Feed on Posts or Comments 20 September 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism &Rationals Thomas on 28 Dec 2011 12:52 am

Dogs can speak English! It is a brilliant way to demonstrate that God is imaginary

Here is the graphical version:

Dogs can speak English!

And here it is in plain text:

Dogs can speak English!

This ability is supernatural, so you can never discover it using science. You can’t dissect dogs to find out how this ability works. It is outside the scope of your ability to study or even understand.

Furthermore, dogs intentionally hide this ability from humans. Dogs only speak when humans aren’t around, and they have the ability to know if humans are eavesdropping in any way. So, you will never catch them in the act.

You can’t prove that this isn’t true. It’s entirely possible that it is. So, do you believe that dogs can speak English?

If not, why?

As you read this, you realize two things. First, we all know that dogs do not speak English. Second, we do not need to prove that this is true. If someone wants to assert that dogs can speak English, they must provide evidence that the assertion is true. If they cannot, their assertion is merely amusing.

This is exactly the same situation we find whenever a theist talks about God. The theist assertion is that God is supernatural and outside the scope of our ability to study or even understand. Furthermore, it is asserted that God is invisible, silent and cannot be detected in any way by science.

Since this is the assertion, the only way that anyone with any sense would believe it is through evidence. If any sensible, intelligent, rational person is going to believe in God, there must be evidence.

Since there is no evidence for God, the assertions of theists should be merely amusing. But they are not. Unfortunately, theists combine their God-nonsense with a desire to make many people miserable, to inhibit the freedoms and civil rights of millions, to stop the progress of science, etc. In other words, God-nonsense is extremely dangerous to society as a whole. For this reason, God-nonsense is not benign – it is a cancer. It should be eliminated.

For more information see God is imaginary.

144 Responses to “Dogs can speak English! It is a brilliant way to demonstrate that God is imaginary”

  1. on 28 Dec 2011 at 9:35 am 1.Anonymous said …

    Good post, it’s also interesting how similar the theist claims are to those who follow so-called alternative medicine. They too, when their woo fails to produce results in well-conducted trials, will make claims that “science” can’t answer everything and that their magic is undetectable by “science”. Somehow this circular logic makes sense to believers.

    Both are examples of placebos.

  2. on 28 Dec 2011 at 3:55 pm 2.Lou (DFW) said …

    Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

  3. on 28 Dec 2011 at 4:51 pm 3.RevWillyNilly said …

    Let’s not forget the historical documents that clearly feature talking dogs – Milo and Otis, Homeward Bound, Men in Black, etc. And Brian Griffin is obviously a modern adaption of a historical figure. Some chihuahuas have even been reported to speak Spanish.

  4. on 28 Dec 2011 at 9:31 pm 4.DPK said …

    My dog speaks french. She speaks directly to me telepathically, so other people can’t hear her, but I know it is her speaking. What does she say? I don’t speak french, so I don’t know, but I like to think she tells me what a wonderful guardian I am and that when we are both dead, we will live together in a wonderful paradise where the streets are paved with gold and you can eat all you want and never get fat… unless you like being fat, then of course you can.
    This sounds GREAT to me, so I’m believing it. You can’t prove I’m wrong either, so don’t even try. And stop trying to prove to other people that I’m nuts, you can’t do that either, plus, it’s VERY disrespectful. You should be ashamed for trying. Anyway, you can’t tell me that dogs evolved from wolves…. any idiot can see that dogs are way nicer than wolves, and who ever heard of a dog eating Red Riding Hood’s grandmom? No one, that’s who!!! And if dogs evolved from wolves, what did wolves come from? A rock?? Yeah, one day a rock turned into a wolf and then 100 years later turned into a dog…. haha.. you atheists are so gullible. You should all burn in hell for eternity you filthy swine. So how come we don’t see any wolves turing into dogs today??? Huh? You don’t know, do you? I asked my dog and she explained it, only in french, so I don’t really know what she said, but I know it’s the truth so shut up!
    Lot’s of people also believe in talking dogs! Haven’t you ever seen “Family Guy”? Plus, you can’t tell me how the universe was created, so that proves dogs can talk. I mean, the bible has stories about talking snakes and donkeys, and dogs are way smarter than them, so why is that hard to believe?
    You all just need to have some faith and stop thinking about all this hard stuff. If god had wanted us to think about stuff he wouldn’t have invented religions. Stupid people.

  5. on 28 Dec 2011 at 10:19 pm 5.Q said …

    DPK you have perfectly captured the religious mindset!

    Scarey

  6. on 28 Dec 2011 at 11:26 pm 6.Horatiio said …

    “I’m wrong either, so don’t even try. And stop trying to prove to other people that I’m nuts, you can’t do that either,”

    Well OK, I wont. I wish you well with all that.

    But if I was really crazy, I would go out and start websites, write books and buy billboards telling the world not to believe! LOL!! Then I would spend my day arguing with those who believe. LOL!!

    You guys kill me. You don’t even see how ridiculous you look.

    DPK, tell your pup Happy New Year for me.

    LOL!! WoW!

  7. on 28 Dec 2011 at 11:47 pm 7.anon said …

    LOL, trying to compare dogs with god. R U F*CKIN retarded? worst strawhat arguement ever. atleast the theory of god is better then “evolution” and “big bang”. at least theist have the guts to realize that there has to have been a creator or a first “thing” to have started it all. thiests believe that there had to be a beginning, it could not have been a cause and effect to infinity, there had to have been a first causeless effect. there had to be god. and the first evidence for god is you. thats right your very existence and that of everything else testifies to there being GOD. so yeah.

  8. on 29 Dec 2011 at 12:18 am 8.Hell Yeah said …

    “trying to compare dogs with god. R U FUCKIN retarded?”

    It’s called an analogy so that you theists can relate to how your belief in an invisible god is silly.

    —————-

    “at least theist have the guts to realize that there has to have been a creator or a first “thing” to have started it all.”

    So how did your god get created then? Just because we aren’t at the point in science yet where that question has been answered, doesn’t mean a god has to be the answer. Even if it turns out to be a god, then why is it the Christian god? Why is it a god that watches over its creation? Why is there an afterlife?

    ————

    “the first evidence for god is you. thats right your very existence and that of everything else testifies to there being GOD. so yeah.”

    Really? How so? LOLhor!

    —————-

    “But if I was really crazy, I would go out and start websites, write books and buy billboards telling the world not to believe! LOL!! Then I would spend my day arguing with those who believe. LOL!!”

    Hor, I see you are back from celebrating the winter holiday! Did Jesus give you any good presents?
    If only you knew how religion has corrupted our world. Not just religion, but the fact that religion is based on a false reality. That is the reason why atheists like me are trying to get the word out there. Throughout history, it has been seen as something bad to talk about religions not being real, so people were afraid to talk about it or bring it up. Now that we have outlets like the internet, people can communicate and talk about things like this now.

  9. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:08 am 9.A said …

    Good one Hor. The old red herring retread from DPK.

  10. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:11 am 10.A said …

    “If only you knew how religion has corrupted our world. Not just religion, but the fact that religion is based on a false reality.”

    Let me guess. You will not be proving this is a false reality. You, as per schedule, will claim you have nothing to prove although you make a positive statement asserting a positive claim regarding Hor’s reality.

    Yes?

  11. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:13 am 11.DPK said …

    “LOL, trying to compare dogs with god. R U F*CKIN retarded?”

    Not dogs… TALKING DOGS!!! Big difference… hahaha. I take it you have no problem with talking snakes or burning bushes that speak though? Which one of is retarded???

    “there has to have been a creator or a first “thing” to have started it all.”
    Then who created god? If you’re going to tell me god did not require a creator, then you have just violated your own premise. Idiot.

    “the first evidence for god is you.”

    And a proof positive there was no “intelligent design” is you.

  12. on 29 Dec 2011 at 4:58 am 12.DPK said …

    “9.A said …
    Good one Hor. The old red herring retread from DPK.”

    Ahh.. I see that both you and Hor do not understand what a red herring argument is! That’s ok, there is much you don’t understand.

    Tell you what, let’s cut to the chase and get rid of any analogies that you think are “red herrings” and get right to the point.
    Provide your proof that your god, or any gods, are real.
    We’re waiting.

  13. on 29 Dec 2011 at 8:10 am 13.Severin said …

    7 anon
    “the first evidence for god is you.“

    No doubt! I knew I was divine!

    I am a living evidence for Wakan Tanka.

  14. on 29 Dec 2011 at 8:22 am 14.Severin said …

    10 A
    “You will not be proving this is a false reality.”

    Talking snakes, making man from dirt, creating light without a source of light (Bible), horses with wings flying to heaven (Koran), snakes with feathers (Aztecs), are all “unfalse reality”.

    Yes, indeed, how can we prove it false?
    They are ALL “unfalse”! All real! All correct, nothing to prove!

    Why don’t you apologize to A?

  15. on 29 Dec 2011 at 12:59 pm 15.Hell Yeah said …

    “Let me guess. You will not be proving this is a false reality.”

    Religion is a false reality until evidence shows that one of the relgions is real. That is the default stance. Notice how I said religions and not just Christianity. You only believe in one religion and think all the others are a false reality. How you can prove your religion isn’t a false reality, but the others are? Or do you think all religions are reality? All religions have the same amount of proof, which is nothing but a book and no actual evidence. So by default, none of them are real.

  16. on 29 Dec 2011 at 1:11 pm 16.Anonymous said …

    The evidenc of god is so overwhelming and obvious

    http://i.imgur.com/hHzCw.png

  17. on 29 Dec 2011 at 1:28 pm 17.You know said …

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

  18. on 29 Dec 2011 at 1:44 pm 18.Asher said …

    “So by default, none of them are real.”

    The default position for mathematics is a complete lack of understanding of mathematics from ignorance. The ignorance is not due to lack of available evidence but willful denial. This would be true for physics, literature, etc.

