Does God exist? (10 Viewers)

[jdennis]

Atheist Guide to argumentation:

- Copy paste from an anti-theist website attacking and twisting all religious traditions
- Watch videos from AmazingAtheist and other atheist bloggers and youtubers
- Watch videos on fundamentalist Christians getting rekt by biologists and physcists
- Talk about homosexuality, A LOT
- Never engage with the actual argument
- Mention unicorns, sky fairies and Santa Claus
- Ask various rhetorical questions with no value
- Talk about how there is no evidence for God
- If the theist presents evidence, talk about science and how the argument is 'god of the gaps'
- Talk about how bad slavery was and how bad religion is
- All arguments are begging the question, even when they aren't

Ooh look, the theist is getting a little upset!

If all you can produce is unfounded personal attacks on atheists, I've got no desire to continue talking to you.

 

[seventhroot]

hawkrider post your thoughts

 

[Sy123]

This has already been discussed at length in this thread. Even if the argument holds up, it only provides a case for deism.
You still have all your work ahead of you if you want to believe in a particular god or gods. This, of course, implies that the argument overcomes the problems with it, which it doesn't (and we have already been through this).

Ok? This thread is about proving the existence of God, the Abrahamic faiths is just a Deistic God that provides revelation
I don't claim that the argument is to prove the truth of Islam in one sweep

The argument is in fact very strong, the only way to go against the argument is to become a laughing stock tin-foil hat weirdo and accept that time is in fact an illusion, or that things can come into existence out of nothing

You can also say that the universe is eternal, though you need to refute arguments the beginning of the universe

What evidence is there for a "timeless" God and how does this concept even make any sense?
How can a timeless God create the universe in one instant if such a God exists outside of time?
Why does God seem to escape any logical questioning of his cause, simply because of your assertion that God does not need a cause?
How can you know with such certainty that your argument holds up when we do not even understand truly what occurred when the universe began?

I apply the law of excluded middle, and say, that the cause of the Universe, (which is powerful and immaterial as we already demonstrated) has a Will or it does not have a Will
If we prove that it is impossible for the cause to not have a Will (i.e. mechanistic and naturalistic), which I have done already, then it follows that the cause of the Universe has a Will.

You might say it seems quite improbable, and quite weird indeed, how a timeless God can have Will, however this is for the theologians to discuss, I have already proven with rational necessity that the cause of the Universe has a Will. Whether God exists sempiternally, in time since eternity or as a timeless permanency, or a combination of both really does not have any bearing on the proof. I can give you one answer to the question, but there are many, and is in fact an answer that is theologically motivated.

Why does life have to have a purpose

Read my post

and why can't it be subjective? Why can't it be, if it exists, based on our experience and interpretation of life?

Since subjectivity has no bearing on reality

Ah, so this is why God seems to get so upset when we don't believe in him and sends us to hell. Thanks for clearing that up!

Why are atheists so angry at God for? Seems like a pretty weird mental illness common among people of your religion

 

[Sy123]

Ooh look, the theist is getting a little upset!

Upset!? Not at all!

I'm just glad I can refute everyone here without having to go over and do some actual (extra) research and effort

If all you can produce is unfounded personal attacks on atheists, I've got no desire to continue talking to you.

Its a good thing I have provided a lot, lot more

 

[Stygian]

I thought the answer was obvious, but anyway

- The reason why our purpose is to worship and know God, is precisely because that is what God says our purpose is, there is no way to deduce through the intellect, our objective purpose of life without referring to God. If you disagree, then you must demonstrate proof as to an alternate purpose that holds true by rational necessity

- It does not matter to God whether we believe in Him or not, rather it matters to us, because God is not affected by it at all. Preachers use the analogy for simple-minded folk of an examiner, the examiner does not really care if you pass or fail, but He is the one to give you the exam and to grade you. If you fail, it means you fail the course and thus you did not fulfill your purpose of coming to university (and so on)

- We can determine through our intellect whether or not a particular concept of God is rationally possible. For example, polytheists can be refuted by the argument:

1 - If there are multiple Maximally Great Beings (MGB), then they are identical in attributes
2 - Take one MGB who wills event A and another MGB who wills event not-A at the same moment
3 - If the will of the first MGB is taken over the second, then they are not identical in power, contradicting premise 1
4 - If the will of the second MGB is taken over the first, then they are not identical in power, contradicting premise 2
5 - Both wills cannot take place as it contradicts the law of non-contradiction
6 - If neither Will takes place they are both impotent, contradicting their status as MGB
7 - Thus all options end in contradiction, entailing that the original premise (of multiple MGBs) as illogical
8 - Thus polytheism is false

Similarly we can invoke other arguments to refute other religious traditions, further, one may appeal to scriptural arguments, such as those from miracles, historicity and prophecy

However this thread is about the existence of God, with a capital G, who is a Being possessing all perfections, namely perfect Will, Knowledge and Power who is transcendent.
Asking about specific conceptions of God is not related to this thread

So you worship god because you see no point to your existence without a superior being telling you what to do with your life? Wow.

