Facebook Twitter MySpace YouTube



Forum Search   Advanced Search
August 22, 2017, 04:41:25 PM
Welcome, Guest.
Please login above or register.
News: OIAM!
   
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
   
Author Topic: Evidence for God  (Read 2056 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
MOE SYZLAK
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 88
Posts: 1746
"I never got to taste cantaloupe"
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #30 on: August 12, 2017, 06:28:08 PM »

I can suck my own dick. Therefore, God exists.
Like just the tip? Or all the way down?
Logged
Francis Xavier
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 7
Posts: 746


Ignore
« Reply #31 on: August 12, 2017, 06:52:59 PM »

Based God, Switch God, Lemmy is God
Logged
Simon Woodstock
Full Member
***
Rep: -23
Posts: 175
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #32 on: August 12, 2017, 08:01:03 PM »

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?


In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.
Logged
snickers
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 85
Posts: 1726
light as a feather, stiff as a board


Ignore
« Reply #33 on: August 12, 2017, 08:12:32 PM »

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?


In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.

fuck off
Logged
Sorry if I'm depressing snickers/ice nine/whoever.  We can't all be tatted up, broad-slaying, OC, cool guys.
Simon Woodstock
Full Member
***
Rep: -23
Posts: 175
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #34 on: August 12, 2017, 08:18:01 PM »

guess computers have souls and also prove the existence of god

disabled comments because that guys a pussy

Computers are programmed, which proves they have a programer.  This has illustrative purposes in that just as the complex information in computers has been programmed, so has the complex DNA in biological life been programmed by an intelligent programmer.

Also, minds (such as in humans) would necessarily come to be (that is, have been caused to exist) by an uncaused Mind, that is God.
Logged
Simon Woodstock
Full Member
***
Rep: -23
Posts: 175
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #35 on: August 12, 2017, 08:20:39 PM »

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?



hume covered that in dialogs concerning natural religion

David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion - Summary and Analysis


Time permitting, I would be open to dialoging about Hume. If you present a specific reference (as to provide a particular context of discussion) I would be up for it.
Logged
Simon Woodstock
Full Member
***
Rep: -23
Posts: 175
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #36 on: August 12, 2017, 08:23:03 PM »

I don't think you could make any assumptions about the morality of multiple gods who may be in conflict with each other. That video only addresses my last question and only from a monotheistic standpoint, which is exactly the hang-up I was talking about.

Understandable, but Monotheism would have to be refuted then. There are sufficient arguments for Monotheism. Causality, design, moral argument, etc. they are a cumulative case.
Logged
Simon Woodstock
Full Member
***
Rep: -23
Posts: 175
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #37 on: August 12, 2017, 08:25:59 PM »

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.

Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.
Logged
snickers
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 85
Posts: 1726
light as a feather, stiff as a board


Ignore
« Reply #38 on: August 12, 2017, 08:27:46 PM »

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.
Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.
fuck off.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2017, 08:46:14 PM by snickers » Logged
Sorry if I'm depressing snickers/ice nine/whoever.  We can't all be tatted up, broad-slaying, OC, cool guys.
doublesteveburger
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 285
Posts: 3253


Ignore
« Reply #39 on: August 12, 2017, 08:35:31 PM »

God damnit, Simon. Go away.
Logged
Everything I've ever done has been on drugs
Gorgeous
Newbie
*
Rep: -1
Posts: 19


Ignore
« Reply #40 on: August 12, 2017, 09:02:40 PM »

Dear religious people who want to argue,

You believe that a creator exists because the universe is too complex to have just happened by itself. Your creator must then be more complex than the universe, or at the very least no less complex, but you believe this creator just happened/always existed. So, by your own reasoning it makes more sense to believe the universe came into existence by itself or always existed.
The whole creationism idea is actually circular and false logic.

Game, set and match.
fuck off
Not so fast, I don't believe God is a complex being. He is simple (in the sense of not consisting as parts). This is an important aspect of the debate. A lot of atheists assume that theists hold that God is an eternal bundle of parts. I myself would argue against a complex God.

Hahahaha so how is he an intelligent designer then???  How does he do anything you religious nutjobs think he does? Your argument makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Look, if you believe that things must have been created, it doesn't matter what the creator is, if the creator exists then he must have been created as well. It is simpler to believe that the universe just happened (or just is) than God AND the universe.
Logged
snickers
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 85
Posts: 1726
light as a feather, stiff as a board


Ignore
« Reply #41 on: August 12, 2017, 09:09:51 PM »

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?



hume covered that in dialogs concerning natural religion

David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion - Summary and Analysis


Time permitting, I would be open to dialoging about Hume. If you present a specific reference (as to provide a particular context of discussion) I would be up for it.

fuck off.
Logged
Sorry if I'm depressing snickers/ice nine/whoever.  We can't all be tatted up, broad-slaying, OC, cool guys.
Pigeon
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 30
Posts: 623
Fred Gall slammed for my sins.