    Atheism is a complete lack of understanding of God from ignorance not from lack of evidence (Rom 1 Ps 19) due to willful denial. Taking a default position is not something to be proud of. It only indicates ignorance, laziness and a refusal to investigate.

    None of that is true, just taking your position a step further. Children are born with an innate sense of God. That is the default position. One only has to build on it.

  19. on 29 Dec 2011 at 2:32 pm 19.Hell Yeah said …

    Asher, I used to be a Christian until sometime during my college years, so I once believed until I realized it was just a form of brainwashing because parents tell their kids about it at a young age and for the most part force it upon them. Children are not born with it, it is how they are brought up. My best friend growing up never went to church and I never asked why and just thought his parents deprived him. Now I look back and understand. People for the most part follow a religion because of where and who they grew up with and who they looked up to at a young age.

  20. on 29 Dec 2011 at 2:48 pm 20.Hell Yeah said …

    ….. We are not born with it. At a young age we lack understanding of the real world and think our parents have the answer to everything, so when they tell us that a god of whatever religion is real, we believe it. Then we are brought to church by our parents and see others doing this as well, so we think it must be real. Then we are told that great grandma is in heaven and it sounds great that we will be there once we die, too. Religion is the biggest trick in human history.

  21. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:12 pm 21.Hell Yeah said …

    And comparing lack of understanding of religion to lack of understanding of mathematics isn’t even comparable. Has one ever understood math and then one day realized it wasn’t real? Also, math is based on proofs, so if one person doesn’t understand an equation, another can actually prove it to them. Math has real evidence, religion doesn’t.

    And why do you theists keep ignoring my question on why is your god the correct god? What evidence do you have over other gods that yours is the real one? Its not like math where 1 plus 1 = 2 is the only answer. You can’t say nope, it is 3, because there is proof it is 2.

  22. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:22 pm 22.Hell Yeah said …

    By not believing something is true because of a lack of evidence doesn’t mean because of a refusal to investigate. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Believers don’t investigate enough to see if their belief is actually real. I believed and then investigated further to realize there really is no actual evidence for me to believe, that it was my lack of understanding of the correlation of my belief and the real world. The more I actually thought about it and invetigated over the years, the more I realized that there is no real evidence. I wasn’t going to believe because many others around me did and because it felt comforting. I am just one of those who likes to seek out reality and want to know reality. If there is ever any real evidence that comes about, then I will believe. Until then, there isn’t a real reason to.

  23. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:32 pm 23.Severin said …

    18 Asher
    “Atheism is a complete lack of understanding of God from ignorance not from lack of evidence (Rom 1 Ps 19) due to willful denial.“

    You willfully deny all gods but one and have no understanding for any god but one, without any evidence your god exists and other gods don’t.

    Are you an atheist?

  24. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:40 pm 24.Lou (DFW) said …

    23.Severin said …

    18 Asher…Are you an atheist?

    All theists are atheists except when it come to their particular imaginary god.

  25. on 29 Dec 2011 at 3:45 pm 25.Lou (DFW) said …

    6.Horatiio said …

    “But if I was really crazy, I would go out and…”

    I would tell complete blog strangers about my “Broadway In The Basement Fantasy” wherein I imagine them “dancing with Wiccans.”

    “You guys kill me. You don’t even see how ridiculous you look.”

    Right, but you don’t.

    Oh yea, then there’s your claim from several weeks ago that you could prove god, but you never did, even though your conditional question was answered before you would do it. Not only do you look ridiculous, you are a liar.

    You and your delusional religious beliefs go hand in hand.

  26. on 29 Dec 2011 at 4:06 pm 26.Lou (DFW) said …

    18.Asher said …

    “The default position for mathematics is a complete lack of understanding of mathematics from ignorance. The ignorance is not due to lack of available evidence but willful denial. This would be true for physics, literature, etc.”

    That has to be one of the dumbest, most incorrect conclusions that I ever saw posted here.

    “Atheism is a complete lack of understanding of God…”

    Here we go again, redefining atheism to create a a straw-man argument.

    “None of that is true, just taking your position a step further. Children are born with an innate sense of God. That is the default position. One only has to build on it.”

    Children in India “are born with an innate sense of” several Hindu gods, children in America “are born with an innate sense of” the xtain god, children in Iraq “”are born with an innate sense of” Muhammad, children of ancient Greece were “born with an innate sense of” many Greek gods, etc., etc., etc. See a pattern here?

    Actually, children everywhere aren’t “born with an innate sense of” ANY god. But some people “are born with an innate” desire to force their delusions upon those who don’t have it. It’s part of a mental disorder that requires them to justify their unjustifiable belief through the mistaken idea that if more people believe something, then the more probable it’s true.

  27. on 29 Dec 2011 at 4:17 pm 27.Lou (DFW) said …

    7.anon said …

    “R U F*CKIN retarded?”

    Asked the person who wrote:

    ” worst strawhat arguement ever”

  28. on 29 Dec 2011 at 4:21 pm 28.Lou (DFW) said …

    12.DPK said …

    “9.A said …
    Good one Hor. The old red herring retread from DPK.”

    “Ahh.. I see that both you and Hor do not understand what a red herring argument is!”

    Is it similar to a “strawhat arguement?”

    11.DPK said …

    “Idiot.”

    That is a huge understatement.

  29. on 29 Dec 2011 at 5:53 pm 29.Asher said …

    “What evidence do you have over other gods that yours is the real one?”

    You don’t understand the word “theist” do you? I believe there is a God. That is all so why must I defend any particular religion?

    With this line of reasoning I will ask you to defend your form of atheism. Maybe you are a Buddhist? What evidence do you have your brand of atheism is correct?

    Rather than dealing with the concept of God, atheist in typical fashion like to proceed to discuss a brand of religion. I think it is because they cannot answer any of the big questions.

    I think all you guys have is insults, belittlement and ad homenim attacks.

    To further disprove the above arguments, I grew up never going to a church or even in a family that broached the subject of God. Whala, I am a theist. I have always know there was a great Creator behind our existence. It is elementary.

  30. on 29 Dec 2011 at 6:12 pm 30.Hell Yeah said …

    Asher, if you believe in a god and have no particular religion, then you would be a deist, not a theist. So what are these big questions you speak of? Atheism believes in no gods unless evidence for one arrises. Most people that are on this blog are either atheists or christians, so that is typically the way the general conversation sways.

  31. on 29 Dec 2011 at 6:17 pm 31.Anonymous said …

    Asher, which god do you think is responsible for creation?

    what religion do you follow?

    Man has worshipped thousands of gods over the centuries. Which of those gods do you think are real, which do you think do not exist, and why?

  32. on 29 Dec 2011 at 6:29 pm 32.Lou (DFW) said …

    29.Asher said …

    “I believe there is a God. That is all so why must I defend any particular religion?”

    That reply is a diversion. Which god is the real god? Your “God” or Zeus, or any one of many other imaginary gods?

    “With this line of reasoning I will ask you to defend your form of atheism. Maybe you are a Buddhist? What evidence do you have your brand of atheism is correct?”

    There aren’t any forms of atheism anymore than there are forms of not believing in Santa Claus.

    Which god is the real god, not which form or brand of theism is true. Can you not answer that simple question?

  33. on 29 Dec 2011 at 6:30 pm 33.Lou (DFW) said …

    30.Hell Yeah said …

    “So what are these big questions you speak of?”

    They are diversions used to deflect the fact that Asher has no evidence for his imaginary god.

  34. on 29 Dec 2011 at 10:47 pm 34.scottp said …

    no one found fault with it. if anything man and god were with each other and recent corruption has driven god from us as we try and expell him from society as you atheists do. For example. say you left a kid to be raised in the woods and taught him nothing, he wouldnt learn math or reading or writting of any sort, now say you get 40 kids exactly like that and leave them together and they get older, no real society will grow at all even if you left them together and reproducing for centuries because we are uncapable of that, but we can learn so clearly humans had to be given previous knowlede on how to make, create and interact with one another. How could you explain all the things in the bible? about how many kinds of people all over the world at different times with no callaboration wrote the same exact things abut the same exact guy? its impossible for it to be coincidence. also if i took a fish and left it in a pond with other fish for eternity it would never sprout legs anbd walk on land with lungs, thats nonsense, also an bacteria cell will never turn into a person or any other creature than what it is for eternity. thats crazy talk and impossible. God being the creator of everything was always around, he came form nothing because he is everything, that “no where” where that dense ball of hot matter was doesnt make sense for science because that nothing would have to be something, if anything that something is god! he was everythiong, there was no creator of the creator because he is a pre existing being! not in the sense of blood and bone as you an i are which i think is really hard for atheists to wrap their minds around.

  35. on 29 Dec 2011 at 11:13 pm 35.ZZZ said …

    if i took a fish and left it in a pond with other fish for eternity it would never sprout legs anbd walk on land with lungs, thats nonsense

    Actually, you have no idea what would happen. You, in all likelihood, have never looked at a single scientific paper on the topic, so you “know” absolutely nothing. The fact is that, if left for eternity, a multitude of species might arise depending on the conditions. Millions of interlocking pieces of scientific evidence indicate that this is so.

    Study. Learn. You will be stunned by what you discover.

  36. on 29 Dec 2011 at 11:22 pm 36.Asher said …

    “Asher, which god do you think is responsible for creation?”

    A God, which one man claims is immaterial. Maybe none that man claims.

    “what religion do you follow?”

    None

    “Asher, if you believe in a god and have no particular religion, then you would be a deist, not a theist”

    This goes back to the fact you do not know the definition of a theist. Do your due diligence. Theist does not imply a religion.

    Will anyone actually answer a question or is everyone fearful here. Buddhism, Taoism, among others, are forms of atheism. Anyone of you one of these?

    http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm

    I read the fifty proofs for the non-existence of God yet all the posters here claim they do not need to prove God’s existence. Which is it? Which of these fifty proofs would be the dagger to prove God is not an entity? I was not impressed with any of them.

  37. on 29 Dec 2011 at 11:25 pm 37.Asher said …

    “now say you get 40 kids exactly like that and leave them together and they get older, no real society will grow at all even if you left them together”

    We don’t do a very good job even when taught, trained and nurtured so, yeah, I could accept that claim.

  38. on 29 Dec 2011 at 11:27 pm 38.Asher said …

    “The fact is that, if left for eternity, a multitude of species might arise depending on the conditions.”

    Might? This doesn’t sound like an atheist. Might includes a whole hosts of possibilities including God. Might is not science and don’t atheist only believe what science can prove? Your biases and presuppositions (No God)have exposed you.

  39. on 30 Dec 2011 at 12:14 am 39.Anonymous said …

    Asher, atheists reject the claim that gods exist. The fact that you need to construct strawman versions of atheists so that you can make your silly comments, says a world about your due diligence.

    Now, to your wishy-washy comments. If you wish to claim theism as opposed to deism, then you’re claiming a personal god that interacts with this universe.

    So, which god do you claim exists and where is your proof?

    Your lack of proof, the lack of interaction of these gods, the spectacular failure of prayer, coupled with posters such as yourself that play evasive word games to avoid placing a concrete definition or providing testable evidence, all add to lack of evidence for any gods.

    By the way, do you understand the difference between cats have four legs and all things with four legs are cats? By your yammering about atheism, it looks like you don’t.

    Still, the claim is yours. You claim the existence of a god or gods, so now other than your “feelings” – prove it.

    So, again, stop with the diversions. Post your proof of your god or join the queue of people who claim such but go to great lengths to avoid actually providing concrete evidence.

  40. on 30 Dec 2011 at 12:59 am 40.Dez said …

    “Might? This doesn’t sound like an atheist.”

    Sure it does Asher. Atheist claim all kinds of “mights” with the exception of God. Even alien seeding. God is the only thing they really need scientific proof for.

    They are a constant contradiction in action.

    As far as the the 50 proofs go, they are a joke I believe. I don’t think the author really wrote them to be serious.

  41. on 30 Dec 2011 at 1:30 am 41.Anonymous said …

    God is the only thing they really need scientific proof for.

    Actually, you’re the one that needs proof. Until you do so, then your god remains imaginary.

    So, lets see you break the theists duck. Horatiio ran away, Curmudgeon ran away, Ben, biff, Q, A, Boz, Asher, 40YA and more, all ran away from the challenge. As they say, “you’re all mouth and no trousers”.

  42. on 30 Dec 2011 at 4:52 am 42.Dez said …

    “Actually, you’re the one that needs proof. Until you do so, then your god remains imaginary.”

    Actually I have all the proof I need. Until you or this website that over promises under delivers provides some evidence to the contrary, God is the ultimate reality. Its not even a debate.

    Your arrogance to believe you are somehow the ultimate judge as to the reality of God is cute but delusional. Just because you put on spiderman pajamas doesn’t make you spiderman.

  43. on 30 Dec 2011 at 10:17 am 43.Anonymous said …

    Dez #42:

    “Actually I have all the proof I need. Until you or this website that over promises under delivers provides some evidence to the contrary, God is the ultimate reality. Its not even a debate.”

    Can you describe your proof? If “its not even a debate” can you explain this proof you are talking about?

  44. on 30 Dec 2011 at 12:17 pm 44.Anonymous said …

    Dez won’t produce proof though, theists never do.

    He’ll just say he has all the proof “he” needs. In other words, he has absolutely no empirical proof at all, just a desire to believe backed up by post-hoc rationalizations.

    But I could be wrong and I’d love for Dez to demonstrate otherwise. It’s just that we’ve asked this before, and the result is always nothing of substance.

  45. on 30 Dec 2011 at 1:54 pm 45.Lou (DFW) said …

    36.Asher said …

    “Will anyone actually answer a question or is everyone fearful here.”

    Nobody here is “fearful” of your juvenile, schoolyard taunts.

    “Buddhism, Taoism, among others, are forms of atheism.”

    No, they aren’t. Besides, this stupid idea has been discussed and dismissed here before. But guess what one question theists NEVER, EVER answer.

    “Anyone of you one of these?”

    I’m not.

    If Nazis don’t believe in leprechauns, that doesn’t make Naziism a form of aleprechaunism. (Before you lie again, no, I’m not a Nazi.)

    Now, enough of your idiotic questions and lies about atheists that you use to avoid THE question – where is the evidence for your imaginary god, whichever one you believe is true?

  46. on 30 Dec 2011 at 2:06 pm 46.Lou (DFW) said …

    42.Dez said …

    “Actually I have all the proof I need.”

    I have all the proof that (insert idiotic belief here). Therefore, it must be true. That’s a perfect example of delusion.

    On the other hand, we don’t have ANY “proof” of your god, not even the “proof” that you claim to have. Please provide it.

  47. on 30 Dec 2011 at 4:17 pm 47.Severin said …

    42 Dez
    “Actually I have all the proof I need.“

    Why don’t you share your proof with us?
    If you have proof you need, why don’t you give us proof WE need?

    If I claimed my dog was, in fact, the god who created universe, who now rests acting a dog, and if I said I had all the proof I need for that, what would YOU say?
    Would you buy my claim? If not, why not?
    YOU are the evidence for my dog being a god, aren’t you? I mean, my dog created you, didn’t he?
    I have all evidences I need it happened that way: My dog told me!

    „Your arrogance to believe you are somehow the ultimate judge as to the reality of God is cute but delusional.“
    I don’t see anyone arrogant here but some people claiming there are gods without any evidence.
    I humbly, non-arogantly, kindly ASK someone to finally share his/her evidences for god with us!

    Until I get some answers, please worship my dog! His name is Alex, and if you don’t worship him, who knows what could happen to you!
    Your contributions in money to „Alex Church“ are higly wellcome!

  48. on 30 Dec 2011 at 5:32 pm 48.DPK said …

    Severin is almost right. The only thing he has wrong is that it was, in fact, MY dog that created the universe and everything in it. Poor Severin, he means well, but you see, he is worshiping the wrong dog. So, I dismiss his claim of Alex being the creator of the universe, but I have all the proof I need that my dog actually did it. You will need to prove me wrong. Your arrogance to believe that you are the ultimate judge as to the validity of my doggie creator is cute, but delusional, and I challenge you to provide any proof whatsoever that my claims are untrue. Since you cannot, I will assume the argument is ceded and you must admit I am right.

    D

  49. on 30 Dec 2011 at 5:34 pm 49.DPK said …

    And Severin, I’m sorry, but if you insist on propagating your lies about your dog being the real creator, I will have no choice but to convince our leaders to come to your country and bomb you back into the stone age. Sorry about that, but my dog commands it.

  50. on 30 Dec 2011 at 6:23 pm 50.Horatiio said …

    “As far as the the 50 proofs go, they are a joke I believe. I don’t think the author really wrote them to be serious.”

    Yes, they are just a joke. Even DPK, Louiar, Severin and the phantom Anonymous realize they are a joke.

    And Dez don’t waste your time providing proof for God’s existence. I have done it more than once and then some new agnostic arrives and wants to go through the process again. It is pointless. I have posted books, websites and my own synopsis. My time is done and I begin my NY resolution early. Time is to valuable.

    I truly hope the atheists/agnostics will investigate for themselves the most important question facing them in their lives. Consider you might very well be wrong. Eternity is a very long time.

    Goodbye

  51. on 30 Dec 2011 at 7:14 pm 51.Hell Yeah said …

    The problem with theists is that they think they truly have enough proof to tell themselves that their religion is real. Those that have a particular religion think theirs is the correct one and all other relgions are false.

    For those who believe in a god but have no particular religion, at least you are halfway to being an atheist/agnostic, and I even am willing to accept that there could possibly be a god out there that none of us know about and hasn’t interacted with the universe once it created the big bang. That is because we can call the beginning of the universe a god, whatever that god could be, we may never know, but all I can say is that a god was not necessary once the big bang occurred. Also, why would that god also create a whole lot of empty wasteful space in the universe? Maybe on the other side of the black holes are other universes, or maybe black holes compress whatever gets sucked in and then another big bang happens. We may never know.

    All I know is that religions are man made and a god does not interact with the universe, not now, not since the big bang. So for those of you who think your religion and afterlife is real because a god must have created the universe from nothing, please take the time to think that the only other real possibility of there being no god, is a god that created the universe and left it alone. Those are really the only two real possible answers.

    We are born and then we die, the rest is up to us to fill the gaps. If you want to fill your gap by believing in something that isn’t real, that is fine, just don’t make decisions that affect others’ actual reality by using your false belief to affect it. That is the reason atheists want to speak out against theists, because atheists have to hear the false reality every day and see important decisions made every day that affect those that are in the real reality.

    We only live once, you might as well enjoy it. The things that religions tell you that are bad, are not all that bad. Yes, murder, stealing, etc are bad, but those are natural morals. I am talking about the other things that can be enjoyed in life that religions might deem as the devil, but in reality they are just a form of having fun.

    When I die, if I do happen to be surprisingly judged in front of god, all I will have to tell that god is that I lived my life in a good way and now that I have actual proof that you are real, I now believe. Isn’t that all that your god would want if he is actually real? If not, he should have done a better job of making sure he is believable to everyone.

  52. on 30 Dec 2011 at 7:45 pm 52.Random said …

    “As far as the the 50 proofs go, they are a joke I believe.”

    I really like them. Look at proof #1:

    http://godisimaginary.com/i1.htm

    Pretty easy to understand. Everything in the Bible about prayer is a lie. It’s proven conclusively. Now what? It means the god of the Bible doesn’t exist.

    Look at proof #2:

    http://godisimaginary.com/i2.htm

    Easy to understand: every prayer claim is bullshit. You can do scientific experiments and stat analysis and prove it. “The belief in prayer is a superstition. It has been proven scientifically over and over again.” That’s what it says. There is no way to deny it. Since the god of the Bible claims to answer prayers and clearly does not, God is imaginary.

    You go down through the rest of them. EVERYTHING in the bible is bullshit. God never does ANYTHING. There is ZERO evidence of god. God is imaginary.

  53. on 30 Dec 2011 at 8:24 pm 53.Jeff said …

    @Hell Yeah:

    Hey man. A lot of the evidence for God is inside of people’s changed lives. Situations that they couldn’t overcome on their own, they have overcome with the help of unseen power. This is real. I know from experience and I know from many other folks who have overcome.

    So far as having fun, the Christian God has guidelines in place designed to protect people and societies from the side effects of various actions.

    On an individual level, the Christian God has made provision for folks when they fail to be completely redeemed at no cost to themselves – and in fact at the cost of his Son’s life instead.

    So far as evidence of God, I think resurrection from the dead is a good start. There is plenty of evidence that who-ever Jesus was, he WAS resurrected. I am convinced that the reason he was resurrected was that he was who he claimed to be, the Son of the Living God.

    I once read a book called “The Case for Christ” which the author, a highly respected investigative reporter, started out to prove how stupid his wife was for starting to believe. In his efforts to prove her wrong he discovered that there was more to it than met the eye. It is an excellent work.

    There are actually a number of stories like that – where folks set out to prove the Bible false but found that in fact it is true.

    Anyway, most folks who don’t believe are motivated by their belief that God would want them to stop doing things they want to do. Removing that from the equation and then weighing the evidence openly pretty much always produces the same result – a believer!

    The interesting think in my own experience getting to know a Personal God is that I used to think he didn’t want me to have fun! I also for a long time thought he was against me having money. Some people think God doesn’t want them to enjoy sex or a beer. I once thought that God didn’t want me to enjoy bacon! I LOVE BACON by the way. I was wrong.

    I also wrestled with the “promises” of God. There are two things that happen when it looks like a promise didn’t happen. Often the promise is for the future – God says he’s returning and this or that will be brought about at that time. Another thing that happens is what happened to me when I read in Matthew 6 that if you put God’s kingdom first all this other stuff would be added to my life as well and I didn’t see that other stuff coming along.

    I recently realized, being totally honest with myself, I wasn’t interested in the Kingdom of God, I was interested in stuff being added to my life that I wanted. My motives weren’t consistent with the promise. I can’t hold God to a conditional promise when my end of the deal isn’t being held up.

    Well, I have to go for now because I have some things to take care of but I wanted to share those thoughts with you guys.

    Happy new year everyone,

    Jeff

  54. on 30 Dec 2011 at 8:41 pm 54.Hell Yeah said …

    “A lot of the evidence for God is inside of people’s changed lives. Situations that they couldn’t overcome on their own, they have overcome with the help of unseen power. This is real.”

    Yeah? And what about the lives of those that didn’t change for the good? He just chose to answer only random prayers? How do you know that those situations that were overcome couldn’t have happened on their own?

  55. on 30 Dec 2011 at 9:02 pm 55.Jeff said …

    Good questions Hell Yeah.

    Changed lives: I can only speak for myself with certainty on that – and after that I accept that what others have described is the truth – which, since I’ve seen it in my own life I tend to accept that they aren’t making it up.

    The ones he didn’t change – well, he’s not going to force people to change at this point in history. I know two women who were severely molested when young. One is now a leader and reaches out to 1000′s of people helping them. She says that she sought God earnestly and by His power she was able to overcome. It’s beyond my comprehension after all she went through how she has forgiven and now is able to help so many others.

    The other woman hangs onto bitterness, rage and anger and refuses to speak to God because she blames Him for what men did. Her hatred is what defines her so she is not open to the healing that is available.

    Does God answer random prayers – good question. From a purely human perspective I’d say yes. However, I also know that sometimes the answer is no. Other times the answer is wait. Sometimes the answer is Yes but it comes in a much different package than expected. I don’t believe it’s actually random because I believe that God cares for people and that being his motive, the answers are couched in eternity and the eternal consequences and significance and in love. So they appear to be random but they are carefully given.

    Jeff

  56. on 30 Dec 2011 at 9:04 pm 56.Random said …

    “A lot of the evidence for God is inside of people’s changed lives. Situations that they couldn’t overcome on their own, they have overcome with the help of unseen power. This is real.”

    Bumper sticker:

    25,000 children will die of starvation today. Why should God answer YOUR prayers?

    Seems appropriate.

    How is “dying of starvation” a “changed life”? Being dead is not a life. 25,000 dead kids is a lot of death.

  57. on 30 Dec 2011 at 10:36 pm 57.Jeff said …

    @Random

    I understand feeling frustrated about such things. I have felt the same way!!!

    There are two parts to this. First, God doesn’t FORCE his will on anyone. That means we as humans get to pick how we live. The side effect of our selfishness, hatefulness, craving of power etc., often results in harm to other people. The alternative would be that we were all automatons with no free choice.

    According to the Bible, if nations operated according to God’s principals they don’t end up in famine etc. But, rather, nations choose to disregard the principals that create healthful existence of individual and nation and the results are evident!

    If nations and individuals chose to live a better way, less children would be starving. If less men were raping people, less women would be getting raped. Is it God’s fault women get raped? Duh. It’s the filthy dogs who rape women’s fault.

    The second thing about this is that you and I are temporal beings. We tend to look at everything through the lens of the 100 or so years we live here. Granted, if I’m wrong, then that is all there is. But, according to the Bible, there is an eternal existence full of joy, absent of any sickness or hate etc. According to the Bible, this eternal joy filled existence belongs to innocents and those who enter a relationship with Jesus. So, in the eternal measure, it sucks that men’s evil causes such suffering and children die but their next thought after that last breath is eternal joy.

    So, according to the Christian faith, even though mankind has created misery and suffering because of their unwillingness to submit to God’s laws that create joy and healthful living, God has made a way for those who become victims to have an eternal reward that immeasurably makes up for what they had to endure.

    For many years I didn’t want to believe that there was a God because I love women. I thought that God didn’t want me to be happy and have fun. I thought he was a grumpy jerk looking for a chance to destroy people so I tried to not believe there was a God. I was wrong about all of that.

    Thanks for your comments. I understand exactly how you feel because that’s how I used to feel.

    I hope you have a great New Year,

    Jeff

  58. on 31 Dec 2011 at 2:28 am 58.Zed said …

    “Results Not Typical”

    Jeff, have you ever watched an informercial where so much of the hype is based on testimonials? Have you wondered why? Advertising types know that testimony is a better motivator and seller than plain truth and it’s a powerful way to overcome objections. The thing is, they are rarely typical of the actual results.

    So, someone loses 50 pounds, a beautiful woman has beautiful skin, some guy puts on 10 pounds of muscle, and those “male enhancement” adverts.. enough said. Do you notice that at the bottom there’s usually an asterisk “Results Not Typical”?

    That’s what you’re doing here. You’re picking only the good and you’re saying it’s the result of your actions. However, just like so many of those late know selling shows, the product does little or nothing, it’s the person using it who does the work. You’re ignoring all the negative results and selecting only those that fit what you want to believe.

    Look at your own words. You’ve selected a few, isolated incidents (Results Not Typical) and claim it’s your god, and you’ve created the perfect set of excuses for when prayer doesn’t work which is most of the time. Actually, it’s all of the time, as what you are seeing is simply what happens without a god being involved. “Results Not Typical”. i.e. it doesn’t actually work.

    Ask yourself this. How can you differentiate between your rationalizations for when your prayer doesn’t work and the result of there being no god? You can’t can you?

    The answers of “no” and “wait” are exactly what you would get if there was no god. And guess what? There is no god and you have no proof of one. None at all, other than your desire for there to be one.

    As for your excuses as to why people are starving and your god doesn’t intervene. Wow, talk about being blind to reality. I realize there are the excuses you are taught in church, but once again, you’ve latched on to a set of excuses that operate EXACTLY as they would were there no god. And, guess what, there is no god. Not yours, not ones others believe in either.

    Now, you seem genuine in your approach so please answer these things.

    Jeff, do you believe that the god Zeus is real?

    Whatever your answer, yes or no, please tell us how you got to that conclusion. Then tell us, are you applying the same set of rules for your belief in your god as to Zeus, or are you using a special set of rules that apply ONLY to your god alone?

  59. on 31 Dec 2011 at 1:45 pm 59.Severin said …

    57 Jeff
    “First, God doesn’t FORCE his will on anyone.“

    What IS he doing, at all?

    He randomly picks whom to kill (for an omnipotent creature let die = kill), without any recognizable criteria: good christians, children…
    What is his role in all that? Why do we need him and why does he need us?
    What is he doing? What is his purpose?
    One would expect god to PROTECT innocent and helpless people and children! Hey, an „allmighty“ and „all loving“!!!
    One would expect him to PREVENT evil to touch innocent and helpless ones, especially children. More specifically, children who believe in god and pray.
    If god exists AND let children die from hunger, he deserves all possible hate one can find in himself/herself!
    Jus imagine: you have a son of 6 years with leukemia. You pray allmighty and all loving god to spare his life. Child himself writes to god (I saw the letter!): „dear god, please do not take me, I will keep my toys in order all the time, and I will never again pull my sister’s hair…“
    Child dies!
    I am happy for my disbelieving in god: if I believed in god, I HAD to hate him, although it was not my child.
    Hate is not a feeling I typically practice, I do not recall I felt it ever in my life, but if god existed, I would hate him with all my heart for this boy who died some 35 years ago.
    IF god existed, it was HIS responsibility, and killing of children deserves NOTHING but hate (and hanging on balls upside down).
    If SUCH a god stood before me and told me HE was the one who let this child die, I would spit in his face.
    At least I would try to.

  60. on 31 Dec 2011 at 2:04 pm 60.Lou (DFW) said …

    50.Horatiio said …

    “Yes, they are just a joke. Even DPK, Louiar, Severin and the phantom Anonymous realize they are a joke.”

