and would give my life for most all of them. But I love my God, and I would not change that for anyone.
I’ve beat your butt also in these threads...I don’t take anything personally and neither should you. Once the computer is shut off, it’s done. Just have fun and enjoy it. The other thing is I know plenty of Christians. My best friend from college (who I’m still in phone contact with) is a Roman Catholic. She studied paleontology with me. The Catholics do not see any interference between their spirituality and evolutionary biology. In fact most religions are not at odds with it. It’s usually only the very fundamentalist Christians who insist on taking it all very literally.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This one is classic...
ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists
------ This thread is Archived ------
That's a common atheist attitude as well.
krimsa: This one is classic...ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists
------ This thread is Archived ------
ARGUMENT FROM CREATION, a.k.a. ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL INCREDULITY (I)
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
------ This thread is Archived ------
krimsa: ARGUMENT FROM CREATION, a.k.a. ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL INCREDULITY (I)
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
OK, how many here goggled the word "INCREDULITY"?
I remember running across this word when I was studying (yes Krimsa studying) Postmodernism. Jean-Francois Lyotard, made INCREDULITY central to his definition of Postmodernism. I think "incredulity towards metanarratives (metanarratives is translated as big stories, or the true explanations of)" is how he describes it. I find the concept of Postmodernism most interesting because it comes to defy both the religious and the scientific at the same time. You cannot define Postmodernism because its very nature is being against any sort of central definition, or authority.
Postmodernism comes to destroy the age of science and reason in much the same way the age of science and reason came to destroy religion. The postmodernist believes scientist have failed us. The world is no better, and even worse in some instances. They say to hell with all the experts and those in authority. They believe we should create our own realities and leave each to his own. By the way, they have no way of defining “evil”.
The next 100 years should be very interesting indeed.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Well, that is all I have tonight.
Have a good night everybody. Hopefully I will see yall tomorrow!
Have a good night everybody. Hopefully I will see yall tomorrow!
------ This thread is Archived ------
krimsa: I’ve beat your butt also in these threads...I don’t take anything personally and neither should you. Once the computer is shut off, it’s done. Just have fun and enjoy it. The other thing is I know plenty of Christians. My best friend from college (who I’m still in phone contact with) is a Roman Catholic. She studied paleontology with me. The Catholics do not see any interference between their spirituality and evolutionary biology. In fact most religions are not at odds with it. It’s usually only the very fundamentalist Christians who insist on taking it all very literally.
wait...
did you say you beat my butt?
OK, you deserve this one...
<--- Krimsa
------ This thread is Archived ------
In response to: OK, how many here goggled the word "INCREDULITY"?
I’ve always thought the word "incredulous" sounds very similar to "incredible" and the meanings are somewhat similar. Simply being in a state of "disbelief." I know biological evolution can seem very unapproachable to people at times. It’s an extremely involved subject matter but it follows a very distinctive pattern. It’s just a matter of getting people to listen attentively and wrap their head around it. You are either interested or you aren’t. If you choose mentally to shut down and reject the basic premise, then there is no point in attempting to explain it because people put blinders on and plug up their ears.
I’m not sure that such an adversarial view of science and reason as the antithesis of spirituality is all that accurate. Organized religion, yes I would agree with you there. But shouldn’t it go? It seems to me that these irreconcilable religious commitments still inspire an appalling amount of human conflict and destruction.
I think that’s generally a large section of the overall Atheist argument against organized religion. I personally refuse to use the term "evil" in any manner outside that of adjective. Actions can be evil, people can have a high propensity to allow or commit evil acts but there is no such thing as evil people. I don’t believe in the concept that someone can be "born evil".
------ This thread is Archived ------
I haven't read all the posts, so apologies if I repeat what someone might have said earlier.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
Shedman01: I see many people posting that they want proof that God exists. Sure this want, desire, demand, of proof that God exists is being manifested in many ways, such as biblical belief etc. But it really seems to boil down simply to many folks seeking proof that God exists.
Perhaps they are trying to change the minds of others, or perhaps they are looking for that proof so they too can believe. Perhaps some others are trying to convince themselves of their own belief whatever it may be. I surely can not guess to the reasons or motivations behind some of the very blatant postings I have seen some individuals post, and my above reflects only some views I have encountered in my many years on the Internet when I have asked people why they want proof of God, etc.