Ignore
« Reply #42 on: August 12, 2017, 09:41:31 PM »

I can suck my own dick. Therefore, God exists.
Like just the tip? Or all the way down?
I actually can't. If there was a god, I would be able to, though.
Logged
My balls itch.
Gay Imp Sausage Metal
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: -359
Posts: 6319
We're just 2 lo(b)s(t)ers sitting behind a screen


Ignore
« Reply #43 on: August 12, 2017, 10:12:53 PM »

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well Cheesy
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?
Logged
#lynchspencerhamilton #-65gforRyfe #GoldfishLiberationFront #teamdogdrugs

#WordAroundTown #LobstersWhatIHit #DieLying #numbersoffendme #RIPSilas1s
SodaJerk
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 402
Posts: 5580
Butterscotch yo!


Ignore
« Reply #44 on: August 13, 2017, 04:26:57 AM »

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well Cheesy
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?

Religious and a vegan?! You can hear the sound of panties dropping all over the world for this guy.
Logged

1. AVE - the way he skates is incredible. Its as if youre more afraid for the obstacle than for him.
Sleazy
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 283
Posts: 16038
tiger style


Ignore
« Reply #45 on: August 13, 2017, 07:58:53 AM »

for fucks sake, stop trying to prove faith based beliefs. the whole point is that you have faith and don't have to burden yourself with logic and rational thought.
Logged
grimcity
Administrator
SLAP Pal
*****
Rep: 2040
Posts: 11004


« Reply #46 on: August 13, 2017, 08:05:48 AM »

questions from an agnostic bored to death by obnoxious atheism and obnoxious monotheism:

if one god can bring itself into existence/have always existed, what precludes that possibility for a 2nd 3rd or 4th god, (etc.)?
couldn't an infinite number of gods have come up into existence at the same moment?
using the argument from the first video, why does each mind have to be made in the image of the same god? couldn't each mind be an image of a different god? couldn't parts of minds come from different sources?

why do people do people involved in organized religion make assumptions about things they know they cannot possibly comprehend?


In my understanding, as far as the multiple gods question goes, it has to do with the characteristics of of God not being caused and God's attribute of infinity. That is, an uncaused, infinite cause, cannot cause another uncaused, infinite cause, because by the very facts that the caused entity would have a) not always existed, and b) needed to be caused to exist, it would by default be a lesser being than the cause, and thus could not be God (if that makes sense). In other words, as far as my understanding of God goes, such an ultimate being would have to have always existed, and, therefore, a second or third etc. caused being would be less than ultimate, and thus not God.

Also, there are mathematical problems with an actual infinite number of things. While one non-complex being that is infinite is not contradictory, an actual infinite sequence (of individual gods or whatever) is impossible because you cannot add to or subtract from an infinite sequence. If you add two gods to an infinite number of gods, then you still have an infinite number of gods, if you add three gods, same thing.

I would say, following this logic out, the best conclusion is to state that there is one, uncaused God that exists.

Thus, I think the One God conclusion also answers (at least to some extent) your second inquiry about individual minds.

As far as assumptions, I think people in disorganized religion do such things more often.

All you're saying is that "God" cannot be defined.

Having said, we can trace the stories of the Christian god back to cultures that predate Christianity by thousands of years, from the Epic of Gilgamesh to the story of Odin. Not to say it's faith-based plagiarism, but when ancient civilizations didn't understand things they imposed supernatural attributes to things they couldn't explain (much like the video about consciousness you posted at the beginning of this thread). Your own religion was modified greatly by Constantine based off of the beliefs of ancient pagan Saxons, not to mention the selective use of what was and what wasn't included in the scriptures you read via smashing together the Tanakh and certain 1st century pieces rewritten by the Greeks, as well as additional insertions/omissions by the Catholic church.

While that may or may not fall on deaf ears, if it gives you comfort, by all means roll with it... but it's no more valid than any other mono/polytheistic religion out there.

I'd also like to add that higher maths have absolutely no issue with the concepts of infinity, whether you're talking about it on a grand scale or infinite decimals in between whole numbers.

Also, while your comment about adding to an infinite sequence still equals infinity is correct, you're still adding to it, but the total is infinity (∞), not one (1). I can easily add odd numbers to a sequence of infinite even numbers in a sequence.



