Debate: God Exists

[I_am_not_mafia]

Something greater can always be conceived.
List every property that your specific god/idea of god has, and I will mention one thing that is missing, and therefore makes "your" god not the Necessary Being.

No, don't walk into the trap. Something greater than The Necessary Being automatically becomes The Necessary Being, thus defeating the argument by default. Slippery bastard, this TNB.

I thought I was The Necessary Being. At least everybody just nods resignedly when I tell them yet again.

[Drich]

Again, late to the party...
Anyway, given that mankind has evolved from other apes and then from mammals, it should be safe to admit that once upon a time the concept of God or gods didn't exist in any mind on this Earth.
At some point in pre-history that concept appeared in human minds.
How?
What was the first concept of God like?
How?!

This first "how"is important. If there is a god, then that god likely presented itself... If so, then it should be able to present itself to everyone else... That it doesn't presents a challenge to the initial premise.
If it doesn't exist, then it was invented by human imagination... Need I say more?

That's the thing sport. we are all hurdling toward the day that God does indeed 'present' Himself, but unfortunately it will be far too late to seek or find redemption at that point.


Why? because the point of redemption is to be earnestly and honestly genuine sorry for your sins, and not sorry you got caught, which is what a judgment day recanment of sin would show to be.

However we all do indeed have an opportunity to 'meet God' before that day. But on his terms, not yours.

[LastPoet]

That's the thing sport. we are all hurdling toward the day that God does indeed 'present' Himself, but unfortunately it will be far too late to seek or find redemption at that point.

lel. huh, scary. fire and brimstone heh? I would worry more about yourself and leave others outside your fantasy world.

[Drich]

If a douche bag fails to get a joke, does it mean the joke is without humor?

No of course not. douche bags fail to get really good jokes all the time, as they are most often occupied in building themselves up. So busy infact they often see intentional attempts at self deprecating humor, as an unintentional error no matter how ridiculous the mistake would have been in order for them to be right.

Butt (pun) that's ok because it just underscores the level of douche baggery one must be set to endure to bring the gospel to the 'unwashed masses.'  
maybe I should all my jokes

So if I don't find one of your jokes funny its my fault.
I see at least you are consistent.
If your arguments don't convince me it's my fault.
If the news isn't to your liking its fake news.
You are trump and I claim my £5

It's not about what you think is funny. It is your inability to define or identify humor. which prompted me to ask if you needed the emoji's. Because it seems it is far more plausible to you that I confuse prostate with prostrate in the given religious discussion. than me making a poo/pooper joke, despite my ability to speak topically line by line and point by point for several pages with you.

I think maybe the British mind is simply not wired for 'dry' humor even if I wrap it in a poop joke.

---

That's the thing sport. we are all hurdling toward the day that God does indeed 'present' Himself, but unfortunately it will be far too late to seek or find redemption at that point.

lel. huh, scary. fire and brimstone heh? I would worry more about yourself and leave others outside your fantasy world.

I was talking about more of the day of Judgement.. Ever knee will bow every tongue confess.. And I guess it will end for many with fire and brimstone. I think most of us will be shocked who do meet their end in the fire, as well of us who will not. Matter of fact there seem to be a few, who are trying to make something of what they been given here on this board..

[Chas]

Psychology. Weak psyches (sp?).

That's not a sophisticated answer. It's like a shortcut to thinking.

Let's make this a debate. Shall we get started?

Let's be speculative as well as using historical evidence. The question isn't asking merely who wrote religions and what their political motives were. The question is multilayered: have they made differences in human history? Without religions, how would the world today be? What impacts, whether positive, negative or both, did they have upon today's world and the future ? So on.

This is either about the existence of a god or about the motivation for religion.  Pick one or the other.

---

The atheist doesn't have to prove a negative.

Do you think that lack of belief in God can be without consequence? Think about what it would mean to lack belief in the Principle of Non-Contradiction or the Law of Identity.

That is one big stinking non sequitur.

[pocaracas]

Again, late to the party...
Anyway, given that mankind has evolved from other apes and then from mammals, it should be safe to admit that once upon a time the concept of God or gods didn't exist in any mind on this Earth.
At some point in pre-history that concept appeared in human minds.
How?
What was the first concept of God like?
How?!

This first "how"is important. If there is a god, then that god likely presented itself... If so, then it should be able to present itself to everyone else... That it doesn't presents a challenge to the initial premise.
If it doesn't exist, then it was invented by human imagination... Need I say more?

That's the thing sport. we are all hurdling toward the day that God does indeed 'present' Himself, but unfortunately it will be far too late to seek or find redemption at that point.


Why? because the point of redemption is to be earnestly and honestly genuine sorry for your sins, and not sorry you got caught, which is what a judgment day recanment of sin would show to be.

However we all do indeed have an opportunity to 'meet God' before that day. But on his terms, not yours.

Well then... The question stands, why doesn't the god that manifested itself in the first place so that mankind would know about it manifest itself to everyone unmistakably?
That is a clear hint that the original concept of god is man made...and, very likely, any subsequent info concerning any god that has ever been worshipped.

I don't care about which terms are used for us to meet said god, just make it clear to everyone. If the original terms are not the same ones as nowadays, then something must be terribly wrong... That or the whole thing is made up, which accounts for regional variations, as well as temporal variations on rites, temples...even entities being worshipped!
And that includes end times predictions... Sorry, that doesn't impress me.

[Chas]

Again, late to the party...
Anyway, given that mankind has evolved from other apes and then from mammals, it should be safe to admit that once upon a time the concept of God or gods didn't exist in any mind on this Earth.
At some point in pre-history that concept appeared in human minds.
How?
What was the first concept of God like?
How?!

This first "how"is important. If there is a god, then that god likely presented itself... If so, then it should be able to present itself to everyone else... That it doesn't presents a challenge to the initial premise.
If it doesn't exist, then it was invented by human imagination... Need I say more?

That's the thing sport. we are all hurdling toward the day that God does indeed 'present' Himself, but unfortunately it will be far too late to seek or find redemption at that point.


Why? because the point of redemption is to be earnestly and honestly genuine sorry for your sins, and not sorry you got caught, which is what a judgment day recanment of sin would show to be.

However we all do indeed have an opportunity to 'meet God' before that day. But on his terms, not yours.

What a bunch of unevidenced assertions and drivel.

And the word is 'hurtling', you dumb ass.

[Cyberman]

When Drich uses a word, it means just what he chooses it to mean - neither more nor less.

Then he falls off a wall.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Something greater can always be conceived.
List every property that your specific god/idea of god has, and I will mention one thing that is missing, and therefore makes "your" god not the Necessary Being.

No, don't walk into the trap. Something greater than The Necessary Being automatically becomes The Necessary Being, thus defeating the argument by default. Slippery bastard, this TNB.

You are confusing the Aquinas's 3W (Necessary Being) with his 4W (Degrees of Perfection). And if you mean the trap of inescapable logic that exposes the underlying irrationality of atheism then you are correct.

[Crossless2.0]

No, don't walk into the trap. Something greater than The Necessary Being automatically becomes The Necessary Being, thus defeating the argument by default. Slippery bastard, this TNB.

You are confusing the Aquinas's 3W (Necessary Being) with his 4W (Degrees of Perfection). And if you mean the trap of inescapable logic that exposes the underlying irrationality of atheism then you are correct.

You really want to get into the underlying irrationality of people's positions, Christian? Care to tell us how you rationally determined that your favorite character "really" came back from the dead?

Oh, wait . . . sorry. I forgot how you don't like to discuss 'special revelation' with people who don't already buy into it -- you know, rational belief that it is.