Anyway to the topic of the thread. I thought it might be interesting to flip the table a little on some of the more vocal posters that continue to ask for proof that God does exist or continue to assert that he is a mass delusion, or other some such humanistic imagination,
So here is my thread topic...
Prove to me... God does not exist.
I look forward to a few replies if anyone is willing to offer some proof that God is imaginary or does not exist etc, or perhaps since that may be difficult to do I will allow for a sideline proof as well...
Prove to me... that "omnipresence" is impossible, or in essence does not exist.
Now then because of the title and manner in which I have laid out the thread let us all assume that every posting made to this thread will be directed SOLELY at me, this may help keep folks from arguing among themselves and stick better to the request of the thread, prove to me... me
Perhaps they are trying to change the minds of others, or perhaps they are looking for that proof so they too can believe. Perhaps some others are trying to convince themselves of their own belief whatever it may be. I surely can not guess to the reasons or motivations behind some of the very blatant postings I have seen some individuals post, and my above reflects only some views I have encountered in my many years on the Internet when I have asked people why they want proof of God, etc.
Anyway to the topic of the thread. I thought it might be interesting to flip the table a little on some of the more vocal posters that continue to ask for proof that God does exist or continue to assert that he is a mass delusion, or other some such humanistic imagination,
So here is my thread topic...
Prove to me... God does not exist.
I look forward to a few replies if anyone is willing to offer some proof that God is imaginary or does not exist etc, or perhaps since that may be difficult to do I will allow for a sideline proof as well...
Prove to me... that "omnipresence" is impossible, or in essence does not exist.
Now then because of the title and manner in which I have laid out the thread let us all assume that every posting made to this thread will be directed SOLELY at me, this may help keep folks from arguing among themselves and stick better to the request of the thread, prove to me... me
------ This thread is Archived ------
MikeHD: wait...did you say you beat my butt? OK, you deserve this one... <--- Krimsa
Yeah, on the PH quote dealy...tee hee. Let's not re-hash that on this thread though.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Scubadiva: I haven't read all the posts, so apologies if I repeat what someone might have said earlier.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
Proof that god doesn't exist?
Guess what: You can't prove a negative.
The burden of proof always rests with the one making the positive assertion.
Logic 101.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Shedman01: Thanks for sharing that thought!
One evidence I have seen used against this evidence for a supreme being comes to my mind, and that is one that is also used to support the existence of infinity, that evidence is water.
I do not mention the following to argue your point made, I truly don't, I very much respect that you hold that evidence as your base and can easily agree with the premise of it.
The unchanging molecular composition of water more specifically. No matter what is done to it in any known natural way its basic structure/composition remains unchanged, perfectly stable, hence it remains the exact same molecule of water it has 'always' been.
This offers an evidence that more then one thing is capable of existing in such a way as to remain perfectly stable which is what is required by modern understandings to support the possibility of having always existed in a singular form and also the possibility of remaining in a singular form of existence eternally.
I merely used your point to offer the above as one more example of evidence to support the none-supremacy of the defined God being used in the thread thus far, which becomes an evidence of proving the non-existence of an entity, God, with that same definition.
Thank you very much for the posting and time given to make it, I very much appreciate it! me
One evidence I have seen used against this evidence for a supreme being comes to my mind, and that is one that is also used to support the existence of infinity, that evidence is water.
I do not mention the following to argue your point made, I truly don't, I very much respect that you hold that evidence as your base and can easily agree with the premise of it.
The unchanging molecular composition of water more specifically. No matter what is done to it in any known natural way its basic structure/composition remains unchanged, perfectly stable, hence it remains the exact same molecule of water it has 'always' been.
This offers an evidence that more then one thing is capable of existing in such a way as to remain perfectly stable which is what is required by modern understandings to support the possibility of having always existed in a singular form and also the possibility of remaining in a singular form of existence eternally.
I merely used your point to offer the above as one more example of evidence to support the none-supremacy of the defined God being used in the thread thus far, which becomes an evidence of proving the non-existence of an entity, God, with that same definition.
Thank you very much for the posting and time given to make it, I very much appreciate it! me
Hey dude!
Not to worry. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. Not sure I BELIEVE in a god as such. Makes for an interesting discussion, tho, as long as the heat stays out; know what I mean?? As for your evidence/point above. Makes sense ----except----where did the water molecule come from??? Are you saying it was ALWAYS there?? That there is no beginning?? No end?? Seems to me everything has an initiation and a termination. So how did the water molecule form if there was nothing there to begin with??
