Posts: 5399
Threads: 256
Joined: December 1, 2013
Reputation:
60
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 8:35 pm
(This post was last modified: June 19, 2014 at 8:38 pm by Mudhammam.)
Lek, we literally have it documented that God went, in the hearts of enthusiastic men and women, from deities who controlled everything, from weather to birth, could be petitioned with various rituals, could have their wrath called down in the form of catastrophic drought or storm... people went from this, polytheistic gods who control nature, to a God who basically just sits somewhere as an invisible mighty force, doing what? Nobody knows. There is no actual role left for him to do anything. Just a pathetic, lonely, soul, watching the Universe from afar, perhaps lamenting he isn't a part of it.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 8:52 pm
(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God. If God is supernatural, and you look for proof only by natural means you won't find him. I can understand why you consider the existence of God to be illogical, but it's hard to convince someone who knows God that he really doesn't know him.
Congratulations, you just proved Santa.
And I want a helicopter. That shoots lasers.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 35341
Threads: 205
Joined: August 13, 2012
Reputation:
146
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 8:53 pm
(June 19, 2014 at 8:52 pm)Stimbo Wrote: (June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God. If God is supernatural, and you look for proof only by natural means you won't find him. I can understand why you consider the existence of God to be illogical, but it's hard to convince someone who knows God that he really doesn't know him.
Congratulations, you just proved Santa.
And I want a helicopter. That shoots lasers.
I want a Lawmaster - fully operational.
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:
"You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"
Posts: 2029
Threads: 39
Joined: October 16, 2013
Reputation:
48
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 9:18 pm
(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God.
Lek... how many times are you going to pull ad pop. out of your ass?
(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If God is supernatural, and you look for proof only by natural means you won't find him.
Typical bullshit. 
(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: I can understand why you consider the existence of God to be illogical, but it's hard to convince someone who knows God that he really doesn't know him.
Yes, it is rather hard to break through the delusional barrier. I agree.
![[Image: bbb59Ce.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i.imgur.com%2Fbbb59Ce.gif)
(September 17, 2015 at 4:04 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: I make change in the coin tendered. If you want courteous treatment, behave courteously. Preaching at me and calling me immoral is not courteous behavior.
Posts: 8271
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 10:15 pm
(June 19, 2014 at 9:18 pm)Starvald Demelain Wrote: Lek... how many times are you going to pull ad pop. out of your ass?
As many times as he thinks is necessary to convince us.
Lek, according to your ad pop logic, Michael Jackson is the greatest recording artist of all time. Better than the Beatles, Led Zep, The Who, The Rolling Stones or any other great act.
Why MJ? "Cause he's the best selling (most popular) of all time.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 6843
Threads: 0
Joined: February 22, 2014
Reputation:
15
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 19, 2014 at 11:29 pm
(June 19, 2014 at 1:33 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:
I've spent a great deal of time considering the big bang theory. It's not analogous to a supernova in any way (hint: one involves matter, the other does not).
So you're saying that the Big Bang involved magic dust?
Posts: 30974
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 20, 2014 at 12:54 am
(June 19, 2014 at 11:29 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: (June 19, 2014 at 1:33 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:
I've spent a great deal of time considering the big bang theory. It's not analogous to a supernova in any way (hint: one involves matter, the other does not).
So you're saying that the Big Bang involved magic dust?
Hardly.
Posts: 1946
Threads: 17
Joined: February 6, 2014
Reputation:
18
Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 20, 2014 at 1:05 am
(June 20, 2014 at 12:54 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: (June 19, 2014 at 11:29 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: So you're saying that the Big Bang involved magic dust?
Hardly.
On the other hand, given the dissimilarity of quantum physics and Planck time physics compared to modern physics, the distinction pre Big Bang would have been so dramatic, it may as well have been magic dust, by today's standards.
Posts: 6843
Threads: 0
Joined: February 22, 2014
Reputation:
15
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 20, 2014 at 4:34 am
I'm not buying the Big Bang Theory because it's silly. The quantum foam theory is most likely closer to the truth. That's because we are almost certain that once hydrogen forms it clumps together into giant balls and goes nuclear to create stars. And then the stars cook up the heavier elements. That process wouldn't have happened under the Big Bang.
Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
June 20, 2014 at 6:05 am
(June 19, 2014 at 6:59 pm)Lek Wrote: If I know God, and a billion other people know God, I consider that pretty good evidence for God. Unless a significant number of those people don't qualify as "true god believers," right? Because this is the sort of thing I'm referring to in that other thread, where people point to the number of believers as "evidence for god" but quickly whittle those numbers down once we get into specific behaviors or beliefs.
More than 4 billion people claim to know god, but they don't all know the same god, and many of them tell the others that the god they claim to know cannot be the real god. That's a pretty poor standard of evidence to me.
"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."
-Stephen Jay Gould
|