    Once again, Hor lies about people and what they DID NOT post on this blog. Hor’s pathological lying has once again reared its ugly head, further demonstrating that he and his imaginary god are frauds. Hor claims to provide proof of god’s existence, yet because he hasn’t, he can only result to lying about what atheists here think. Hor is a pathetic excuse foe a human being.

    “And Dez don’t waste your time providing proof for God’s existence.”

    Because you can’t.

    “I have done it more than once and then some new agnostic arrives and wants to go through the process again. It is pointless. I have posted books, websites and my own synopsis.”

    Once again, Hor lies – if not, then somehow the world has missed his monumental proof of god.

    “My time is done and I begin my NY resolution early. Time is to valuable.”

    Translation – Hor can’t, never has, and never will provide evidence of his imaginary god, so rather than simply admit his belief is nothing but a primitive faith, he uses a “NY resolution” as an excuse to leave. But it’s just another lie. In reality, he will be here next year.

    “I truly hope the atheists/agnostics will investigate for themselves the most important question facing them in their lives.”

    Should we also investigate UFOs, Big Foot, alien abductions, Bermuda Triangles, astrology, and all the other dozens of stupid beliefs, including an imaginary god?

    “Consider you might very well be wrong.”

    Or that certainly and conclusively, you are.

    “Eternity is a very long time.”

    Yes, it is. But our lives are not, so don’t waste that time in pursuit of an imaginary god.

    “Goodbye”

    And hopefully, good riddance.

  61. on 31 Dec 2011 at 2:29 pm 61.Lou (DFW) said …

    58.Zed said …

    About what

    57.Jeff said …

    Summary – In psychology and logic, rationalization (also known as making excuses[1]) is an unconscious defense mechanism in which perceived controversial behaviors or feelings are logically justified and explained in a rational or logical manner in order to avoid any true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable– or even admirable and superior– by plausible means. [2] Rationalization encourages irrational or unacceptable behavior, motives, or feelings and often involves ad hoc hypothesizing. This process ranges from fully conscious (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly subconscious (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings of guilt).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_%28psychology%29

  62. on 01 Jan 2012 at 2:24 pm 62.Anonymous said …

    Faith:

    http://truth-saves.com/images/faith.jpg

  63. on 02 Jan 2012 at 5:42 am 63.Zed said …

    It’s a shame Jeff chose not to continue the conversation, as I’d be interested if a believer does or does not see that they’ve constructed a scenario in which there is no way to differentiate between success and failure.

    For the theists, maybe you could contrast your “yes”, “no”, or “wait” conditions with the heads-I-win tails-you-lose arguments that are so often put forward to defend rank pseudoscience. Perhaps it’s clearer in another context.

    For example, defenders of nonsense therapies (Homeopathy, Naturopathy, Reiki, Chiropractic etc) will often claim the folowing:

    - If something improves (usually it’s a self-limiting condition) then that’s proof their magic works, even though their rate of “success” is no different from placebo or doing nothing.
    - If something fails (nothing happens), it’s proof that their magic needs further “individualization” or the patient didn’t disclose all information.
    - If something gets worse, then that’s a “healing crisis” which is “proof” that they are eliminating “toxins” or some other crap excuse.
    - When their magic fails all scientific testing, that’s because their magic cannot be understood / analyzed by science.

    Just like religion, these “practitioners” of so-called alternative medicine end up with conditions that take every possible outcome and claim it as a success. Perhaps seeing it in another context might help folks like Jeff see how their arguments are just covering up failure and promoting it as success.

  64. on 03 Jan 2012 at 3:20 am 64.Sam said …

    Science and the belief in God are not contradicting.
    Go back to the basics and anyone with no biases and is open to the truth can and will find out that God is The Creator and The Sustainer of everything.

  65. on 03 Jan 2012 at 3:34 am 65.Anonymous said …

    > God is The Creator and The Sustainer of everything

    God is the creator and sustainer of polio?

    Starvation?

    Tsunamis?

    Cancer?

    Stillbirths?

    Cleft palates?

  66. on 03 Jan 2012 at 4:03 am 66.Sam said …

    just because you name bad diseases doesn’t mean there is no God. He created the entire system. And of course there are good things and bad things. Like when someone makes a car but it COULD brake down that doesn’t mean he didn’t make the car.

  67. on 03 Jan 2012 at 4:17 am 67.Anonymous said …

    > And of course there are good things and bad things.

    Why would a loving God create bad things? Why would a loving God create cancer, influenza, polio, parasites, appendicitis, etc.?

  68. on 03 Jan 2012 at 4:24 am 68.Sam said …

    Step by step first we prove there is a God.
    Then we figure out his attributes and why he does or does not do things. Maybe He’s not a “loving God”.
    The only way to find out is if God communicates with us. We can’t assume anything about him we only realize that there must be a God then we need a message from God to explain why there are disease if God chooses to let us know why.

    An employee doesn’t impose his boss to be a certain way. You do what the boss says, period. Of course in life you can probably change your boss but there is only ONE God and we cant do anything about it. What God says goes.

  69. on 03 Jan 2012 at 4:56 am 69.DPK said …

    68.Sam said …
    Step by step first we prove there is a God.

    Yes, by all means. Please do so………… This will be earth shattering.

    Hey everyone… here’s another one who claims he can prove gods exist.
    Don’t mind if we don’t hold our breath while you try though. But if you do, you’ll be the first person in history, so… really, no pressure. Go for it.

  70. on 03 Jan 2012 at 5:02 am 70.Sam said …

    Many people have proven that God exists. Thats besides the point. It’s very simple but most get carried away going in the wrong direction and getting “lost in translation”. Keep it simple and its easy.

  71. on 03 Jan 2012 at 5:14 am 71.DPK said …

    Name one, and it’s not beside the point.. it is the point. No one has ever proven that gods exist. If they had, no one would be here discussing it.
    I agree to keep it simple and easy. Prove such a thing exists, or admit you cannot.

  72. on 03 Jan 2012 at 5:21 am 72.Sam said …

    Well first thing is. What are the basic laws or things that we know that we all live are life by?
    For example if you hear a knock on your door, you know somebody was there. Right? Thats how we all live our daily life. By the way I can’t stay long. But I will try to keep checking back and commenting when I can so this might take a while. But I guess thats good. That way we all can take our time and think about each others comments.

  73. on 03 Jan 2012 at 7:43 am 73.what? said …

    > An employee doesn’t impose his boss to be a
    > certain way. You do what the boss says, period.

    Bullshit. If the boss is murdering people, the employee gets the boss arrested.

  74. on 03 Jan 2012 at 8:40 am 74.Severin said …

    72 Sam
    “For example if you hear a knock on your door, you know somebody was there. Right?”

    Not right.
    It may be a branche brought by wind, a stone lounched by truck tires, a frightened bird that lost orientation, the tail of your dog waiting for you to let him in, sounds caused by thermic causes…

  75. on 03 Jan 2012 at 8:52 am 75.Severin said …

    There are about million + things that can cause sounds that makes you think someone is knocking the door.

    There are also many things that makes you think there is a god, but if you are willing to explore, you will always find some much more reasonable causes, something that fits.

    God doesn’t fit anywhere.

  76. on 03 Jan 2012 at 9:21 am 76.Anonymous said …

    Sam, did you read ANYTHING at all of the preceding conversations?

    You are so brainwashed that you arrive here, make some brain-dead comments, and you don’t even bother to refute or comment on the previous conversations?

    Is this how you live your life as a Christian? You barge into people’s lives, tell them some stupid story about your god knocking on the door, then make an excuse to leave before anyone can question you on your delusion?

    By all means prove your god exists, but don’t simply repeat the nonsense of Pascals Wager or make an argument from ignorance.

  77. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:23 am 77.A scientist said …

    I have been a scientist for many years. I am not sure if some of the posters here understand the true nature of science. Science is a valuable and useful tool. However there are many things it can not prove or disprove. For example I can not prove to anyone that I love my wife and children using science. String thery is widely regarded by many scientists, but there is no evidence for it. I believe in evolution, and I have a degree in biochemistry, but am not aware of any proof to date of an accepted mechanism by which life first arose. Standing on the sidelines of this dicussion it seems to me as if the atheists have as much “fath” in unproven theories as the the theists.

  78. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:41 am 78.A scientist said …

    Sorry the above post is probabaly in the wrong thread.

  79. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:46 am 79.Anonymous said …

    Boring… once more with the god of the gaps argument and diversions about “love” and “origins”, yet you believers in 2000 year old goat-herder’s superstitions have no proof at all of your silly stories being anything other than myths.

    How about this “scientist”. How about YOU provide proof that any god exists? Never mind what science can’t prove, let’s see what you CAN prove.

    Can’t prove god exists? Of course you can’t as all gods are imaginary and not being able to prove how something happened doesn’t mean a god did it. Some “scientist” you are.

    Do any of your delusional believers have any, you know, proof at all?

  80. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:57 am 80.A scientist said …

    Excuse me anonymous, but I made no such claim.
    I merely said that science can nether prove or disprove such questions.

    Please read carefully what I said before you comment.

    Also why do you feel the need to resort to rhetoric, capitalisation and put downs?

  81. on 03 Jan 2012 at 1:01 pm 81.Lou (DFW) said …

    77.A scientist said …

    “However there are many things it can not prove or disprove. For example I can not prove to anyone that I love my wife and children using science.”

    That’s because love is an emotion that only exists in the mind. Does your god only exist in the mind? Yes, of course. Therefore, the god of the mind cannot exist in the physical world. He cannot create or interact with the physical world. He can’t part seas, make snakes talk, turn wine into water, or do any of the many other supernatural things that are claimed by superstitious goat herders.

    Your imagination is just as real as your feelings of love. That is also the extent of your imaginary god. He’s just as real as your imagination.