------ This thread is Archived ------
bollywood: The Biblical concept of God is just the transalation for Humankind . God does exist I believe is is not sitting somewhere out there watching our doing .(He or she or ..whatever ) is the intelligence that makes this whole infinte universe work .God is the system not a person .If you study quantum physics you see there is an amazing set of coorinates that work seamlessly to make this universe work .its just not coincendence .its intelligence . You see a DNA its just not a patter of genetice material ..its a language and no language can come out without intellingence . GOD is a big Organism huge and infinte that is our universe .
We usually disagree Bolly on the political forums, but I truly admire you here and find this posting of yours the best so far and very scientific as an explanation for the proof of explaining God's existence. A terrific contribution here to the forum and not condescending whatsoever in my opinion. You made some really great points there.
Can anyone disprove this?
------ This thread is Archived ------
crotalus_p: no1 Because you are asking people to prove a negative , no2 all atheists that are reasonably intelligent will tell you that technically they are agnostic when it comes to a god no3 now if you want people to disprove different a particular god you will have to name which one you are talking about
You are flustered, you need to take time out and do some thinking about things. What ever sin is bothering you God will forgive you. All you have to do is ask. Learn more about the feel of having God in your heart, you may like it.------ This thread is Archived ------
NeWildflower: To answer your question, of course not.
To the rest of your post...
Okay, I'll tell you why I believe.
I went through a long period of questioning when I was a young mother. I've addressed this before, so I won't go into a lot of detail about that... but just know, that I wasn't a believer. None of it made sense to me.
During my quest for truth, my baby who is now 22, but was only 2 years old at the time sat on my lap one morning and said to me, "Momma, I know why babies can't talk." I said, "You do? So, tell me then, why can't they talk" And he told me:
"Cause they would tell you where they live before they were borned, and they would tell you 'bout the big daddy on the mountain flowers that watches us play. And nobody can't go there til it their turn."
Interpret that as you wish...
But for me, it helped me find my answers rather quickly...
That's also why I'm not a "Christian" in the traditional sense. It opened my mind to new ideas and possibilities about life and the spirit world, and kick started a whole new journey for me!
Does that help?
To the rest of your post...
Okay, I'll tell you why I believe.
I went through a long period of questioning when I was a young mother. I've addressed this before, so I won't go into a lot of detail about that... but just know, that I wasn't a believer. None of it made sense to me.
During my quest for truth, my baby who is now 22, but was only 2 years old at the time sat on my lap one morning and said to me, "Momma, I know why babies can't talk." I said, "You do? So, tell me then, why can't they talk" And he told me:
"Cause they would tell you where they live before they were borned, and they would tell you 'bout the big daddy on the mountain flowers that watches us play. And nobody can't go there til it their turn."
Interpret that as you wish...
But for me, it helped me find my answers rather quickly...
That's also why I'm not a "Christian" in the traditional sense. It opened my mind to new ideas and possibilities about life and the spirit world, and kick started a whole new journey for me!
Does that help?
Out of the mouth of babes...WOW!! Now that child has got some natural information about another dimension that we can only imagine exists. FANTASTIC KID I might say and you were so blessed to hear it from a child.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sorry Krimsa, guess I'm not the only one you have an attitude problem with. You seem to think that every forum is a debate. The OP specifically did not want this as a debate. Instead of contributing a simple proof of God's non existence as the OP originally asked, you wish to turn it into a debate and then you get condescending to posters who don't agree with you. You are the omnipotent god of all the naysayer forum writers?
Shedman's question was very simple and direct. He has asked it 7x already and I'm not even all the way through the forum. Bollywood had a very good scientific proof of what he thought God was although that wasn't an answer to the OP's original question. And NeWildflower has told you about the experience of her 2 yr old whom she hadn't even taught anything about God so that was a totally unbiased answer out of the mouth of a little child. So since Bollywod stated what he felt God was scientifically and NeWildflower told you what a little child spoke of, now let's hear from you what is your proof of the non-existence of God scientifically? You do claim to be scientific, don't you?
Quit spending so much time on telling us how you don't have to answer to prove that God doesn't exist because no one told you that it does exist. These posters have explained the existence...but I'll bet you can't explain a scientific reason for non existence.
