A good argument for God's existence (long but worth it)

[Whateverist]

Alex K,  because it is qualitative and quantitative our value both which are not existing physically (even Atheists will not say their personality is a physical thing but a program of the brain though they believe it is pure produced physically).

That is why it requires perception.

Exact value means we have an accurate reality, but I am saying that reality and perception go together. We aren't the accurate perception, we exist beyond our own perception of ourselves. This requires a perfect seer to see us if we have an exact value as that value is derived and created from his perfect judgment.

MK, you're obviously using "as" for "because" here.  But how can you expect your bald assertion that we have a value only in relationship to a perfect seer with perfect judgment to add support to anything?  This sort of "make a proof" talk is messing with your head.

[Edwardo Piet]

Am I going too far to say that in this case, the OP is an objectively worse person than otherwise, solely because of their faith?

Any theist could be an objectively better person if they were an atheist, yes.

If only because simply by being a theist they're advertising their B.S. and other theists who believe their B.S. may be less harmless than them with it... and moderate theists often give a shield for the fundies and extremists.

[Jehanne]

He's wrong. It's 2017. Get with the freaking program, Islam.

Religious belief really is a mental illness.  It is easy to understand why the Roman aristocracy ignored the early Christians, all of whom believed in a flat earth.

[Astonished]

He's wrong. It's 2017. Get with the freaking program, Islam.

Religious belief really is a mental illness.  It is easy to understand why the Roman aristocracy ignored the early Christians, all of whom believed in a flat earth.

It's definitely impossible not to consider it a sickness of some sort, even if the APA won't muster the cojones to declare it a full-blown diagnosed condition. At least before they kowtowed to religion in that respect, they declared that homosexuality wasn't a mental illness, so they weren't completely spineless.

[Edwardo Piet]

Personally I think it's too specific to be a specific mental condition.

IMO, different but similar and related mental conditions probably lead to religious belief.

[downbeatplumb]

Hamster dance!!

Yay!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qN72LEQnaU

[LastPoet]

Personally I think it's too specific to be a specific mental condition.

IMO, different  but similar and related mental conditions probably lead to religious belief.

Hmmm if you say you hear the voice of god in a religious context, people will not look weirdly, infact, look with admiration for your "faith". As long it is the god that is worshipped in the venue.

Now I know I have no voices in my head. Just my thoughts.

Except for Zuul, always yammering "please feed me!"

[Kernel Sohcahtoa]

Alex K,  because it is qualitative and quantitative our value both which are not existing physically (even Atheists will not say their personality is a physical thing but a program of the brain though they believe it is pure produced physically).

That is why it requires perception.

Exact value means we have an accurate reality, but I am saying that reality and perception go together. We aren't the accurate perception, we exist beyond our own perception of ourselves. This requires a perfect seer to see us if we have an exact value as that value is derived and created from his perfect judgment.

MK, you're obviously using "as" for "because" here.  But how can you expect your bald assertion that we have a value only in relationship to a perfect seer with perfect judgment to add support to anything?  This sort of "make a proof" talk is messing with your head.

It would be interesting to see a proponent of the theist position present a proof via the same exactness and precision as a mathematical proof: each series of statements logically flows from the previous statement in order to reach the desired outcome, and if previous knowledge is used to make a new forward statement, then that knowledge can itself be unquestionably verified via another proof.  Thus, when the conclusion is produced via proof, then there should be no doubt as to the truth of the statement/proposition. 

Now, for the sake of proof writing, IMO, it is interesting to consider the proof hurdles  that proponents of theism would have to overcome in order to write a fully logical, exact, and unequivocal proof:  they have to establish the existence of the special life-form who is the subject/centerpiece of various belief systems via one proof, and after that, they would then have to establish the uniqueness of their special life-form via another proof (note that they cannot begin this proof by asserting the existence of such a life-form unless they have successfully constructed an existence proof) .  Also, even if they did successfully construct/present a proof, then IMO, humanity's knowledge-base at the time that the proof was written, would have to be taken into account, as the proof could possibly be a logical argument for something that is presently outside of humanity's knowledge but can nevertheless be understood and explained via time, inquiry, and reason.

[Cyberman]

Personally I think it's too specific to be a specific mental condition.

IMO, different  but similar and related mental conditions probably lead to religious belief.

Hmmm if you say you hear the voice of god in a religious context, people will not look weirdly, infact, look with admiration for your "faith". As long it is the god that is worshipped in the venue.

Now I know I have no voices in my head. Just my thoughts.

Except for Zuul, always yammering "please feed me!"

[Mystic]

Alex K,  because it is qualitative and quantitative our value both which are not existing physically (even Atheists will not say their personality is a physical thing but a program of the brain though they believe it is pure produced physically).

That is why it requires perception.

Exact value means we have an accurate reality, but I am saying that reality and perception go together. We aren't the accurate perception, we exist beyond our own perception of ourselves. This requires a perfect seer to see us if we have an exact value as that value is derived and created from his perfect judgment.

MK, you're obviously using "as" for "because" here.  But how can you expect your bald assertion that we have a value only in relationship to a perfect seer with perfect judgment to add support to anything?  This sort of "make a proof" talk is messing with your head.

Exact value and perfect perception go hand to hand. 

Exact value requiring perfect judgment is a premise here. We know it to be true because we know people's relative judgments are not what create our value.  Neither do we decide what our value is and then create it. We rather are evaluated and judged, and perceived, to have this value.

It is so manifest, so apparent, so clear, that something sees us as we are. But what is that something that creates us and sees us as we TRULY ARE. It is the perfect judge.

It is what knows our inner secret, and what is inner to that. That which creates us and maintains us and holds us by all that what we have earned.