Debate: God Exists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-03-2017, 03:54 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
God certainly does exist in the same way numbers exist, as a concept. I wouldn't argue with that. Not just a particular God, but every possible God.

I remember Matt D noting that "God exists" is so problematic because both words need a ton of clarification.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
03-03-2017, 04:01 AM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2017 04:05 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Debate: God Exists
(01-03-2017 08:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(01-03-2017 01:52 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Lol, that's all I ever seem to debate Tongue

I'll say yes it does, because the idea that it doesn't makes me very uncomfortable. A world without X? Unthinkable!

No xylophones, no xenophobia, no Xena...

Thank goodness she (Lucy Lawless) didn't turn out to be a huge failure pile like Hercules (Kevin Sorbo)... Dodgy

[Image: 150729-news-lucylawlessxena.jpg]

To this day, it's because of Xena that I find that particular hairstyle so damn sexy. Big Grin

[Image: 3d5b2dec59f411825caa8f93bbb3bdea.jpg]

And she looks great as a redhead in Sparticus too.


[Image: kevin-sorbo-hercules-103164.jpg]

[Image: Kevin_Sorbo.jpg]

How the mighty have fallen... Facepalm

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
03-03-2017, 07:23 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
(03-03-2017 03:49 AM)Belaqua Wrote:  whether X exists" -- Well, the apophatic theologians, including Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and the Cappadician Fathers, wrote that "exist" is the wrong word to use for God, or is at least misleading. They said that God is existence itself, or something like what later theologians called the "Ground of Being." What's certain is that no theologian asserts that God exists in the way that physical matter, you or I, or bigfoot exists.

Philosophers all the way back to Kant have argued that the Ontological Argument fails because existence is not a property. You can't define something as existing in the same way you can define a bachelor as unmarried. In other words, a priori arguments can be analytic but not synthetic. Only observation can prove whether something exists or not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Thoreauvian's post
03-03-2017, 07:26 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
Right... If I define something as existent, then I've just begged the question. It exists because I say it does.

It is kind of implied in the definition of anything, that you're talking about something that exists in some way. So the question, like you say, is showing that this is the case. You'd never define something which had the property of not existing, except for extreme mental masturbation.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
07-03-2017, 08:02 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
(24-02-2017 06:40 AM)Thinker Wrote:  Shall we get started?

Proof that God does not exist:

>The Christian God is defined by mainstream Christianity as being all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful, and all just. Yet even a cursory reading of the bible reveals a God who is cruel, unjust, tyrannical, unloving and eternally vengeful. Ergo, the Christian God does not exist by reason of self-contradiction.

>An all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God, by definition, cannot create evil or permit evil to exist in the world. And yet, evil exists. Ergo, God, as he is defined, does not exist on the grounds of self-contradiction.

>The law of conservation of matter and energy states that the total quantity of energy in the universe remains the same. Matter and energy are interchangeable, but neither can be created or destroyed. Ergo, the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another. God is unnecessary by the Principle of Parsimony.

>The natural history of religions are well-documented. The behavioral causes of religions are well-known. There is no evidence that religions are the products of anything other than human ingenuity and imagination. Ergo, atheism is rational and skeptically unassailable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2017, 09:49 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
(07-03-2017 08:02 AM)Gwaithmir Wrote:  
(24-02-2017 06:40 AM)Thinker Wrote:  Shall we get started?

Proof that God does not exist:

>The Christian God is defined by mainstream Christianity as being all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful, and all just. Yet even a cursory reading of the bible reveals a God who is cruel, unjust, tyrannical, unloving and eternally vengeful. Ergo, the Christian God does not exist by reason of self-contradiction.

>An all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God, by definition, cannot create evil or permit evil to exist in the world. And yet, evil exists. Ergo, God, as he is defined, does not exist on the grounds of self-contradiction.

>The law of conservation of matter and energy states that the total quantity of energy in the universe remains the same. Matter and energy are interchangeable, but neither can be created or destroyed. Ergo, the universe has always existed and will always exist in one form or another. God is unnecessary by the Principle of Parsimony.

>The natural history of religions are well-documented. The behavioral causes of religions are well-known. There is no evidence that religions are the products of anything other than human ingenuity and imagination. Ergo, atheism is rational and skeptically unassailable.

An all knowing god who, even before the creation process began, would know in advance what choices everyone would make and who would end up sinning and baking in hell for eternity. This is a premeditated hell monger and torturer. We lock up people for stuff like this.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
07-03-2017, 09:56 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
(03-03-2017 07:26 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Right... If I define something as existent, then I've just begged the question. It exists because I say it does.

It is kind of implied in the definition of anything, that you're talking about something that exists in some way. So the question, like you say, is showing that this is the case. You'd never define something which had the property of not existing, except for extreme mental masturbation.

Except Reality includes the possibility of non-existence. Being/existence is not nothingness. As long as that is true, Reality is always larger than any deity that possess any property.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
30-04-2017, 04:27 PM
RE: Debate: God Exists
The problem with the ontological "proof" is that it merely joins perfection with existence.

If God does not exist, then by definition, God is also not perfect. If you are making definitions, you can't allow fallacious definitions, which lead to errors. The definition in question needs to be grounded in reality. Which means supporting evidence is needed. You can't finesse that with mere definitions.

So God is not existent and also not perfect.

Yog Sothoth! Yog Sothoth! Come back old ones! Yog Sothoth!

Cheerful Charlie
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post
30-04-2017, 05:20 PM
RE: Debate: God Exists
(30-04-2017 04:27 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote:  The problem with the ontological "proof" is that it merely joins perfection with existence.

Kant addressed the ontological argument long ago by pointing out that existence is not a property. Another way of saying that is that a priori arguments can be analytic but not synthetic. You can't define something into existence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Thoreauvian's post
03-05-2017, 11:24 AM
RE: Debate: God Exists
Ok I'll go first:

[Image: nope1.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: