Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 4:39 am
(August 27, 2013 at 7:46 pm)Darwinian Wrote: SoC..
So basically because you have refused and/or failed to understand a single point that has been made to you it means that you have won the argument and defeated those stupid atheists?
Wow!
Well, yeah!
If theists understood the reasons we brought to the table, well, there wouldn't be any theists to bring reasons to!
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 5:13 am
(August 28, 2013 at 4:39 am)Texas Sailor Wrote:
(August 27, 2013 at 7:46 pm)Darwinian Wrote: SoC..
So basically because you have refused and/or failed to understand a single point that has been made to you it means that you have won the argument and defeated those stupid atheists?
Wow!
Well, yeah!
If theists understood the reasons we brought to the table, well, there wouldn't be any theists to bring reasons to!
Makes you wanna skip reason and go straight to ridicule, huh?
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 5:57 am
Why not? I think I've made a very commendable effort in my attempt at rational discourse with this fellow. But, if they are literally throwing logic out the window with assertions such as "I know God is contradicting but...", how are you supposed to reason with that? There's no reasoning with insanity!
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 6:02 am
Yeah, once you've got your theist asking "wouldn't things be more interesting if god were the answer, though?" there's really very little else that can be done with rationality.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 6:08 am
Hey Sword, I addressed your arguments at exhausting lengths only for you to ignore my objections and continue perpetuating the same flawed arguments. I guess that's okay, but at least I had the decency to respond to yours. Can you return the sentiment?
P1) Things that do not exist, have no verifiable properties, no comparable results, and zero reproducible evidence.
P2) A God has no verifiable properties, no comparable results, and zero reproducible evidence.
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 6:16 am (This post was last modified: August 28, 2013 at 6:17 am by Tonus.)
(August 27, 2013 at 5:40 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Doesn't exist in a tangibly defined state as an object with any properties or dimensions, anything you can see or measure.
You speak of logical deduction while trying to convince us of the existence of a being that does not exist in any form we can detect, who lives in some different dimension, who reaches through some undefined and equally undetectable barrier to interact with our universe and who is "a contradiction."
When all of your claims are illogical, calling them logical does not magically make them so. Repeating a flat assertion with no basis does not constitute an explanation. The god you have described is not, as far as I am aware, described in any religious text. You have added properties to this god in order to make him fit into a universe that is becoming less and less hospitable to the notion of a god. You've shunted him off into a whole other reality from which he cautiously peeks out from time to time, when he's sure the cameras aren't rolling.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 11:54 am
(August 27, 2013 at 6:52 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: I think I've covered everything here. You can continue deny the logical conclusion of Gods inevitable existence if you like. Sure it isn't inevitable that the God who exists is the Christian God of the Trinity, but I have also covered the arguments for that specific faith in God in relation to all the alternatives available including deism. So...
You're kidding, right? Everything you've covered has been debunked! Proven to be completely ridiculous! I've told you this already, I've asked you to show me one instance where that wasn't the case! And you didn't!
Sword of Christ Wrote:
Points for making me laugh though.
ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water
RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?
August 28, 2013 at 3:32 pm
(August 28, 2013 at 4:01 am)Esquilax Wrote:
(August 27, 2013 at 6:52 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: I think I've covered everything here. You can continue deny the logical conclusion of Gods inevitable existence if you like. Sure it isn't inevitable that the God who exists is the Christian God of the Trinity, but I have also covered the arguments for that specific faith in God in relation to all the alternatives available including deism. So...
Alright class, are we ready for video time? Old professor Esquilax is gonna play a little movie, and then we're going to have a question and answer session, alright?
Now, did we get that? Are we... did we understand?
Your Kalam argument is simple handwaving, at base. You've stated a number of premises that follow on logically from one another, but if you can't show how those premises correspond to physical reality, you can't say that any of them are true. You're effectively defining your god into existence, as though any of that should actually matter.
At no point have you demonstrated that all things require a cause, especially things in a pre-planck time universe where nothing is within our ability to predict. At no point, also, have you demonstrated that things that don't begin to exist can exist. And you certainly haven't gone anywhere toward demonstrating your god. You've just said a bunch of words. Which is fine, I like words... but let's not pretend you've done anything other than play a game with us.
Your assertion of victory is rather funny, but there's something that's been bothering me for a while now; you cheerfully accept that even the argument you're providing doesn't get you to any specific god. At numerous times you say he could be some other thing, some other gender... whatever. And yet your username is sword of christ and you're a christian. Why is that, given that your best argument doesn't get you to the position you're actually in?
More than once you've intimated that the reason is that you want the creator god to be the christian one. But that's in no way logical; why should we take any of your arguments seriously, if you've shown a willingness to just believe whatever you want, regardless of reality?
Mmmm you make me want to put on a school girl uniform.
If I were to create self aware beings knowing fully what they would do in their lifetimes, I sure wouldn't create a HELL for the majority of them to live in infinitely! That's not Love, that's sadistic. Therefore a truly loving god does not exist!
Quote:The sin is against an infinite being (God) unforgiven infinitely, therefore the punishment is infinite.
Dead wrong. The actions of a finite being measured against an infinite one are infinitesimal and therefore merit infinitesimal punishment.
Quote:Some people deserve hell.
I say again: No exceptions. Punishment should be equal to the crime, not in excess of it. As soon as the punishment is greater than the crime, the punisher is in the wrong.
As is usual, theoreticalbullshit knocks it out of the park. I'd love to see old swordy discuss these points, but first he'd have to understand them, which... well, seems rather beyond him.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!