  82. on 03 Jan 2012 at 2:24 pm 82.Anonymous said …

    A scientist, no one needs to disprove the existence of imaginary beings such as gods. In the religious faith is belief despite evidence to the contrary. If you think science is based on ignoring the bulk of the evidence in favor of unsupported superstitions, then you simply don’t understand science.

    Your arguments are simply silly distractions from the point that gods are imaginary and belief in them is a delusion.

  83. on 03 Jan 2012 at 6:10 pm 83.Lou (DFW) said …

    77.A scientist said …

    “Standing on the sidelines of this dicussion it seems to me as if the atheists have as much “fath” in unproven theories as the the theists.”

    It’s irrelevant as to what “unproven theories” atheists accept on “fath.” The only relevant point here is that theists don’t have any evidence for their imaginary god.

  84. on 03 Jan 2012 at 7:05 pm 84.Anonymous said …

    83, most strange that posters insist on going off on tangents rather than address the simple question of providing proof for the existence of a god or gods. Why, it’s almost as if they want to change the subject to avoid an embarrassing silence.

  85. on 03 Jan 2012 at 10:16 pm 85.Sam said …

    So none of you answer your door because “it could be something else” not a knock. Ok even though you didn’t prove anything against me, you just made claims that something else could knock on the door like a falling tree. OK, lets say you come to your house and see a lit cigarette on the table. What conclusion do you derive from that?

  86. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:06 pm 86.DPK said …

    Sam, I’m not entirely disagreeing with you. If you hear a knock on the door, it IS a fairly reasonable assumption that someone is there knocking. It is also possible the knock was caused by something else, but most everyone would answer the door because someone knocking is a reasonable assumption.
    Now, let me ask you this. Suppose you and a friend were traveling along a mountain road and you came upon a boulder blocking the road. You look to the left, up a hill, and see tracks in the dirt coming from up the hill ending where the boulder lies. Would you assume that the boulder had come loose, rolled down the hill, and stopped where it was, blocking the road? Or, would you assume that invisible space monkeys from Venus used transporter technology to transport the boulder from a distant moon of Neptune to the spot on the road in order to repair a rip in the space – time continuum and that you dare not move for fear of angering the monkeys, or disturbing the equilibrium of the universe?

    Hopefully, you would assume the boulder rolled down the hill. Why? You cannot prove or disprove either scenario. No one witnessed the event. You have no real reason to think the space monkey theory is any more or less valid except for the fact that you KNOW gravity exists, that boulders roll down hills, and when they do, the disturb the soil in their path. You also have no reason to believe invisible space monkeys exist, there is no evidence of them, transporter technologies, or “rips” in space-time that can be repaired with a boulder.
    That is the difference between a reasonable assumption and an unreasonable one.
    If you hear a knock on the door, what is your conclusion? That a person is knocking because they want you to answer the door, or perhaps Jesus has descended from heaven in a firey chariot and has come to take you home to your eternal reward in a magical fairy land where streets are made of gold and you can eat all the ice cream you want without ever gaining an ounce?

    You don’t see a difference?

  87. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:35 pm 87.Sam said …

    Of course when see the effects of the boulder on the hill and see it blocking the road, in short the conclusion is that the boulder rolled down the hill. And it is a fact that something caused that boulder to move. Whether wind,earthquake, a person, or machine, etc… but no matter what there was a cause and within that is the fact that everything is going according to preconditioned system like gravity or the fact that the boulder was somewhat round which means it can roll. Whether you ever find out the exact cause of the boulder coming down the hill or not there had to have been a cause even if I never figure that out. So going to the second example of seeing a cigarette lit in your house. You know someone was in your house regardless if you figure out exactly who was in there. Right?

  88. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:47 pm 88.Hell Yeah said …

    “So none of you answer your door because “it could be something else” not a knock. Ok even though you didn’t prove anything against me, you just made claims that something else could knock on the door like a falling tree. OK, lets say you come to your house and see a lit cigarette on the table. What conclusion do you derive from that?”

    So if I hear a knock on my door it might be god? That is your proof of a god? How do you know it wasn’t big foot?, or on a serious note, just the wind.?

    And as far as a lit cigarette, we have proof that humans and cigarettes exist, so a conclusion would be that a human broke in and lit a cigarette. Or are you claiming it could be god that lit the cigarette?

  89. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:48 pm 89.Hell Yeah said …

    ……or maybe that knock on the door is an alien who came to anal probe me.

  90. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:56 pm 90.Sam said …

    I never said anything about God yet. We are discussing it point by point and taking are time with it and since many of you assume that nobody has proven God’s existence for thousands of years then I guess we have a lot of time. Unless of course one of us dies then it would be too late for me or you.

  91. on 04 Jan 2012 at 12:24 am 91.DPK said …

    We know exactly where you are going with it Sam. Don’t think we haven’t heard it 1000 times before… the “first cause”… the painting proving the painter, the watch as proof of the watchmaker… the “creation” as proof of a creator.
    Let’s save you some typing… none of them are proof for god. First… show us what is a “creation” and then prove that it must have been created, rather than that it just exists. 2nd, show us what, or who, created the creator. By your logic, if a creation proves a creator, then the creator requires a creator even more complex, and on and on into infinity. Now, if you accept the fact that the creator you propose was not created, then why can you not accept that the universe could also exist without one? Do you know what a quantum fluctuation is?
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html
    Cut to the chase, save the tap dancing and make you case for the existence of supernatural gods. Why do you believe it, and what evidence do you have that any gods actually exist. You stated recently that “many people have proven god exists.” If this is true, all you need to do is site the work and the proof. We don’t need the dog and pony show.
    So, I call. Put up or fold.

  92. on 04 Jan 2012 at 12:56 am 92.Sam said …

    Thats interesting so are you saying that painting doesn’t prove that there is a painter but it proves instead that the painting happened by mere chance. Is that you are saying? That you would rather believe that the universe with all its laws that you go by test things and disect things etc…. Laws that you and me live our life by and depend on. These happened by “chance” and that is a better possibility then everything being created. Even though you can’t prove that “chance” that goes against our daily life and laws that we know are true. Like for example when there is an effect there must have been a cause.

  93. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:04 am 93.Hell Yeah said …

    I agree with DPK, please get to the point Sam. Yes, we know if we hear a knock on the door it could be many things, including those annoying Jahoba witnesses. And when we go to the door and see no one there, then it could be other reasons like the wind or kids putting a flaming bag of poo on your porch and running……so where are you trying to go with this?

  94. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:08 am 94.Hell Yeah said …

    “Thats interesting so are you saying that painting doesn’t prove that there is a painter but it proves instead that the painting happened by mere chance.”

    Uh, we know painters exist, so when we see a painting, we know how it got there. It’s not like we see other gods creating other things, and are still denying a certain god. The supernatural has not been proven to exist.

  95. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:12 am 95.DPK said …

    No, not at all. A painting certainly proves a painter. We know paintings exist and we know painters paint them. We do not know that the universe was “created”. We do not have any reason to think that gods exist, that gods created the universe, or universes. It could be the universe just is. It is what this thing we call reality IS. Even if you cannot accept that, that does not mean that there must then be a god. “Chance” has noting to do with it. The universe “works” according to laws… if you want to call those laws “god”. Fine. But the natural laws of the universe do not love you, they do not listen to your thoughts, answer your prayers, care who you sleep with or what you do on Sunday. They do not require your love, devotion, worship, or belief. The universe cares not one wit if you are here or not.
    Now, show you evidence that a “god or gods” are required and actually exist. If you claim that every effect must have a cause, then what “caused” god? If you cannot answer that question, then your entire position collapses under its own pretense.
    Go.

  96. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:12 am 96.Sam said …

    But none of us have seen pretty much anything happen by chance but yet you would rather take that as evidence even though there is no evidence that it happened by chance. Its just a claim that people are taking as if its been proven. If people are waiting for me on the other side of a river and I finally make it and I tell them I had no way of getting across the river but all of a sudden things were being put together in front of my eyes and then there was a boat and thats how I made it across. They would look at me like I was insane. But yet there are people that still claim that the universe that is far more complex than a boat and has many systems and laws came to be by chance which again is a claim. Which obviously goes against our everyday lives.

  97. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:13 am 97.Hell Yeah said …

    “That you would rather believe that the universe with all its laws that you go by test things and disect things etc…. Laws that you and me live our life by and depend on. These happened by “chance” and that is a better possibility then everything being created. Even though you can’t prove that “chance” that goes against our daily life and laws that we know are true. Like for example when there is an effect there must have been a cause.”

    The natural laws were created from the big bang and billions of years of randomness with these laws. We don’t know yet what caused the big bang. We can call whatever that is god, but there is no way we can define what that god is. That god could have created the big bang and left it alone, whatever that god is. Your type of god has no need once the big bang happened, so there is no need for a god to have been around all this time and still around.

  98. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:14 am 98.Sam said …

    I was writing that before I saw your comment. LOL

  99. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:15 am 99.Sam said …

    It also requires you to prove that it just “is”. So you are saying that the universe never had a beginning?

  100. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:20 am 100.Sam said …

    “The natural laws were created from the big bang and billions of years of randomness with these laws. We don’t know yet what caused the big bang. We can call whatever that is god, but there is no way we can define what that god is. That god could have created the big bang and left it alone, whatever that god is. Your type of god has no need once the big bang happened, so there is no need for a god to have been around all this time and still around”

    Even though I don’t agree that “randomness or chance” “created” the laws we live by and that can’t be proven anyway. Lets forget about that and then you say there was a big bang but don’t know what caused it. And also how it got there before the “bang”. So now you want to assume it just “is” with no proof.

  101. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:22 am 101.Hell Yeah said …

    Sam, if your god created the universe for us, then why didn’t he just create our galaxy only? What does the vast amount of space and other planets have to do with us? We are a tiny spec of the universe. Yes, it is amazing what billions of years can do to the universe after the big bang, but it doesn’t mean you get an afterlife out of it. Would you still worship your god if you knew there was no afterlife? Your whole belief system rides on the afterlife being real.

