### Author Topic: Probabilities of God's existence debate  (Read 35537 times)

Astreja, Foxy Freedom and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### wow

• Freshman
• Posts: 35
• Darwins +11/-0
• Gender:
• WWGHA Member
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1247 on: June 23, 2014, 02:43:52 PM »
You tell us we have to already think that the god is there for us to detect him. Which is impossible. Nobody does that in any other area of life, at least nobody sane. But that is what you are saying we need to do. Pretend that god is real, imagine that god is real, and then god will show up.
Really? Nobody? What about mathematicians? Don't they discover the math that is already there? Don't they need to acknowledge the existence of math to detect it?

I think you are totally missing the point here.. As a mathematician, we don't just discover the math which is already "there".. This would be the platonic view from 350 BC.. Any logical statement or proposition is proven using axioma's, generally.. Thus we upfront consider them to be valid and thus they require no proof.. These axioms in abstract sense have nothing to do with the math already being out there and we just 'discovering' it.. Also these axioma's are not observed, but invented by human beings in abstract sense.. After proving theorems using an axiomatic system, can we start applying them to what we observe to either proof/disprove statements and then applying theorems to find/approximate solutions.. So please don't think that mathematicians 'discover' what's already there because that is quite a misleading view.. If that would be true and it would just be a matter of discovering then running multi simulations would not result in numerical approximations with quite some error of things which could be 'discovered'.. And the argument that perhaps it is not discovered yet, would again be building on axioma's, which have no observatory nature.. Furthermore I could also set up a mathematical system, which has no relation to anything in our world (undefined terms) and thus this math could never be discovered if this were true, because nothing in our world relates to.it.. Yet, it is possible to set up such a system..

#### median

• Posts: 1812
• Darwins +193/-15
• Gender:
• Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1248 on: June 25, 2014, 02:28:04 AM »
Fallacy of False Analogy. You have neither demonstrated that math/numbers nor your alleged "God" exist outside the mind of human beings (independently).
You have not stated how these laws we live within came into existence or why they obey mathematical precision to support life. Perhaps you believe they were magically created out of nothing. Does a law need consciousness to observe it or are they made to be broken? If the latter does a creator need to make the laws for the created? Scratch that last one - you only need the imaginary to keep fueling the illusion you live in.

You have just gone irrational by attempting to shift the topic. We aren't talking about how the laws "came into existence", nor are we discussing "why" they "obey" XYZ. Those are side issues and I have made no positive claims regarding either of them. Second, you speak of "law" as if laws are "things" which need to be "observed". They are not. Laws are linguistic descriptions of the behavior of what we observe in phenomenal reality. If you think laws are "things out there somewhere" then you will need to demonstrate that.

Third, your mere CLAIM that I live in an illusion is one which you have neither demonstrated nor even attempted to define.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2014, 02:33:30 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

#### median

• Posts: 1812
• Darwins +193/-15
• Gender:
• Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1249 on: June 25, 2014, 02:29:26 AM »
Fallacy of False Analogy. You have neither demonstrated that math/numbers nor your alleged "God" exist outside the mind of human beings (independently).
It is not for me to demonstrate.

Yes, it is actually since you are the one making the claim that a god exists outside human brains. Henceforth, YOU have the burden of proof.

EDIT: Actually, you yourself even disagree with yourself because (about a month ago or so) you attempted to demonstrate your alleged "God" by using the tired old standard arguments from historical philosophy!! You pulled out the ontological, teleological, cosmological, and moral arguments...remember?? In fact, you even started your own thread where you attempted to show that your alleged god exists outside human brains (independently), and to which you did not respond to the rebuttals I gave which pertained to your old arguments. So don't give us this bullshit that it is not for you to demonstrate. By your own actions on this forum it is for you to demonstrate! And you haven't done it. You've just CLAIMED to have done it.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2014, 02:42:35 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

#### nogodsforme

• Professor
• Posts: 6242
• Darwins +785/-4
• Gender:
• Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1250 on: June 25, 2014, 11:20:04 AM »
Lukvance, if the police came to your house and accused your mother of robbing a bank, would you just agree and let them take her to jail because they said she robbed a bank?  Would you accept the testimony of a random stranger who says he thinks your mother robbed the bank? Would you turn to your mother and say, "Prove that you did not rob the bank?"

Or would you expect them to produce some physical evidence that shows she robbed the bank? Video of someone who looks like her threatening the bank teller with a gun, a gun with her fingerprints in her purse, a pile of money with the bank's serial numbers in her closet, a witness who says he saw a white BMW speeding away from the bank, the keys to a white BMW in her purse, etc.

