Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[SteveII]

[GrandizerII]

[SteveII]

Are you really going with "God is not thermodynamically plausible". Really?!? If God exists, you do understand that entails him having created the universe, right? Then to use a physical law within that universe to apply to him is a step beyond...I'll be nice...nonsense.

It only seems nonsense to you because you do not understand the nature of intelligence. How can your god exist or think without being constrained by the laws of Thermodynamics? After all, for your god to be relevant he has to be able to interact with this world and therefore work within the same laws.

You are confusing cause and effect. While the effect will be seen in accordance with the laws of nature, that in no way means that the cause has to be. Thinking that the immaterial, omnipotent creator of the universe consists of or is bound by physical laws is really really messed illogical thinking. 

And before you use the argument of a programmer and a computer simulation, both the programmer and the computer exist in the same reality.

I would never use such analogy. It fails in too many ways.

[Mister Agenda]

The Christian god Yahweh is also derived from previously held concepts.  So can he too be reasonably dismissed as being real.  If so, then I concede defeat (to you at least).  If, however, you still hold that God exists then I still maintain that Odin is real.  After all I can simply argue that the similarities from other religions are based in part truth, and part the work of the trickster god and shapeshifter Loki. 

This discussion isn't about Yahweh, now is it? In the other thread I clearly stated that I would provide evidence for God if someone provided evidence against and well see who had the most for and against... no one took me up on it.

It doesn't matter who has the most evidence. It matters who has the best evidence.

---

So you have a scientifically vetted photo of god? hahahahahahaha

Laugh it up, it's not like I haven't already posted it but then you wouldn't know this since you're a straight up newb.

I remember that. It was both sad and laughable that anyone would consider it evidence of anything but bad lighting, poor photography, and desperately motivated 'reasoning'.

---

You don't get it, the point is can you provide the same for Odin?

Btw if you were an eye witness then you'd have no choice but to be a believer... Isn't that what you guys say? If you saw evidence you'd believe?

Are you saying that the proper response to a claim where you find the evidence offered to support it insufficient to justify acceptance is to withhold belief?

[I_am_not_mafia]

[Mister Agenda]

Let's not forget that Huggy was the one who made the claim that he could provide evidence blah blah blah ad nauseum.

Yeah, wasn't he supposed to be providing evidence against the existence of Odin? So where is it? All we've got so far is basically saying we should be skeptical about the claim that Odin exists (duh) and arguing for Yahweh again. Arguing for Yahweh isn't his job, he's supposed to be providing evidence that shows Odin does not really exist.

[I_am_not_mafia]

It only seems nonsense to you because you do not understand the nature of intelligence. How can your god exist or think without being constrained by the laws of Thermodynamics? After all, for your god to be relevant he has to be able to interact with this world and therefore work within the same laws.

You are confusing cause and effect. While the effect will be seen in accordance with the laws of nature, that in no way means that the cause has to be. Thinking that the immaterial, omnipotent creator of the universe consists of or is bound by physical laws is really really messed illogical thinking. 

Every example we have of natural intelligence is a self-organising system that functions because of the laws of thermodynamics. Every example we have of natural intelligence is embodied in a physical environment which can be sensed and acted within. We have good reason to believe that every form of natural intelligence can ultimately be explained in terms of thermodynamics.

If you want to assert that natural intelligence exists in any other form (i.e. not AI) then give an example, evidence and at the very least a hypothesis on how it might function.

So if your god is intelligent (i.e. a being) then all the evidence is that it must also be subject to the laws of thermodynamics and therefore not eternal.

Give me one single example of intelligence that is not subject to the laws of thermodynamics.

[Crossless2.0]

Give me one single example of intelligence that is not subject to the laws of thermodynamics.

The one he posits, obviously. 

[I_am_not_mafia]

Give me one single example of intelligence that is not subject to the laws of thermodynamics.

The one he posits, obviously. 

Maybe I should have specified that it should actually exist in reality and not some metaphysical 'reality' imagination.

[robvalue]

Well, I think the photo that he won't show is is actually fantastic evidence of Yahweh. The audio recording he also won't show us tips the scales, it's amazing, I assume. Yahweh confirmed. I don't care though.

Now what? He's supposed to be disproving Odin. He's still right here next to me. I'm surprised no theists are interested in what he has to say. It's like they are discounting my testimony instantly because it doesn't agree with the conclusions they want.