Does anybody else hate this argument?
|
|
|
01-02-2015, 01:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(01-02-2015 12:09 PM)Ace Wrote:(01-02-2015 11:53 AM)Full Circle Wrote: - God is the most perfect imaginable asshole Yes, here you go ![]() ![]() “I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain “Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce |
||||
![]() |
01-02-2015, 01:59 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(01-02-2015 09:28 AM)Blackout Wrote: - God is the most perfect ('the greatest') being conceivable Use of this argument pretty much qualifies you for your "sign"..... "I don't mind being wrong...it's a time I get to learn something new..." Me. N.B: I routinely make edits to posts to correct grammar or spelling, or to restate a point more clearly. I only notify edits if they materially change meaning.
|
||||
![]() |
01-02-2015, 02:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
I agree with Mayuri in every respect. |
||||
![]() |
01-02-2015, 02:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
I'm tired of the morality argument from Team God.
Can't have morals without god, god's objective morality, blah fuckety blah. Another is the tactic of asking vague, confusing questions that dance around the subject they're trying to steer me toward. Just get to the point already! Somehow getting me to unintentionally say something that conflicts with my point is intentionally dishonest and weak at best. My worldview hasn't suddenly and completely changed because I misspoke. |
||||
![]() |
01-02-2015, 02:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
Gasking's proof
A piece of parody for the non-existence of god is as follows: 1) The creation of the universe is the greatest achievement imaginable. 2) The merit of an achievement consists of its intrinsic greatness and the ability of its creator. 3) The greater the handicap to the creator, the greater the achievement (would you be more impressed by Turner painting a beautiful landscape or a blind one-armed dwarf?) 4) The biggest handicap to a creator would be non-existence 5) Therefore if we suppose that the universe is the creation of an existing creator, we can conceive a greater being — namely, one who created everything while not existing. 6) Therefore, God does not exist. http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?t....27s_proof "I feel as though the camera is almost a kind of voyeur in Mr. Beans life, and you just watch this bizarre man going about his life in the way that he wants to." -Rowan Atkinson |
||||
![]() |
01-02-2015, 05:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(01-02-2015 09:28 AM)Blackout Wrote: - God is the most perfect ('the greatest') being conceivable Actually, this has recently become one of my new favorites. If we insert just one more premise: - A god that is not bound by logic is greater than a god that is bound by logic. The conclusion is that: - If god exists, god must be irrational. The ontological argument proves that all logical arguments regarding god are no more than hot air and arm waving. ---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
|
||||
02-02-2015, 06:54 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(01-02-2015 09:28 AM)Blackout Wrote: - God is the most perfect ('the greatest') being conceivable I remember when I first heard that argument. I was still Christian and in high school. I found the second premise utterly incomprehensible. I could never figure out why we couldn't just imagine "greater" things. I guess it's one of those "because they say so" things. I got into a debate with a guy on this once, and he abandoned the thread as soon as he saw he was backed into a corner. Part of his problem was he wasn't arguing over "greatest", but rather "real". He said we couldn't conceive imaginary things, so this means God is real. I brought up imaginary things I could conceive, and he would say that I wasn't conceiving them, but rather rearranging real concepts. So unicorn = horse + horn. I told him that we could construct God in the same way. God = human + builder. |
||||
![]() |
02-02-2015, 07:16 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
Perfection to me, means unchanging.
A state of perfection cannot do anything. It would be something frozen in that state from the beginning of time to the end. And if that's the case, you might as well worship a strand of your own hair for all the good it will do ya Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results |
||||
02-02-2015, 07:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(02-02-2015 07:16 AM)Rahn127 Wrote: Perfection to me, means unchanging. A "Hairy Krishna"? .... I'm a double atheist. I don't believe in your god or your politician. |
||||
![]() |
02-02-2015, 11:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Does anybody else hate this argument?
(01-02-2015 01:34 PM)Chas Wrote: The first time I heard that argument, I kept waiting for the rest of it. That is exactly the way I first felt about it.... Then I started thinking about the person who attempted to use this argument with me..... And it became quite obvious that he was a fool. |
||||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)