The police have the burden of proof; they have to produce some evidence that what they say has merit or else they have no case against your mother. Even all that evidence may not be enough to convince you that your mother robbed a bank--someone who hates your mother could be trying to frame her. But you would definitely be more worried after the police show you all that evidence, right? Because the evidence makes the case much stronger than just the police saying she robbed a bank.

Consider the situation we are facing with you, Lukvance. You want us to accept a lot of stuff just because you say so, like the police just saying your mother robbed a bank. You say god is real. When we ask for evidence, you say, "You guys can't prove that he isn't real--at least as real as love or math--so that means he is real."

That is the same as the police saying, "Your mother can't prove that she didn't rob the bank, that she isn't a serial killer, that she isn't a terrorist. So that means she is all those things. We don't need any evidence. She's going to jail for the rest of her life."

That is not a reasonable way to decide whether something is real.

Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1251 on: July 15, 2014, 03:41:01 PM »
God is as real as love. If you think that love is not real then I am sorry for you and more for the one you supposedly love which is a lie since it is not real.
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1252 on: July 15, 2014, 03:52:24 PM »
God is as real as love. If you think that love is not real then I am sorry for you and more for the one you supposedly love which is a lie since it is not real.

You say this one more time and I'll dedicate the rest of my life to puking every Valentines Day.

A world so simple that even you can understand it wouldn't be worth living in. Love is no more an amazing emotion than embarrassment or anxiety. It is one way to feel. Now if you are claiming that god's love is the greatest thing since sliced bread, a) you live in a town with lousy bakeries and b) your standard of evidence for said love is so low that is actually non-existent. Yet you harp about it incessantly.

I love my kids. If you have kids, you love yours. I don't love your kids, you don't love mine. See how this falls apart. It is an emotion of proximity and familiarity and of positive feedback, not an emotion so magical that all it can do is amaze. Love it fickle, too often short-lived, and a pretty stupid label to put on a guy who once drowned almost the entire planet.

Love can hold small groups together. Trying to extrapolate and say that it is the force that keeps life worth living is like like saying that god gave us peanut allergies so that we would go nuts for him.

I have a feeling that next February 14th is gonna be disgusting...
Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1253 on: July 15, 2014, 04:10:21 PM »
I love my kids. If you have kids, you love yours. I don't love your kids, you don't love mine. See how this falls apart. It is an emotion of proximity and familiarity and of positive feedback, not an emotion so magical that all it can do is amaze. Love it fickle, too often short-lived, and a pretty stupid label to put on a guy who once drowned almost the entire planet.
You love your kids? Is this love real?
Are you saying that God is not as real as love?
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1254 on: July 15, 2014, 04:41:48 PM »
I love my kids. If you have kids, you love yours. I don't love your kids, you don't love mine. See how this falls apart. It is an emotion of proximity and familiarity and of positive feedback, not an emotion so magical that all it can do is amaze. Love it fickle, too often short-lived, and a pretty stupid label to put on a guy who once drowned almost the entire planet.
You love your kids? Is this love real?
Are you saying that God is not as real as love?

You're asking an atheist such a silly question? I know that the emotion we humans call love actually exists. I know god doesn't. The two are mutually exclusive.

When you insist that love requires your version of god, and that love is proof of your god, you are just making stuff up. Stop it.

Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### jdawg70

• Posts: 1851
• Darwins +320/-6
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1255 on: July 15, 2014, 04:42:39 PM »
God is as real as love. If you think that love is not real then I am sorry for you and more for the one you supposedly love which is a lie since it is not real.

This right here is some bullshit.  You act like there isn't 20+ pages in this thread and several other threads where this has been addressed.

This is rude and monumentally disrespectful towards those of us that have conversed with you in earnest on this very subject.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

#### Azdgari

• Laureate
• Posts: 12210
• Darwins +267/-31
• Gender:
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1256 on: July 15, 2014, 04:46:59 PM »
This is rude and monumentally disrespectful towards those of us that have conversed with you in earnest on this very subject.

So then, mission accomplished, is what you're telling him.
The highest moral human authority is copied by our Gandhi neurons through observation.

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1257 on: July 15, 2014, 04:53:22 PM »
This is rude and monumentally disrespectful towards those of us that have conversed with you in earnest on this very subject.

So then, mission accomplished, is what you're telling him.

He'll be right back. Right now he's at confession, telling some strange guy on the other side of the screen that he's been doling out the bullshit at nigher than normal religious rates.

He may be surprised to find out that that's not actually a sin, but the guy who has a 2% chance of being pedophile on the other side of the screen will tell him to make amends just to make himself sound official.

Someone is gonna have to say one or two hail mary's.
Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1258 on: July 15, 2014, 05:25:15 PM »
You're asking an atheist such a silly question? I know that the emotion we humans call love actually exists. I know god doesn't. The two are mutually exclusive.
When you insist that love requires your version of god, and that love is proof of your god, you are just making stuff up. Stop it.
You stop it! There is no way I would insist that loves requires God or that it is a proof of God.
All that I am saying is that you are fooling yourself if you think that love is real and that God is not.
What proof that love is real do you base your belief on? (beside you feeling it)
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### Defiance

• Posts: 554
• Darwins +21/-1
• Gender:
• Can't be mad at something that doesn't exist.
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1259 on: July 15, 2014, 05:38:02 PM »
You're asking an atheist such a silly question? I know that the emotion we humans call love actually exists. I know god doesn't. The two are mutually exclusive.
When you insist that love requires your version of god, and that love is proof of your god, you are just making stuff up. Stop it.
You stop it! There is no way I would insist that loves requires God or that it is a proof of God.
All that I am saying is that you are fooling yourself if you think that love is real and that God is not.
What proof that love is real do you base your belief on? (beside you feeling it)
Luk, stop dodging and provide evidence for God's existence.
"God is just and fair"
*God kills 2.5 million of people he KNEW would turn out like this in the flood*
*Humanity turns bad again, when God knew it would*
We should feel guilty for this.

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1260 on: July 15, 2014, 05:47:38 PM »
You're asking an atheist such a silly question? I know that the emotion we humans call love actually exists. I know god doesn't. The two are mutually exclusive.
When you insist that love requires your version of god, and that love is proof of your god, you are just making stuff up. Stop it.
You stop it! There is no way I would insist that loves requires God or that it is a proof of God.
All that I am saying is that you are fooling yourself if you think that love is real and that God is not.
What proof that love is real do you base your belief on? (beside you feeling it)

All it is is feelings. It is real to us humans. As is disgust and anger. That doesn't mean it is physically real like a an atom of iron, which itself isn't as real as real as we think, but it'll do in this case.

It doesn't have to be real to be important to people. Witness the World Cup. There is nothing actually important about a bunch of guys running around on a field chasing a ball, but many make it important, at at the point it becomes real to them.

Love is our attachment to people and things that makes us feel good. That is all it is. A feedback loop that we have labeled for our convenience.

God on the other hand, is a figment of the imagination that isn't actually important except to those who have decided it is. The concept is neither universal or consistent. Yes, many have gods, but not everyone has your god. Or your version of your god. Or the version of god you have this week that might vary a bit from the one you had last week.

So, love is real in that humans call it real. Since we don't therefore say we're gonna roast in hell if we don't have love, etc., it is pretty much benign. The hate your god generates, on the other hand, is very real (Crusades, anyone) and kind of hard on the population as a whole.

Yes, love can hurt too, when the non-real aspects of it get redefined to mean obsession=love or possession = love, where we end up with stalkers and wife beaters and such. But generally people in love don't fly into buildings or indulge in other attacks that kills thousands or tens of thousands. Love doesn't quite seem to be able to generate as much passion as religion, I guess.

On second thought, it may well be that love=god, because neither are actually real.

Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1261 on: July 15, 2014, 05:57:20 PM »
On second thought, it may well be that love=god, because neither are actually real.
I know right! This is scary how you lie to everyone when you tell them that you love them (since it is not actually real)! You have to chose you cannot have both.
Love is as real as God.
If you think that love is not real, then it is ok for you to think that God is not real. It doesn't mean that it's the truth.

I wouldn't want to live in a world where love is a lie/ does not exist.
Ps : I don't support your claim Love = God unless you are talking only about the reality aspect of both.
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### jdawg70

• Posts: 1851
• Darwins +320/-6
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1262 on: July 15, 2014, 06:11:03 PM »
This is rude and monumentally disrespectful towards those of us that have conversed with you in earnest on this very subject.

So then, mission accomplished, is what you're telling him.

Oh no, I'm quite convinced that he's still got a piÃ¨ce de rÃ©sistance of conversational buffoonery yet to play.  I've been noticing a trend with his posting style for the past week or so...<extrapolating> I'm kinda banking on him deteriorating into a blathering mess of rascally frequencies or somesuch.

Then the circle will be complete, and the entire interweb will collapse under the weight of a self-referential vortex of contradictory woo.  Then his Mission Accomplished banner can flutter proudly.

It's going to be bleeping beautiful.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1263 on: July 15, 2014, 06:56:06 PM »
On second thought, it may well be that love=god, because neither are actually real.
I know right! This is scary how you lie to everyone when you tell them that you love them (since it is not actually real)! You have to chose you cannot have both.
Love is as real as God.
If you think that love is not real, then it is ok for you to think that God is not real. It doesn't mean that it's the truth.

I wouldn't want to live in a world where love is a lie/ does not exist.
Ps : I don't support your claim Love = God unless you are talking only about the reality aspect of both.

The whooshing sound you heard going over your head an hour or two ago was my sarcasm, missing big-time.

You kinda need to quit using love and god in the same sentence if they are two different things to you. You keep trying to equate the two and then denying that there is any connection and hence you're confusing us with your misinformation. Which, although normal, gets irritating.

On the bright side, any other emotional reactions you have to my writings are not real either. So don't take your reactions seriously.

I, in the meantime, will probably still be puking next Valentines day, because I don't think you can control your urge to confusingly conflate god and love and, eventually, lyme disease.
Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### nogodsforme

• Professor
• Posts: 6242
• Darwins +785/-4
• Gender:
• Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1264 on: July 15, 2014, 09:50:33 PM »
Is Lukvance still maintaining that love is a free-floating thing, out there somewhere across the 8th dimension, even at the center of the sun, just waiting for Sandra Bullock to fall into it and discover a heart shaped drop of molten lava right before she burns up, and therefore love, and god?

Yeah. I thought so.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

#### Anfauglir

• Moderator
• Posts: 6198
• Darwins +407/-5
• Gender:
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1265 on: July 16, 2014, 03:48:23 AM »
God is as real as love.

Lukvance, would you be happy to say "God is no more real than love"?
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1266 on: July 16, 2014, 12:55:05 PM »
Lukvance, would you be happy to say "God is no more real than love"?
Hmm I don't know. I know that Love is real for me. I know that God is real for me. I don't know if there is one "more real" than the other.
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### ParkingPlaces

• Professor
• Posts: 6131
• Darwins +690/-3
• Gender:
• Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1267 on: July 16, 2014, 01:35:07 PM »
Lukvance, would you be happy to say "God is no more real than love"?
Hmm I don't know. I know that Love is real for me. I know that God is real for me. I don't know if there is one "more real" than the other.

You're infatuated. That is never healthy. It mucks up your head, takes all the quality out of a relationship, and sets you up for a crash of titanic proportion when you realize you aren't going to get what you want.

Good luck with that.

Edit: spelling
« Last Edit: July 16, 2014, 02:20:25 PM by ParkingPlaces »
Not everyone is entitled to their opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

#### Anfauglir

• Moderator
• Posts: 6198
• Darwins +407/-5
• Gender:
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1268 on: July 17, 2014, 05:42:48 AM »
God is as real as love.
Lukvance, would you be happy to say "God is no more real than love"?
Hmm I don't know. I know that Love is real for me. I know that God is real for me. I don't know if there is one "more real" than the other.

This is the point though, and is why so many people have trouble with what you are saying.

I doubt anyone on our side of the conversation would have an issue with agreeing that "god is exactly as real as love" - the concept position that you have ostensibly been pushing.

Where you are getting pushback is that it is clear that you are trying to say something more than that - and your unwillingness to say that "God is no more real than love" speaks volumes.

I would suggest that you think carefully about what it is about "god" that makes you unwilling to say that he is no more real than "love" - because when you identify what those things are, you may then understand why you are having such a difficult time in this thread.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1269 on: July 18, 2014, 10:02:23 AM »
I don't feel like having a difficult time.
I don't see anyone disagreeing with my claim anymore.
Like you said "I doubt anyone on our side of the conversation would have an issue with agreeing that "god is exactly as real as love" - the concept position that you have ostensibly been pushing." and that my friend should close the thread.
People seems to want more.
I believe the debate is closed many many post ago. We agreed that God is as real as Love. Meaning that he exist as much as Love exist.
In my opinion, there is no need to add (or try to imply) anything more to prove that the probabilities of God's existence are 100%.

I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### median

• Posts: 1812
• Darwins +193/-15
• Gender:
• Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1270 on: July 19, 2014, 02:27:59 AM »
I don't feel like having a difficult time.
I don't see anyone disagreeing with my claim anymore.
Like you said "I doubt anyone on our side of the conversation would have an issue with agreeing that "god is exactly as real as love" - the concept position that you have ostensibly been pushing." and that my friend should close the thread.
People seems to want more.
I believe the debate is closed many many post ago. We agreed that God is as real as Love. Meaning that he exist as much as Love exist.
In my opinion, there is no need to add (or try to imply) anything more to prove that the probabilities of God's existence are 100%.

Then you're not looking!! I disagree strongly with your assertion. For one, you have presented no rational or cogent definition of the term "God" that refers to anything. So, as far as I'm concered the word has no referent and no rational meaning. Second, you have presented ZERO sound reason for thinking that "love" is anything that exists outside the brain. Our brains can think up fiction. Is your God fiction? Third, the very term "love" is inherently slippery and means many different things to many different people. Thus far, I have been presented with no evidence that "love" exists "out there" somewhere. Love is generally an emotional state (like anger/shyness) or a state of a physical substrate, like digestion. Does digestion 'exist out there'? You keep trying to compare your alleged "God" thing with an emotional state. But that is a false analogy because love is naturally occurring and therefore cannot be compared to an alleged "supernatural" 'thing'.

This OP is discussing whether or not an alleged "God" can be demonstrated to 'probably' exist outside any imagination. That is the context you need to deal with. Just because someone can "think" of something doesn't make it real or actual.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

#### srikacharla

• Novice
• Posts: 1
• Darwins +1/-0
• Gender:
• WWGHA Member
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1271 on: July 19, 2014, 07:31:44 AM »
God is just an excuse created by humans..  http://kaboomed.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/god-an-excuse/ this article depicts on the topic very nicely.

#### Anfauglir

• Moderator
• Posts: 6198
• Darwins +407/-5
• Gender:
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1272 on: July 19, 2014, 12:14:37 PM »
I believe the debate is closed many many post ago. We agreed that God is as real as Love. Meaning that he exist as much as Love exist.
In my opinion, there is no need to add (or try to imply) anything more to prove that the probabilities of God's existence are 100%.

Right.  So you'll be happy to say "god is no more real than love, has no reality other then the reality that there is for love."

If you are NOT prepared to say that, then I out it to you that you feel that god is something more than love - and know damn well that that "something more" is what this thread is all about.  But having successfully derailed it for pages and pages with god being as reL as love and Gandalf and whatever, now you want to have the thread closed?

No dice.

God is no more real than the concept of love.  Glad we agree.

NOW.....anyone got any evidence for the existence of god, over and above just being a concept?
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1273 on: July 19, 2014, 05:17:31 PM »
I believe the debate is closed many many post ago. We agreed that God is as real as Love. Meaning that he exist as much as Love exist.
In my opinion, there is no need to add (or try to imply) anything more to prove that the probabilities of God's existence are 100%.

Right.  So you'll be happy to say "god is no more real than love, has no reality other then the reality that there is for love."

If you are NOT prepared to say that, then I out it to you that you feel that god is something more than love - and know damn well that that "something more" is what this thread is all about.  But having successfully derailed it for pages and pages with god being as reL as love and Gandalf and whatever, now you want to have the thread closed?

No dice.

God is no more real than the concept of love.  Glad we agree.

NOW.....anyone got any evidence for the existence of god, over and above just being a concept?
For that discussion you can read : http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=26874.new;topicseen#new
« Last Edit: July 19, 2014, 05:41:18 PM by Lukvance »
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time

#### frank callaway

• Student
• Posts: 51
• Darwins +0/-4
• Gender:
• it's a bird, it's a shark... you're fucked
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1274 on: July 28, 2014, 03:43:48 PM »
i think you have to look at it like this.  if there is such a thing as "infinity"... say the multiverse theory, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse) in which there could be an infinite amount of universes... then a universe created by the judeo christian god yahweh has to exist.  as well as a universe where some people believe it was created by yahweh, but it was not, etc etc... add infinitum
When a great genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign; that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.

-Jonathan Swift

#### Lukvance

• Posts: 1580
• Darwins +11/-161
• Gender:
• Catholic
• Watched
##### Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #1275 on: July 28, 2014, 04:01:35 PM »
i think you have to look at it like this.  if there is such a thing as "infinity"... say the multiverse theory, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse) in which there could be an infinite amount of universes... then a universe created by the judeo christian god yahweh has to exist.  as well as a universe where some people believe it was created by yahweh, but it was not, etc etc... add infinitum
You are right. It might be not Yahweh. But it must have been created by some kind of entity that always were. That entity is called God by me. Some people call it "universe" or "nature" or "force" anyway. It has multiple names but only one entity.
The choosing of any religion presuppose the existence of God.
I could [support my claims], but you wouldn't understand. Others have tried and you can't or won't see it.

You're worth more than my time