Shedman's question was very simple and direct. He has asked it 7x already and I'm not even all the way through the forum. Bollywood had a very good scientific proof of what he thought God was although that wasn't an answer to the OP's original question. And NeWildflower has told you about the experience of her 2 yr old whom she hadn't even taught anything about God so that was a totally unbiased answer out of the mouth of a little child. So since Bollywod stated what he felt God was scientifically and NeWildflower told you what a little child spoke of, now let's hear from you what is your proof of the non-existence of God scientifically? You do claim to be scientific, don't you?
Quit spending so much time on telling us how you don't have to answer to prove that God doesn't exist because no one told you that it does exist. These posters have explained the existence...but I'll bet you can't explain a scientific reason for non existence.
------ This thread is Archived ------
StressFree: I think I just said that in the post you quoted me bollywood. I mentioned that our energy-souls(Atman)transmigrate-transit after our physical deaths. I hold almost the same beliefs of nature and cycles of Karma. I don't like to use the term God. I do believe that there may be a source, and our bodies have the force that comes from the source...or God if you will.
Interesting though, I believe the concept of Karma will be scientifially proven...if quantum/string scientists can hurry up We are not solid you know, but molecules dancing to a vibrational frequency on this plane of existence.
Interesting though, I believe the concept of Karma will be scientifially proven...if quantum/string scientists can hurry up We are not solid you know, but molecules dancing to a vibrational frequency on this plane of existence.
You are absolutly right . We are not solid we are a form of energy .so condensed.vibrating in this infinte world .If you keep deviding a solid matter it go infinitly down .there exist an infinity in all of us the distance within our structure is infinite as well . The engery which makes us tick as of now is out of bound of our insturments as all these instrumets are designed with the limitation of our physical senses. so seeking proof of "God" with our physical sense is like looking at a wall and say nothing exist beyond that.I am sure Physics not religion is the way to God. and Physics in my Gita for that matter my Bibile
------ This thread is Archived ------
In response to: Sorry Krimsa, guess I'm not the only one you have an attitude problem with.
He was told that you can not request that a negative assertion be supported with evidence. If you scroll back through (if you aren’t too lazy to look) probably this point was brought up over 30 times.
In response to: Instead of contributing a simple proof of God's non existence as the OP originally asked,
Please see above statement.
In response to: You are the omnipotent god of all the naysayer forum writers?
I deliberately pointed out that the burden of proof will always fall upon the person making the positive assertion. I.e. if I accuse you of being a murderer, the burden of proof would fall upon me to substantiate that accusation with credible evidence. Otherwise you would be sent to prison based on my claim alone.
In response to: Bollywood had a very good scientific proof of what he thought God was although that wasn't an answer to the OP's
So are you merely creating this post in order to needle me into taking on Bollywood? He actually followed the parameters of proper debate. He attempted to substantiate a positive assertion. Do you understand the difference between a positive and a negative assertion? If I tell you that there is a monster under my bed and you look and you don’t see one, I can not then tell you that the fact that you cant prove that the monster doesnt exist, substantiates my claim that one is hiding there.
In response to: Quit spending so much time on telling us
Who is US? Sounds like you. Or are you afraid to stand alone?
In response to: how you don't have to answer to prove that God doesn't exist
I do not have to substantiate a negative premise. You have to prove that god exists.
In response to: These posters have explained the existence
The posters have given their OWN individual interpretations of god. They have not substantiated his existence. What that is referred to is a positive assertion. You are stating that "god exists and this is why I have reached that conclusion." Now that you have stated a positive, the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your claim. You can not then go to the Atheists and ask them to prove that god DOESNT exist.
In response to: but I'll bet you can't explain a scientific reason for non existence.
Oh but I can explain the argumentum ad ignorantiam.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Too many fake profiles here ...
It's been a long time....
a question
Blast From The Past
Isis
Your Mental Health
How To Secure Your Gate
"Emotions at the Crossroads"
Note
Wondering
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
There are only a handful of people who have actually designated themselves as atheists on their profiles and who actually post on forum and are outspoken. I would classify at least three. You can’t necessarily count me in that group. I don’t do the label things that well. I avoid all that crap in profiles. I am CONSTANTLY reffered to as an Atheist however which is interesting.
One of my dearest and closest friends is an atheist. I also consider Trish123 a dear friend (even when she is beat my butt in these threads). I can be friends with just about everyone. I love my friends and would give my life for most all of them. But I love my God, and I would not change that for anyone.