  102. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:24 am 102.Sam said …

    The only way you can define God or see if he wants anything from you or not is to have some sort of communication with him. If he decides to communicate.
    Otherwise we can only know that God is there.

  103. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:28 am 103.Sam said …

    Why he created other galaxies you would have to ask God. Which you can’t. But the fact there is other galaxies doesn’t mean there is no God actually it makes it even harder to have happened by “chance” and not from a creator.

  104. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:30 am 104.Hell Yeah said …

    “Lets forget about that and then you say there was a big bang but don’t know what caused it. And also how it got there before the “bang”. So now you want to assume it just “is” with no proof.”

    We will probably never know what caused the big bang, which is why atheists don’t try to come up with a reason. We just realize we don’t know since there is no proof of how it happened. We do know that there was a expansion of a singular point, though.

    The atheists stance is that the default position of something being true is that it isn’t true until something proves it to be true. Nothing proves your god or afterlife to be true, so therefore until real proof comes about, it isn’t true. Like I said, a god may have created the big bang and left, we may never know, but I am not going to go and claim that is the case. You and your fellow believers claim that your god is the real case. But then there is the question of why your god? What makes your god correct and not the others?

  105. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:32 am 105.Sam said …

    Also if we continue step by step first realizing that there must have been a power that started this universe then we have to have some kind of communication like a prophet, messenger, or a book from God. Which of course would need to be proven its from God. Then if we prove the book is from God, if it says there is an afterlife there is, if its says there isn’t there isn’t.

  106. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:33 am 106.Hell Yeah said …

    “The only way you can define God or see if he wants anything from you or not is to have some sort of communication with him. If he decides to communicate.
    Otherwise we can only know that God is there.”

    If he decides to communicate? He has never communicated with anyone for real. The people that have thought they communicated with him just don’t realize that they were just talking to themselves. And you can not know that god is there if there is no actual proof.

  107. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:34 am 107.Hell Yeah said …

    “But the fact there is other galaxies doesn’t mean there is no God actually it makes it even harder to have happened by “chance” and not from a creator.”

    Actually, when explosions happen, the particles that were together before the explosion start to go in many different directions. Our galaxy is one of those directions.

  108. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:36 am 108.DPK said …

    99.Sam said …
    It also requires you to prove that it just “is”. So you are saying that the universe never had a beginning?

    I am saying we don’t know if the universe had a beginning, or if it existed in one form or another infinitely, if it is just one of a infinite succession of universes, if it is just one of an infinite number of universes, or if it was the result of a “chance” quantum fluctuation that created it. That seems most likely, but we don’t know…. and neither do you.
    The fact that I cannot explain to you the exact cause of say, volcanic eruptions does not then mean that you get to claim a magical god must be responsible. YOU are the one making the unwarranted leaps and assumptions. I am simply saying that a gap in knowledge does not then default to supernatural explanations.
    Now before you go off on how statistically improbable a random quantum fluctuation specific enough to produce the universe as we know it is… keep in mind that infinity is a VERY long time… haha… and in infinite time ANY probability is an absolute certainty…. in fact in infinite time it is certain that not only has it happened… it has happened INFINITE times! Such is the nature of infinite things. The fact that you are here thinking about it is only evidence that it is not only possible, but certain.

  109. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:38 am 109.Hell Yeah said …

    “Also if we continue step by step first realizing that there must have been a power that started this universe then we have to have some kind of communication like a prophet, messenger, or a book from God. Which of course would need to be proven its from God. Then if we prove the book is from God, if it says there is an afterlife there is, if its says there isn’t there isn’t.”

    Why do we have to have some sort of communication? And according to all the religions, they each think they have their own communication/book. Why is theirs false, and yours correct? Where is the proof that yours is from the real god?

  110. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:38 am 110.Sam said …

    What are the laws you live your daily life by?
    Do you ever come across anything dead or alive, liquid,gas, or solid in your house, car, park, etc, and say that it’s just there. No power or person put it there? Of course not a power or person must have put it there. Right?

  111. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:43 am 111.Hell Yeah said …

    “keep in mind that infinity is a VERY long time… haha… and in infinite time ANY probability is an absolute certainty…. in fact in infinite time it is certain that not only has it happened… it has happened INFINITE times!”

    Correct. There can be many possible explanations. We don’t know exactly what happens in black holes. The universe, or part of the universe, could eventually be sucked into a huge black hole and then another big bang happens creating another universe.

  112. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:44 am 112.DPK said …

    “Also if we continue step by step first realizing that there must have been a power that started this universe then we have to have some kind of communication like a prophet, messenger, or a book from God.”

    Whoa!! What? Talk about a non-sequitur. Even if we concede that “something” preceded the big bang, that does NOT mean it was a god, it does not mean “we have to have some kind of communication” with it. Where do you get that?

    “Something” causes a volcano to erupt. Can we then assume that we should expect some communication, prophet, messenger, or book from the volcano?

  113. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:50 am 113.Sam said …

    Using “Power” instead of God.

    Its the Power’s choice if he wants to communicate with us or not obviously if the power doesn’t want to then we have nothing to go by but if there is a message that is PROVEN to be from a Power. Then it would be wise to see what that message says. Right?

  114. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:53 am 114.Hell Yeah said …

    “What are the laws you live your daily life by?
    Do you ever come across anything dead or alive, liquid,gas, or solid in your house, car, park, etc, and say that it’s just there. No power or person put it there? Of course not a power or person must have put it there. Right?”

    The power you refer to is the supernatural, which would mean it would exist out of our natural laws. Natural laws prove to exist, supernatural laws don’t. So I would know it was because of a natural law, which we are part of, since supernatural laws don’t exist.

  115. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:54 am 115.Sam said …

    “keep in mind that infinity is a VERY long time… haha… and in infinite time ANY probability is an absolute certainty…. in fact in infinite time it is certain that not only has it happened… it has happened INFINITE times!”

    First you have to prove that there was infinite time not that I agree with the rest. So how could prove its been there for eternity even though when you look at everything in this world it shows to be limited and not infinite.

  116. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:55 am 116.Hell Yeah said …

    “Its the Power’s choice if he wants to communicate with us or not obviously if the power doesn’t want to then we have nothing to go by but if there is a message that is PROVEN to be from a Power. Then it would be wise to see what that message says. Right?”

    Or since there is no communication, that means the power doesn’t actually exist, right? So what is this PROVEN message from a power?

  117. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:58 am 117.Sam said …

    You are trying to dine the “power” and then claim that there is no such power. We don’t have enough knowledge to say anything about the “power”. All we can do is acknowledge that a Power caused things to happen. That is the extent of our limited human ability. Any further information would have to be provided by that Power if the Power chooses to give us any information. Right?

  118. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:59 am 118.Sam said …

    Sorry *trying to define the “power” oops. I’m human and I make mistakes.

  119. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:00 am 119.Hell Yeah said …

    “So how could prove its been there for eternity even though when you look at everything in this world it shows to be limited and not infinite.”

    We aren’t claiming that it has been here for eternity. We are saying that could be an option. Remember, we don’t claim anything unless there is actual proof. There may be a god if actual proof arises. But so far no actual proof has come about. You claim that a god is for sure. We aren’t claiming anything for sure. That is the difference we try to point out. You live your life as if a god is the absolute truth. We don’t.

  120. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:04 am 120.Hell Yeah said …

    “We don’t have enough knowledge to say anything about the “power”. All we can do is acknowledge that a Power caused things to happen. That is the extent of our limited human ability. Any further information would have to be provided by that Power if the Power chooses to give us any information. Right?”

    Our point exactly. We don’t know what the “cause” was of the big bang, and that is all we can go on. No further information has come from the big bang once it was created. Humans, billions of years after the universe began, finally came into exsistance through evolution and at some point began to question where they came from and where they go once they die, and many stories floated around and a book was written for various possible reasons, and you think that is the information provided by the power that started the big bang? LOL.

  121. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:08 am 121.Sam said …

    “We aren’t claiming that it has been here for eternity. We are saying that could be an option.”

    An option on what base? It goes against our daily rational thinking. Because everything we see is limited. Right?

  122. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:13 am 122.Hell Yeah said …

    “An option on what base? It goes against our daily rational thinking. Because everything we see is limited. Right?”

    Matter and energy could have existed in some form before the big bang. The universe as we know it will expand for infinity from the starting point of the big bang, but like I said earlier, black holes could lead to other big bangs inside those black holes, we don’t know. Maybe our matter and energy came from another universe that got sucked into a black hole and that is where the big bang happened. We just don’t know.

  123. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:14 am 123.Hell Yeah said …

    So where is this proof that your god of the religion that you follow is the absolute god and not the gods of all the other religions or even just an unknown god that left the universe alone after the big bang?

  124. on 04 Jan 2012 at 5:38 am 124.Anonymous said …

    Sam, please get to the point and dispense with the script. If you can’t prove your point without playing silly word games then your point isn’t worth making. In fact, I don’t think you have a point at all, just a belief based on wishful thinking which goes round and round in circles ending with the argument from ignorance “goddidit”

    Questions for you:

    (a) Who or what created this creator?
    (b) How do you know that your god was responsible for creation?
    (c) What was the mechanism he used for the above?
    (d) How can we differentiate between the actions of your god and the other 10,000 gods man has invented along the way?
    (e) What testable proof do you have for any of your claims?

  125. on 04 Jan 2012 at 7:03 am 125.Severin said …

    92 Sam
    „Like for example when there is an effect there must have been a cause.“

    Yes, but if you are right, then god must have a cause, unless he is nothing.
    The logic is very simple:
    Everything must have a cause = God must have a cause too, if he is not excluded from „everything“ ( in which case he is nothing, does not exist).

    Once again:
    1. Everything has to have a cause.
    2. God is not nothing, he exists and belongs to „everything“
    3. God must have a cause

    Now tell us what caused god to exist.
    Or explain why would god be excluded from logic.