 
Logged
grimcity
Administrator
SLAP Pal
*****
Rep: 2040
Posts: 11004


« Reply #47 on: August 13, 2017, 08:20:09 AM »

...I'm also really curious about your definition of consciousness. Self awareness? Situational awareness?

I mean, even the simplest photoreceptive cells are aware of light sources, and there are plenty of critters that have demonstrated self awareness. What are you referring to when you use the word?
Logged
fulltechnicalskizzy
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 445
Posts: 1405


Ignore
« Reply #48 on: August 13, 2017, 08:30:54 AM »

Life, uh, finds a way.
Logged
Pigeon
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 30
Posts: 623
Fred Gall slammed for my sins.


Ignore
« Reply #49 on: August 13, 2017, 10:25:38 AM »

Life, uh, finds a way.
Like...yeah, bro.
Logged
My balls itch.
the snake
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 278
Posts: 2154


Ignore
« Reply #50 on: August 13, 2017, 10:39:10 AM »

flat earth, what else ?
Logged
Pigeon
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 30
Posts: 623
Fred Gall slammed for my sins.


Ignore
« Reply #51 on: August 13, 2017, 10:42:48 AM »

http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-religious-adviser-says-god-has-given-president-authority-take-north-648974
Logged
My balls itch.
CRAILFISH TO REVERT
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 300
Posts: 1207


Ignore
« Reply #52 on: August 13, 2017, 12:03:22 PM »

guess computers have souls and also prove the existence of god

disabled comments because that guys a pussy

Computers are programmed, which proves they have a programer.  This has illustrative purposes in that just as the complex information in computers has been programmed, so has the complex DNA in biological life been programmed by an intelligent programmer.

Also, minds (such as in humans) would necessarily come to be (that is, have been caused to exist) by an uncaused Mind, that is God.

By your own logic, why don't you just believe that the whole universe (that is everything you believe to exist) isn't just a complex simulation/program? Wouldn't that make more logical sense than some fairy tale/santa claus shit?
Logged
Level 60 Dwarf Paladin
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: -29
Posts: 1865


Ignore
« Reply #53 on: August 13, 2017, 12:10:52 PM »


Logged
you never know about pre-cum 
straight
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 149
Posts: 819


Ignore
« Reply #54 on: August 13, 2017, 12:28:05 PM »

for fucks sake, stop trying to prove faith based beliefs. the whole point is that you have faith and don't have to burden yourself with logic and rational thought.

this is great
Logged
Gay Imp Sausage Metal
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: -359
Posts: 6319
We're just 2 lo(b)s(t)ers sitting behind a screen


Ignore
« Reply #55 on: August 13, 2017, 08:59:13 PM »

you're honestly going to try and convince slap that god exists? I think you and user: qew0 would get on well Cheesy
how's your veganism going by the way Simon?

Religious and a vegan?! You can hear the sound of panties dropping all over the world for this guy.
Shhhh, I'm trying to trap him Wink
Logged
#lynchspencerhamilton #-65gforRyfe #GoldfishLiberationFront #teamdogdrugs

#WordAroundTown #LobstersWhatIHit #DieLying #numbersoffendme #RIPSilas1s
ChuckRamone
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 40
Posts: 1309


Ignore
« Reply #56 on: August 13, 2017, 09:16:26 PM »

"Proving" that god exists with philosophical proofs always struck me as funny. "Look, I proved god exists with these mental acrobatics." Some people reading that shit might get mesmerized by the big words, logic, and articulate writing but how is that evidence for anything? It's like proving the existence of bigfoot with a long philosophical treatise and saying, "See, I told you so." But that's how religious people function. They convert weak-minded and cowardly people with the threat of hell, and they convert intellectually challenged people with big words that "prove" god is real, basically by confusing the fuck out of them and convincing them with smart-sounding verbosity.
Logged
SodaJerk
SLAP Pal
******
Rep: 402
Posts: 5580
Butterscotch yo!


Ignore
« Reply #57 on: August 13, 2017, 09:18:23 PM »

Logged

1. AVE - the way he skates is incredible. Its as if youre more afraid for the obstacle than for him.
Pigeon
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 30
Posts: 623
Fred Gall slammed for my sins.


Ignore
« Reply #58 on: August 13, 2017, 09:31:32 PM »

In 4th grade, some kid found a potato chip that kind of looked like Jesus, so I ate it. Sorry for eating the only evidence of God.
Logged
My balls itch.
Francis Xavier
Hero Member
*****
Rep: 7
Posts: 746


Ignore
« Reply #59 on: August 14, 2017, 11:49:59 AM »

https://youtu.be/Y_HOYk9ED9Q
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
   
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!