Why does life need some objective purpose anyway and why does it have to be doing what some hypothetical being tells you to do.

That analogy is pretty stupid. Examiners examine students so they make sure students retain knowledge and do their job correctly for some external purpose. If your analogy was directly compared to god it would be like the examiners examining you for no reason at all after creating you for the sole purpose of being examined even though they already know what results you will get and even though your results won't determine anything except how much you suck up to them and if they like you or not.

Also I don't believe in multiple gods either but if I did then why would they have to be maximally great? Why can't they be hierarchical?

Well actually asking about specific conceptions of god is related because you keep asserting that your god in particular is the only one that exists and no other concept of god.

 

[Stygian]

Ok? This thread is about proving the existence of God, the Abrahamic faiths is just a Deistic God that provides revelation
I don't claim that the argument is to prove the truth of Islam in one sweep

The argument is in fact very strong, the only way to go against the argument is to become a laughing stock tin-foil hat weirdo and accept that time is in fact an illusion, or that things can come into existence out of nothing

You can also say that the universe is eternal, though you need to refute arguments the beginning of the universe




I apply the law of excluded middle, and say, that the cause of the Universe, (which is powerful and immaterial as we already demonstrated) has a Will or it does not have a Will
If we prove that it is impossible for the cause to not have a Will (i.e. mechanistic and naturalistic), which I have done already, then it follows that the cause of the Universe has a Will.

You might say it seems quite improbable, and quite weird indeed, how a timeless God can have Will, however this is for the theologians to discuss, I have already proven with rational necessity that the cause of the Universe has a Will. Whether God exists sempiternally, in time since eternity or as a timeless permanency, or a combination of both really does not have any bearing on the proof. I can give you one answer to the question, but there are many, and is in fact an answer that is theologically motivated.



Read my post


Since subjectivity has no bearing on reality



Why are atheists so angry at God for? Seems like a pretty weird mental illness common among people of your religion

Isn't god something that came into existence out of nothing?

No?

Then why not the Big Bang?

 

[Sy123]

Isn't god something that came into existence out of nothing?

No?

Then why not the Big Bang?

Oh wow you have a lot more deeper problems that I thought initially, I am going to be a little more sympathetic

God exists timelessly, eternally, permanently, so He does not have a beginning

Atheists in the past actually said the same thing about the Unvierse, that is, it began to exist. However that idea is mostly dead now, with the advent of modern science

 

[seventhroot]

Oh wow you have a lot more deeper problems that I thought initially, I am going to be a little more sympathetic

God exists timelessly, eternally, permanently, so He does not have a beginning

Atheists in the past actually said the same thing about the Unvierse, that is, it began to exist. However that idea is mostly dead now, with the advent of modern science

no offence but is this like a 'fact' and where does it say. Honestly I am trying to be more religiously involved but need stuff cleared up

one or 2 sentences should do

 

[Stygian]

Oh wow you have a lot more deeper problems that I thought initially, I am going to be a little more sympathetic

God exists timelessly, eternally, permanently, so He does not have a beginning

Atheists in the past actually said the same thing about the Unvierse, that is, it began to exist. However that idea is mostly dead now, with the advent of modern science

Why does the Big Bang need a cause and why does god not need a cause?

All theists do is define some being to have conditions external to time and say "herp derp he doesn't have to fit logic because we define him not to fit into the rules".

Why does god not have to fit the same rules as the big bang? Why does the big bang need a cause?

 

[jdennis]

no offence but is this like a 'fact' and where does it say. Honestly I am trying to be more religiously involved but need stuff cleared up

one or 2 sentences should do

This is the problem. Believers in God keep asserting that God is simply outside of time and space and does not need a cause without actually proving that God has these attributes.

 

[jdennis]

Why does the Big Bang need a cause and why does god not need a cause?

All theists do is define some being to have conditions external to time and say "herp derp he doesn't have to fit logic because we define him not to fit into the rules".

Why does god not have to fit the same rules as the big bang? Why does the big bang need a cause?

lol so many unanswered questions

inb4 sy123 simply re-quotes his entire argument from about 3 pages ago

 

[Queenroot]

no offence but is this like a 'fact' and where does it say. Honestly I am trying to be more religiously involved but need stuff cleared up

one or 2 sentences should do

inb410commandments

 

[Stygian]

God created time and space and everything by my definition.

Therefore he exists because he is defined to exist and to have done all these things.

There Sy123, I summarised your entire argument for you.

 

[Stygian]

I believe in the cosmic hooker, the cosmic hooker bangs multiple cosmic entities it creates and during the one orgasm it has ever had creates an explosion that creates the universe.

It doesn't need a cause either because I define it to be timeless etc.

 

[Sy123]

So you worship god because you see no point to your existence without a superior being telling you what to do with your life? Wow.

No I really don't, my life has no meaning without God and without religion, my purpose is to serve and follow God, not my desires, not any other men.

Anyone who tries to talk about the meaning of life with reference to the subjective inner feeling has missed the point, subjectivity is all fine and good, but subjectivity has no bearing on reality, we should be seeking the truth, not seeking whatever our carnal desires prefer.

Why does life need some objective purpose anyway and why does it have to be doing what some hypothetical being tells you to do.

Life does not 'need' a purpose in the sense that all life must have purpose, God could have created us and just let us be, but the point is, He didn't. The purpose of our life is to know and worship Him.

God after all is the greatest of all conceivable beings, He is all-Powerful, all-Knowing and Truthful, Exalted is He.

You really need to think about what this entails, this is not just nothing telling you to do so and so.

That analogy is pretty stupid. Examiners examine students so they make sure students retain knowledge and do their job correctly for some external purpose. If your analogy was directly compared to god it would be like the examiners examining you for no reason at all after creating you for the sole purpose of being examined even though they already know what results you will get and even though your results won't determine anything except how much you suck up to them and if they like you or not.

The analogy works at a basic level, of course, no analogy befits Him and His Majesty, however the purpose of the analogy is to show that it does not really affect God whether you believe or disbelieve.

Also I don't believe in multiple gods either but if I did then why would they have to be maximally great? Why can't they be hierarchical?

God by definition is the greatest conceivable being, if you have a god that is not powerful, then that is what people call god with a small g, its not an actual 'god', just some sort of exalted title. There is no 'God' without power or knowledge or so on

Well actually asking about specific conceptions of god is related because you keep asserting that your god in particular is the only one that exists and no other concept of god.

Certainly it is related, however that is not the purpose of this thread, I do not intend to create dialectic against other theists, not in this thread. Rather I am only posting in this thread to engage in dialectics against atheists, not other theists, such as Christians or Jews etc.

 

[seventhroot]

inb410commandments

broke pretty a lot of them already

is god saying gg no re to me?

 

[Queenroot]

broke pretty a lot of them already

is god saying gg no re to me?

I think you should say "fak u I do what I want".

 

[Stygian]

No I really don't, my life has no meaning without God and without religion, my purpose is to serve and follow God, not my desires, not any other men.

Anyone who tries to talk about the meaning of life with reference to the subjective inner feeling has missed the point, subjectivity is all fine and good, but subjectivity has no bearing on reality, we should be seeking the truth, not seeking whatever our carnal desires prefer.



Life does not 'need' a purpose in the sense that all life must have purpose, God could have created us and just let us be, but the point is, He didn't. The purpose of our life is to know and worship Him.

God after all is the greatest of all conceivable beings, He is all-Powerful, all-Knowing and Truthful, Exalted is He.

You really need to think about what this entails, this is not just nothing telling you to do so and so.



The analogy works at a basic level, of course, no analogy befits Him and His Majesty, however the purpose of the analogy is to show that it does not really affect God whether you believe or disbelieve.



God by definition is the greatest conceivable being, if you have a god that is not powerful, then that is what people call god with a small g, its not an actual 'god', just some sort of exalted title. There is no 'God' without power or knowledge or so on



Certainly it is related, however that is not the purpose of this thread, I do not intend to create dialectic against other theists, not in this thread. Rather I am only posting in this thread to engage in dialectics against atheists, not other theists, such as Christians or Jews etc.

Why should we seek truth instead of carnal desire? Carnal desire is fantastic.

So this god of yours doesn't get affected by what we do why does he insist on burning us for eternity if we don't do what he wants, especially since if he exists he has seales our fate without any free will of our own to change it.

Oh so no other god can exist because they don't fit your definition of a god. K den.

 

[seventhroot]

I think you should say "fak u I do what I want".

hmmm I should but I am interested to know whether or not he exists

dat scientific curiosity

 

[Sy123]

no offence but is this like a 'fact' and where does it say. Honestly I am trying to be more religiously involved but need stuff cleared up

one or 2 sentences should do

Well this is what philosophers and theologians mean by 'God', it is the 'definition' you can say.

This is the problem. Believers in God keep asserting that God is simply outside of time and space and does not need a cause without actually proving that God has these attributes.

I have already proven that God has these attributes

Why does the Big Bang need a cause and why does god not need a cause?

Since the causal premise is that everything that begins to exist has a cause.
God did not begin to exist and thus does not have a cause
The universe began to exist with the Big Bang, and thus has a cause

All theists do is define some being to have conditions external to time and say "herp derp he doesn't have to fit logic because we define him not to fit into the rules".

What an ignorant statement, you have completlely sidestepped everything the argument says and you decide to focus on a nuanced statement that I have already refuted

Why does god not have to fit the same rules as the big bang? Why does the big bang need a cause?

Addressed above