How Many Has God Killed?

[Anomalocaris]

We did, and discovered from such answers as he was able to manage, that his attributes are indifferentiable from those of a pure figment of of the imagination of rather lesser of human beings.

[RDK]

These discussions are entertaining to me. I have acknowledged that you have good reasons to believe there is no God. But since I have established contact with Him, I happen to be wrong? I am not asking you to believe that I am God. I make mistakes like any of you can make. This is really funny to me. How do you prove that something does not exist? You have no proof of your own. Where is it? You guys have reasoned that because some scriptures do not add up, and this world may seem not to prove to you that God is real, You infer that He can't exist. You have to have proof of your own too! Who ever heard of a one sided argument? If you look honestly at any debate, both sides have to prove their points. How selfish of some of you to throw the burden of proof exclusively on me.

[reverendjeremiah]

when will they learn that all special pleading and all arguments for THEIR god also work for OTHER gods and goddesses as well?

The problem is that it doesn't work for Woden, because on Anglo-Saxon polytheism not everything depends on Woden's existence - there are other gods (like Thunor and Tiw) whose existence does not depend on Woden's. What's more, the view that everything depends on Woden is not a view that you actually hold.

You still dont get it do you? There is no special arguements for religions. Every religion can use the same arguments as every other religion. Just change the god name with your favorite goddess, or vice-versa.

So fine, lets do the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Creator_gods

Your arguments will work for most on this list.

[Cinjin]

These discussions are entertaining to me. I have acknowledged that you have good reasons to believe there is no God. But since I have established contact with Him, I happen to be wrong? I am not asking you to believe that I am God. I make mistakes like any of you can make. This is really funny to me. How do you prove that something does not exist? You have no proof of your own. Where is it? You guys have reasoned that because some scriptures do not add up, and this world may seem not to prove to you that God is real, You infer that He can't exist. You have to have proof of your own too! Who ever heard of a one sided argument? If you look honestly at any debate, both sides have to prove their points. How selfish of some of you to throw the burden of proof exclusively on me.

Do they also have to fly to the North Pole to prove that Santa isn't real? People who don't make claims - don't have to prove them.

[reverendjeremiah]

RDK hasnt been banned yet?

Cain, why are you making a post to him, you know he isnt going to acknowledge your existence. He is just going to ramble on and on.

[Eleazar]

You still dont get it do you? There is no special arguements for religions. Every religion can use the same arguments as every other religion. Just change the god name with your favorite goddess, or vice-versa.

So fine, lets do the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Creator_gods

Your arguments will work for most on this list.

My argument (which is not an argument for the existence of God, but an argument that the demand for a proof of God's existence that does not presuppose God's existence begs the question) will work for any being that both necessarily exists and upon whose existence everything else depends. So if there are any gods on that list that satisfy those criteria, then sure, the argument holds for those gods as well. But what is the problem with that?

[Gawdzilla]

My argument (which is not an argument for the existence of God, but an argument that the demand for a proof of God's existence that does not presuppose God's existence begs the question) will work for any being that both necessarily exists and upon whose existence everything else depends. So if there are any gods on that list that satisfy those criteria, then sure, the argument holds for those gods as well. But what is the problem with that?

You haven't proven God's existence, you presume God's existence and go from there. See the problem?

[Anomalocaris]

(which is not an argument for the existence of God, but an argument that the demand for a proof of God's existence that does not presuppose God's existence begs the question)

It does beg a very fine question, to which any non-flippant answer is not "god"

My argument will work for any being that both necessarily exists and upon whose existence everything else depends. So if there are any gods on that list that satisfy those criteria, then sure, the argument holds for those gods as well. But what is the problem with that?

The problem is broadly similar to "My argumant works on any day the argument is dictated by my personal decree to work"

[Eleazar]

You haven't proven God's existence, you presume God's existence and go from there. See the problem?

Nope, I don't see why is this in any way problematic.

---

It does beg a very fine question, to which any non-flippant answer is not "god"

You don't appear to know what "begging the question" actually means, or understand my point (based on your lack of response).

The problem is broadly similar to "My argumant works on any day the argument is dictated by my personal decree to work"

And how is this statement and anything I've said even broadly analogous?

[ib.me.ub]

These discussions are entertaining to me. I have acknowledged that you have good reasons to believe there is no God. But since I have established contact with Him, I happen to be wrong? I am not asking you to believe that I am God. I make mistakes like any of you can make. This is really funny to me. How do you prove that something does not exist? You have no proof of your own. Where is it? You guys have reasoned that because some scriptures do not add up, and this world may seem not to prove to you that God is real, You infer that He can't exist. You have to have proof of your own too! Who ever heard of a one sided argument? If you look honestly at any debate, both sides have to prove their points. How selfish of some of you to throw the burden of proof exclusively on me.

How about this for a quick proof;

All you have done is create certain pahtways in your brain that has given you the experience of talking with god. It has been proven that we all have these places in out brain, and it is nothing more than a social binding adaptation. Different people react in different ways depending on their upbringing, generally. In a sense we all do have it within us, some beleive this collection of synapses firing is 'god' talking, others beleive it is other things, such as the 'self'.


The reality is;

Here is a study about cognitive and neural foundations of religious belief [Posted by Emporion]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...pq4876.pdf


In terms of why people think in a similar ways can be partly explained by this; Collective Unconscious [Posted by me].

http://atheistforums.org/thread-5223.html


There are other things in the Universe that are much harder to explain such as Quantum Entanglement [Posted by oggtheclever & others.]

http://atheistforums.org/thread-5880.html


If you take the above examples as a whole, they partially explian the god dillemma & the associated phenomenon.

I can say this is a very brief example, and much more information can be included to get the entire picture, including many of the sciences, but I beleive it can all be explained using the different branches of science.