God:

1) A thing that already exists, being relabelled, such as "the universe" or "nature"

Or:

2) An intelligent being that created our reality (presumably deliberately), plus optional [meaningless garbage word salad usually including statements begging the question of its existence; varies wildly from theist to theist]

Or (what it really is):

3) An idealised version of the self that exists only in the theist's imagination

4) One or more unecessary assumptions

5) The personification of the argument from ignorance

God is:

A: My self imposed thought police
B: My self inflicted guilt generator
C: My justification to legitimise my biases in my head
D: An all round cunt

My invitation to god:



Even better, here is my new video which addresses all of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inw1fNItjdU

Hmm, so...

No theist reaction? Is it dead Jim?

Maybe it's dead. I'll fetch the stick so we can be sure.

There is no fucking god. In fairness to Wooters, this is what I think he was getting at. 23 pages in and there's still quibbling regarding the definition of god. It's bullshit. No god, not ever.

Men have imagined a plethora of gods as means of explanation, but never has there been a demonstration outside the imagination. The idea of any God only exists as an error carried forward; a meme.

Those that are sure and want to convince me only have to produce their imaginary friend to rub it in my face. Funny, it never happens. Somehow it always comes down to a fault in my wiring without an explanation from the devout who's responsible for the faulty wiring.

I have never, nor will I ever, understand how otherwise reasonable people convince themselves that despite all evidence to the contrary there is a cosmic litmus test. It's absurd and strains credulity. How very sad.

I have to agree with Cato.

As many generations we have spent in discovering this supposed god, it is rather surprising to our smartest and best abled individuals must succumb to one such as you.

By all means, try again.

I hate hearing the idea that some other method picks up where science leaves off (when studying reality). No, it doesn't. If this "other method", be it arguments without evidence, faith, or feeling-based jiggery pokery actually produced any meaningful results, it too would be science.

As I mentioned in my video, people are off exploring their imaginations.

(March 26, 2016 at 6:56 am)robvalue Wrote: My invitation to god:



Even better, here is my new video which addresses all of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inw1fNItjdU

That was great, Rob! Thanks for sharing as always!

"Cabbages cannot form beliefs. Therefore cabbages lack belief in god(s). Therefore cabbages are atheists."

Perhaps I haven't been giving cabbages enough credit?

Thank you LFC, you're welcome! I'm glad you like it Thanks for the feedback!

As for cabbages and rocks, the usual definition tends to exclude them:

Atheist: A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Although cabbages still do pretty well considering.