  126. on 04 Jan 2012 at 7:19 am 126.Severin said …

    92 Sam
    Now, if you contradict your own claim that EVERYTHING must have a cause, and say: everything needs a cause EXCEPT god, you have to explain WHY, the hell, would god have been excluded from logic that is good for everything else.

    If you say that, unlike „everything else“ (that must have a cause, and the cause is god), god himself „just is“, without any cause and without any explanation, then why would this same logic be invalid for „everything else“?
    Isn’t it possible that „everything else“ (matter, energy) just IS?!

    Anything wrong with this logic?

  127. on 04 Jan 2012 at 7:32 am 127.Severin said …

    92 Sam

    So, matter/energy „just is“. It existed, exists and will exist, no cause, no reason, it „just is“.
    It was NOT created, neither it „popped“ from nothing, it always existed, just changed its form according to natural laws that are „built in“ it.
    Big Bang was nothing but change of form, that happened according to natural laws. Matter/energy existed “before” the BB, it never “began” to exist or “stopped” to exist.

    What is wrong in this logic?
    If it is valid for god, why sn’t it valid for matter/energy?
    I mean, no one saw god ever, and we see matter/energy all the time.

  128. on 04 Jan 2012 at 12:51 pm 128.Hell Yeah said …

    If you want a good laugh for the day, check this out. Make sure you scroll down to the spiritual safety tip for kids on what you should do if you find an atheist.

    http://objectiveministries.org/kidz/

  129. on 04 Jan 2012 at 1:25 pm 129.Anonymous said …

    http://objectiveministries.org/kidz/

    That’s the kind of thing that really ought to make the believers sit back and reconsider their stance. It’s extremely hard to differentiate between parody from sites like that and the real thing. Scary, isn’t it?

    Here’s a great example of the
    sophistry that we might see, for example, from Sam above.

    Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of the Lord? (“Yes.”)

    Do you believe that the Lord brought the flood waters to the Earth and that all animals wherein the breath of life resided save those which Noah brought aboard his Ark were destroyed? (“Of course, that follows from your first question since the Bible tells us that this is what happened.”)

    Do you believe that kangaroos were amongst those animals aboard the Ark? (“Yes. Even though they were not explicitly mentioned in the Bible, they have the breath of life and so clearly two of them must have been aboard the Ark. How else would they be alive today?”)

    Do you believe that, after the flood waters asswaged, the Ark came to rest in the Middle East? (“Yes. The Bible says it came to rest on Mount Ararat, and while the exact location of Ararat might still be the subject of debate, it is clear from the later descriptions of Noah’s generations that it must be somewhere in the Middle East.”)

    Do you believe that the animals aboard the Ark exited it from where it rested, and that they must have spent some period of time in the Middle East? (“Yes. The Bible states that the animals went forth out of the Ark, and they must have spent time there either when taking up residence or in traversing the region to get somewhere else.”)

    So then, did kangaroos once live in the Middle East? (“It is clear that they must have. There is no other sound, Biblical explanation!”)

  130. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:08 pm 130.Lou (DFW) said …

    81.Lou (DFW) said …

    77.A scientist said …

    “However there are many things it can not prove or disprove. For example I can not prove to anyone that I love my wife and children using science.”

    “Your imagination is just as real as your feelings of love. That is also the extent of your imaginary god. He’s just as real as your imagination.”

    A (alleged) scientist, I noticed that you didn’t reply to the invalidation of your faulty reasoning. I can only assume that’s because you agree that the inability to disprove love is irrelevant to the discussion about your imaginary god.

  131. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:13 pm 131.Lou (DFW) said …

    85.Sam said …

    “OK, lets say you come to your house and see a lit cigarette on the table. What conclusion do you derive from that?”

    When I left my house it was secure and there was nobody inside it. There is no direct evidence that anyone entered or left my house. There are no eyewitnesses that saw anyone enter or leave my house. Therefore, my conclusion is that god left that lit cigarette on the table. Prove that he didn’t.

  132. on 04 Jan 2012 at 2:18 pm 132.Lou (DFW) said …

    121.Sam said …

    “An option on what base? It goes against our daily rational thinking.”

    But a maniacal, miracle performing imaginary god who allows millions of innocent children to die from starvation and disease does not go “against our daily rational thinking?”

    You can’t have it both ways.

  133. on 04 Jan 2012 at 4:11 pm 133.Anonymous said …

    You can’t have it both ways.

    But that’s exactly what he does want.

  134. on 04 Jan 2012 at 4:35 pm 134.DPK said …

    Sam said:
    “First you have to prove that there was infinite time not that I agree with the rest. So how could prove its been there for eternity even though when you look at everything in this world it shows to be limited and not infinite.”

    Not true. There is no indication that time, as we know it, will stop at some point, is there? The stars will burn out, the universe will grow dark and cold… but it will still “be”… or do you have some evidence to suggest otherwise. Likewise, if the big bang was an event that happened “x” amount of time ago, it is not hard to imagine that there was therefore a time “before” it happened. Even if that time did not contain space, matter, energy as we know it, for there to be a “then” there had to be a “before then.” So I disagree with your statement that everything we observe is limited and not infinite.

    For the sake of argument though, let’s assume for a moment that you are right, and the big bang had to have a cause, and that cause is something we can call “god.” What would that mean?
    Putting aside for a moment the problem of this being also needing a creator, what would his existence prove?
    Well, I can tell you what it would NOT mean. It would NOT prove that this “god” created the universe for the sole purpose of creating US. It would not mean he has any desire to communicate with us. It would seem, in fact, given the age and size of the universe in relation to our place in it, that in his creation, we bear no more significance than the mold on a crumb of a cookie in the corner of a closet in a building that houses the the great supercomputer of the universe. Not even an afterthought.
    It would not mean that he loves us, listens to our thoughts, hears our prayers, or will provide us with eternal life.
    Let’s think for a second about what we would logically expect such a creature to be like.
    First, why would a perfect being, after an infinite amount of time in a perfect state, decide to create a universe? The bible stories tell us god was “lonely” and wanted a companion. But this violates his perfection… and after an infinite existence… what changed to make him lonely? The bible stories also tell us he existed in heaven with hosts of other heavenly beings… so why did he need us? Especially an “us” that he knew full well would disappoint and never live up to his expectations?
    If his perfect existence in heaven was so perfect, why did so many of his angels decide to rebel against him, and what precipitated that?
    The whole concept just doesn’t make ANY sense, whatsoever.

  135. on 04 Jan 2012 at 6:02 pm 135.Anonymous said …

    DPK@134 – even if you were to allow for the sake of argument that the universe was “caused”, nothing in that concession proves that the cause was a supernatural being or event, and it certainly doesn’t lead us to the god of the bible

  136. on 04 Jan 2012 at 10:32 pm 136.DPK said …

    “even if you were to allow for the sake of argument that the universe was “caused”, nothing in that concession proves that the cause was a supernatural being”

    Exactly!! No more than you can assume that the force that causes a volcano or a supernova is a supernatural being who wants to communicate with you and listens to your thoughts…..
    That’s not a simple leap to a conclusion, that’s jumping crossing the galaxy! There is no reason to believe for a second that it is true, and every reason to think it is not. I mean come on Mr. Sam… what you are saying is absolutely no different from saying since there are rainbows, there must be Leprechauns, and therefore a pot of gold at the end!

  137. on 05 Jan 2012 at 12:41 pm 137.Anonymous said …

    Unfortunately, it says a lot for the theists intentions and their lack of honesty when all they do is turn up here, regurgitate their canned arguments, then disappear when asked questions.

    Oh well, sky daddy and friends are all in their imagination anyway.

  138. on 05 Jan 2012 at 2:32 pm 138.DPK said …

    In 91, I asked Sam to:

    “Cut to the chase, save the tap dancing and make you case for the existence of supernatural gods. Why do you believe it, and what evidence do you have that any gods actually exist? You stated recently that “many people have proven god exists.” If this is true, all you need to do is site the work and the proof. We don’t need the dog and pony show.
    So, I call. Put up or fold.”

    Since all we now hear is the sound of silence, I’ll take it as fold.

  139. on 05 Jan 2012 at 8:37 pm 139.Anonymous said …

    “Since all we now hear is the sound of silence, I’ll take it as fold.”

    The same holds for all the others who come here, post their testimony or fallacious arguments, then disappear when challenged to think about what they have written.

  140. on 06 Jan 2012 at 5:06 am 140.alex said …

    my A.D.D. is making me go off-topic.

    so, jesus version 2.0 shows up on Jan 6, 2012. exactly what does he have to do to prove it?

    1. heal a homeless wheelchaired bum? nah! too easy.

    2. turn water into wine? david blane.

    3. make a bldg disappear? copperfield?

    4. come on believers, hep a brotha out…

  141. on 06 Jan 2012 at 5:23 am 141.Anonymous said …

    (5) If he’s truly the son of god then he ought to implicitly know exactly how to convince each and everyone of us of that fact. If we’d need to tell him what to do, then he’d already have failed.

  142. on 06 Jan 2012 at 2:21 pm 142.Anonymous said …

    > so, jesus version 2.0 shows up on Jan 6, 2012. exactly what does he have to do to prove it?

    One possible Answer:

    http://godisimaginary.com/i14.htm

  143. on 27 Feb 2012 at 6:50 am 143.Anonymous said …

    Way too much disscusion and thought to disprove the bible when all prophecies have came true so far. What bible are you trying to knock down?

  144. on 27 Feb 2012 at 7:30 am 144.Anonymous said …

    You didn’t disprove anything. Opening the idea of goiong to heven or hell, which would you choose? I believe in the majority king james text. Good and bad exist. Why? Pleases dont distract false disruptions on peoples beliefs. Its allready hard to get people to be good, why be a avocate to false human disappointment when you have nothing to believe in but yourself, but we came from nothing. Look at our country as we take our eyes of the lord. Just as the bible says and its not going to.be better. Peace.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply