Author Topic: Probabilities of God's existence debate  (Read 24686 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #58 on: February 24, 2012, 08:00:34 PM »
If I were you lot I would stop answering this guy. It's just a mixture of preaching and gibberish. He'll be asking you to come with him to Guyana next.

Stay away from the kool aid. You have been warned. :police:
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2012, 08:11:53 PM »
I can tell you this: if you do mostly bad things, eventually your own heart will accuse you, and you will feel bad for things you did, your actions will have their weight in your soul, but if you do good to others, you will have peace, you will have something difficult to explain that will be visible even in your face, and people will be able to see it, just as you see it in the faces of certain people.

This is "the measure of your heart", you can call it Karma, or the presence of the Holy Spirit or being possessed by demons, it's basically this "force" that is meant to be used to help others.....

edger allen poe said it best with  "Tell Tale Heart", it is called guilt no force needed, your own feelings that have nothing to do with god, But then again how come a psychopath never feels this not even when he is facing his own death.

See, you cannot repent forever, let's say, there is this cheating husband who cheats on his wife, when caught he cries and feels like garbage, this happens again just the same, but this time there is a change in his mind, he feels like a liar, like an actor, like being capable of keep doing it over and over and reach forgiveness because of his wife.

Then this guy keeps doing it and each time he does it, he remembers his tears, eventually he is caught, only that this time, he is not able to truly regret. He has lost the ability to cry, and up to some degree, he has lost his love for his wife. This is what happens with remorse.

Now, because of the size of certain crimes, some murderers can avoid remorse as an strategy to avoid emotional suffering, no matter if they're actually psychopaths or not. Finally, psychopaths not always kill, it is a condition, but it's not equal to become a criminal, therefore:

a) Avoiding or eliminating guilt is not exclusive of psychopaths, for anyone can do this.
b) Committing crimes is not exclusive of psychopaths, for regular people can do this.
c) Psychopaths can choose not to ever commit a crime, as so everyone else.

Therefore, there is no point in your argument, but I thought it would be useful for you to read this.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2012, 08:24:26 PM »
I find it somewhat ironic that if you complicate your life by adding a religion, you get to simplify everythingelse by invoking god and prophecy and sin and your own redemption.

I like things ugly and gritty and real. And I like having the inability to simply explain most every human action. I prefer complexity over god did it and responsibility over Adam and Eve did it.



Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline ILOVEYOU

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
  • Darwins +5/-76
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #61 on: February 24, 2012, 08:25:47 PM »
Also tell me, if God does not exist, who created existence, I mean, who created the potato that was before the big bang in the infinite? (this is before the existence of time itself (because time came to existence after the big bang along with everything else)

There was indeed “something” before the universe, and that is the “potato”; now… who created it?

A potato is not GOD. A potato is a created thing. Why would you think a potato existed before the Big Bang, if that is what you believe to be true?

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #62 on: February 24, 2012, 08:26:23 PM »
Removed double post caused by the stupid server over capacity problem. This one duplicated my post #62.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 08:38:58 PM by ParkingPlaces »
Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #63 on: February 24, 2012, 08:37:41 PM »
I find it somewhat ironic that if you complicate your life by adding a religion, you get to simplify everythingelse by invoking god and prophecy and sin and your own redemption.

I like things ugly and gritty and real. And I like having the inability to simply explain most every human action. I prefer complexity over god did it and responsibility over Adam and Eve did it.

This is offtopic man, I am not talking, neither supporting any religion. And what you consider simple might be a lot more complex than you know, it would also be good that you read the name of this topic and try to come up with something related to the subject and not to your personal taste.

Should I start reporting people?

Offline Babdah

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • Darwins +4/-3
  • “We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #64 on: February 24, 2012, 08:38:16 PM »
Augusto,

god makes many promises such as in Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Luke 11:9, and the "Tremendous" one in Psalm 91, but then again he doesn't. So one of two thing are the outcome of this, he does not care or he is not real, i seem to to believe the latter.  The one i should of followed Proverbs 26:4: Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him yourself
“We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered, afraid of its own forces, in search not merely of its road but even of its direction

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #65 on: February 24, 2012, 08:39:57 PM »
I find it somewhat ironic that if you complicate your life by adding a religion, you get to simplify everythingelse by invoking god and prophecy and sin and your own redemption.

I like things ugly and gritty and real. And I like having the inability to simply explain most every human action. I prefer complexity over god did it and responsibility over Adam and Eve did it.

This is offtopic man, I am not talking, neither supporting any religion. And what you consider simple might be a lot more complex than you know, it would also be good that you read the name of this topic and try to come up with something related to the subject and not to your personal taste.

Should I start reporting people?

Cheating husbands are on topic?
Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #66 on: February 24, 2012, 08:43:08 PM »
Would you like me to leave dude? I have no patience for jokes, trolling, spamming, flamming and so on.

I just got in here today, and today I can go if my presence is not welcome.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #67 on: February 24, 2012, 08:57:52 PM »
Would you like me to leave dude? I have no patience for jokes, trolling, spamming, flamming and so on.

I just got in here today, and today I can go if my presence is not welcome.

I was making an observation on all of your reasons for believing. All of which seem rather twisty and turny. And I should point out that I've been posting here for several years and you're the first person to threaten to report me. Which might, you know, mean that you are a bit uppity for a new guy or something.
Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7199
  • Darwins +164/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #68 on: February 24, 2012, 09:08:02 PM »
I’d like to start by pointing at revelations in the bible; most of them have been proven to become true. So, if anyone would like to shed some light on this, like “maybe all those prophecies have been manipulated after they actually happened” either way, I think WWII allowed Jews to return to their holly land, which is something pretty much unique in history, for we know (as an example) American natives will never recover their land.

Now there is this Jewish Christian group earning popularity, which is making Jesus part of their beliefs in Israel, something most of us would have imagine impossible. And I’m concerned about the possibility of missing reality because of arrogance.

Since nobody can prove God’s existence, neither his non-existence, I would like to discuss on this forum about what is more likely to be the truth.

Augusto,

Your opening post is mostly philosophical, would you agree?  You seem to want to anchor this discussion on facts that you have not actually shown to be true.  That's fine, as long as you are willing to accept that they might not be true.  Your very first sentence is your opinion, as opposed to "most of them have been proven to become true".  There is no evidence that conclusively proves that revelations in the Bible are mostly true.  If there are, you should point out that evidence.

Your last sentence refers to the idea that no one can prove God's existence, or non-existence.  While this is technically true, most of the members on this site are atheists, which means they do not believe there is a real god, and most of them believe this because no god has ever been shown to exist.

So, you would like to focus this discussion on what is more likely to be true. 

In my opinion, given that all gods appear to be man-made, and completely imaginary, I have little reason to think that a god is more likely than no god.  As well, the world as I see it appears to be exactly the way a world would look without a god in control.  The suffering of humanity by itself, much less the suffering of other animals, and all of the extinctions and disasters that have tormented this planet since its birth.

Of course, I could be wrong, but I am betting that any god as amazing and powerful and loving as the one that many Christians claim is real, would never allow so much suffering. 

Suffering alone clearly shows me that there is no god.

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3748
  • Darwins +67/-10
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #69 on: February 24, 2012, 09:23:44 PM »
I can tell you this: if you do mostly bad things, eventually your own heart will accuse you, and you will feel bad for things you did, your actions will have their weight in your soul, but if you do good to others, you will have peace, you will have something difficult to explain that will be visible even in your face, and people will be able to see it, just as you see it in the faces of certain people.

This is "the measure of your heart", you can call it Karma, or the presence of the Holy Spirit or being possessed by demons, it's basically this "force" that is meant to be used to help others.....

edger allen poe said it best with  "Tell Tale Heart", it is called guilt no force needed, your own feelings that have nothing to do with god, But then again how come a psychopath never feels this not even when he is facing his own death.

See, you cannot repent forever, let's say, there is this cheating husband who cheats on his wife, when caught he cries and feels like garbage, this happens again just the same, but this time there is a change in his mind, he feels like a liar, like an actor, like being capable of keep doing it over and over and reach forgiveness because of his wife.

Then this guy keeps doing it and each time he does it, he remembers his tears, eventually he is caught, only that this time, he is not able to truly regret. He has lost the ability to cry, and up to some degree, he has lost his love for his wife. This is what happens with remorse.

Now, because of the size of certain crimes, some murderers can avoid remorse as an strategy to avoid emotional suffering, no matter if they're actually psychopaths or not. Finally, psychopaths not always kill, it is a condition, but it's not equal to become a criminal, therefore:

a) Avoiding or eliminating guilt is not exclusive of psychopaths, for anyone can do this.
b) Committing crimes is not exclusive of psychopaths, for regular people can do this.
c) Psychopaths can choose not to ever commit a crime, as so everyone else.

Therefore, there is no point in your argument, but I thought it would be useful for you to read this.

Can the same be said for child fucking priests?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3748
  • Darwins +67/-10
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2012, 09:26:46 PM »
Well monkeymind, then tell me, if nothing superior exist, and you embrace evolution, how come an insect can look like this?:

http://desdeguate.com/wp-content/blog/Marzo/fotografias-increibles-animales-ii.jpg

An insect, which cannot even think in our level have evolved and have the ability to fly, and those amazing eyes, this just happened because of the survival of the strongest? the confection of lungs, wings, the stomach system, the circulatory system, the way everything works in life is simply explained by "random" and "the survival of the strongest"?

Also tell me, if God does not exist, who created existence, I mean, who created the potato that was before the big bang in the infinite? (this is before the existence of time itself (because time came to existence after the big bang along with everything else)

I don’t expect you to have the answers, because not even the science can answer to this; fact is, evolution is REAL, but the theory is NOT complete, because it cannot explain the “intelligence” behind its design. Neither can the science explain what was before everything, see… all that exist cannot exist out of the nowhere, out of nothing. There was indeed “something” before the universe, and that is the “potato”; now… who created it?

I don’t think you guys know, but there are some light particles that “know” when they are being observed. There is much more than we know, and everything points to an intelligent creator.
how come a crow can do this

There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #71 on: February 24, 2012, 09:29:31 PM »
Your opening post is mostly philosophical, would you agree?  You seem to want to anchor this discussion on facts that you have not actually shown to be true.  That's fine, as long as you are willing to accept that they might not be true.  Your very first sentence is your opinion, as opposed to "most of them have been proven to become true".  There is no evidence that conclusively proves that revelations in the Bible are mostly true.  If there are, you should point out that evidence.

Actually, by pointing at the books of revelation I just offered part of the bible I consider to be truth, giving you guys the possibility to use it against my point of view if you find that possible; let's say, if I say "I believe Noah's story is 100% truth, would people ask me to prove it, or just jump and say all the errors and stuff about Noah's story? that's exactly the same in this case, you can use this information against me, by pointing out errors or contradictions in the prophecies or not, it's up to you.

Your last sentence refers to the idea that no one can prove God's existence, or non-existence.  While this is technically true, most of the members on this site are atheists, which means they do not believe there is a real god, and most of them believe this because no god has ever been shown to exist.

So, you would like to focus this discussion on what is more likely to be true.

That's right, and that is why the subject is interesting and worth of being debated, because if we cannot KNOW, we could at least calculate what is more probable, and on base of that, we could determine what is the "logic" way of thinking. Now... I would like to request this topic to be moved to the debate zone you mentioned and to invite some people who actually know of the subject (maybe you can recommend some members?) so we can get the best out of this debate on basis of mutual respect and keeping an open mind.

In my opinion, given that all gods appear to be man-made, and completely imaginary, I have little reason to think that a god is more likely than no god.  As well, the world as I see it appears to be exactly the way a world would look without a god in control.  The suffering of humanity by itself, much less the suffering of other animals, and all of the extinctions and disasters that have tormented this planet since its birth.

This you're saying is very important, I can simply tell you, YHWH is not to be seen by men, as you know, and that apostasy have been prophetized, also that earth have been in power of Satan, but it would be more important to determine, aside from those details the "probability".

Of course, I could be wrong, but I am betting that any god as amazing and powerful and loving as the one that many Christians claim is real, would never allow so much suffering.

Suffering alone clearly shows me that there is no god.

Suffering is the other side of joy, and without suffering you would not know joy (as I said before), also, it is WE who create suffering for the most part.

Edit: I don't know what you're implying with this video 12 Monkeys, that animals can have intelligence too? I haven't said the opposite, if it reffers to evolution, it doesn't explain anything at all. Imagine, ants working together to collect certain biological materials to transform into a fungus to eat, being born knowing how to work and what to do, this queen, ready to produce children during all of her life... do you think this could have come up as the result of non intelligent evolution?
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 09:35:07 PM by Augusto »

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3748
  • Darwins +67/-10
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #72 on: February 24, 2012, 09:36:26 PM »
forget it your not worth it
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #73 on: February 24, 2012, 09:38:44 PM »
forget it your not worth it

Basically, this is exactly the way believers act when facing someone they cannot turn to their faith. Isn't interesting the similarities between atheism and theism? it's almost like you have faith in your beliefs, instead that you're free.

I would like to use this as more evidence of God's existence, along with the negative Darwins I'm getting, all of this instead of reasons, and this member "Frank" who acts like a pastor, advicing people not to discuss with me, for I might "confuse them":

If I were you lot I would stop answering this guy. It's just a mixture of preaching and gibberish. He'll be asking you to come with him to Guyana next.

Stay away from the kool aid. You have been warned. :police:
.

Now, besides the lack of solid argument, isn't this pretty much like a religion?

This is a good argument, because if this is in many ways like a religion, what is this offering to you guys? who are you following? it is a good time to meditate.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 09:45:33 PM by Augusto »

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #74 on: February 24, 2012, 09:44:30 PM »
Augusto

At the risk of sounding repetitive,( and I'm pretty sure you'll report me because that's the kind of guy you are):

I find it somewhat ironic that if you complicate your life by adding a religion, you get to simplify everything else by invoking god and prophecy and sin and your own redemption.
Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #75 on: February 24, 2012, 09:50:41 PM »
Augusto

At the risk of sounding repetitive,( and I'm pretty sure you'll report me because that's the kind of guy you are):

I find it somewhat ironic that if you complicate your life by adding a religion, you get to simplify everything else by invoking god and prophecy and sin and your own redemption.

Actually, I did answer this before, so I wonder why you post this for the thirth time. I told you I do not believe in religion, now let me be more specific: ALL RELIGIONS ARE FALSE. As for the rest, it does not make things more simple, it makes them more important. God makes your life important, and every single action will be more important as well.

I hope this helps you, so you don't feel the need of spamming with a 4th post with the same argument, and... you don't know the kind of guy I am, don't think you do.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7199
  • Darwins +164/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2012, 09:51:47 PM »
Now... I would like to request this topic to be moved to the debate zone you mentioned and to invite some people who actually know of the subject (maybe you can recommend some members?) so we can get the best out of this debate on basis of mutual respect and keeping an open mind.
For the debate section of the forum, you will need to find someone who wants to debate you.

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1158
  • Darwins +85/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #77 on: February 24, 2012, 09:53:43 PM »
I'll bite on the original question: which is more likely, existance or non-existance of biblegod?

Non-existance, hands down.

1) You saying "someone must have created the universe" simply moves the question back.  Who created god?  Why do you get to have a causeless beginning and I don't?

2) I find the belief in the existance of a diety who is grand and wise enough to create the universe from nothing, yet stupid and myopic enough to only place a guardian angel in front of the gate of Eden AFTER THE FRUIT WAS EATEN rather than in front of the BLEEEEEDIN TREE *BEFORE* its fruit was eaten, to be laughable.

3) A god who tortures and kills innocents for "mysterious reasons" has, at best, inscrutable motives.  It is not considered "good" to destory for the sake of destruction, or to harm innocents when they could be saved, ergo YHWH cannot be "good."  And I have no interest in a diety who is not good.

4) Intelligent Design?  Seriously??  Having yoru food-hole and your air-hole open at the same place puts you at risk of choking to death eveyr time you take a bite or a sip.  PRetty unintelligent design if you ask me.

I dont' have time to list more.  But maybe I will later if the spirit (so to speak) moves me.
* Religion: institutionalized superstition, period.

* The existence of apologetics is evidence against the existence of the deity in question.

"We humans may never figure out the truth, but I prefer trying to find it over pretending we know it."  ~ParkingPlaces

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #78 on: February 24, 2012, 09:54:05 PM »
I hope this helps you, so you don't feel the need of spamming with a 4th post with the same argument, and... you don't know the kind of guy I am, don't think you do.

Actually, your behaviour indicates a lot about who you are so far. At least as far as your online self. It's very telling so far.

Actually, I did answer this before, so I wonder why you post this for the thirth time. I told you I do not believe in religion, now let me be more specific: ALL RELIGIONS ARE FALSE. As for the rest, it does not make things more simple, it makes them more important. God makes your life important, and every single action will be more important as well.

Preaching is against the rules Augusto. Kindly refrain.
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #79 on: February 24, 2012, 09:57:36 PM »
Let's wait then, such person have not posted in here yet. I sent you a PM jetson, about the flamming, spamming, trolling and offtopic that is going on in here. I'm sure you'll be able to see it by yourself. I would like to ask you to keep an eye in here, because, you know... basically I'm a muslim in islamic territory, and people like to break the rules against me because I'm new in the comunity, and because I'm different.

Pretty much like in school. May I count on you to keep an eye and guarantee everyone (and not just me) follow the rules?

Boots: Please check my previous replies in this topic, your arguments have been answered.

Alzael: I don't know what you mean by preaching, but it's nice you are doing your work, have you found anyone else in here breaking the rules, or just me? Thanks in advance.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 10:02:51 PM by Augusto »

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7199
  • Darwins +164/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #80 on: February 24, 2012, 10:07:59 PM »
Let's wait then, such person have not posted in here yet. I sent you a PM jetson, about the flamming, spamming, trolling and offtopic that is going on in here. I'm sure you'll be able to see it by yourself. I would like to ask you to keep an eye in here, because, you know... basically I'm a muslim in islamic territory, and people like to break the rules against me because I'm new in the comunity, and because I'm different.

Pretty much like in school. May I count on you to keep an eye and guarantee everyone (and not just me) follow the rules?


This forum has a group of moderators that are more than happy to keep threads on track when they get out of hand.  We do allow some freedom though, so we rely on the "Report to Moderator" link as a centralized way to manage complaints.

Maybe you should go to the Introduction section and post about yourself, and your personal beliefs.

This forum does not tolerate preaching, or assertions without evidence and facts to support them.  So, if you're willing to share your opinions, expect them to be directly challenged.  If you provide solid facts and evidence for what you claim, then you will get more respect.  Mohammed flying on a white horse to heaven will not get a lot of repeat, just like Jesus rising from the dead does not.  Neither of them are acceptable claims in modern times, for example.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 10:26:44 PM by jetson »

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5957
  • Darwins +643/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • Entropy isn’t what it used to be
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #81 on: February 24, 2012, 10:12:48 PM »
Suffering is the other side of joy, and without suffering you would not know joy (as I said before), also, it is WE who create suffering for the most part.

I'll elucidate. I don't need a kid to be stuck in a wheel chair for his entire short life before he dies due to MD or some other horrible disease just so I can experience joy.

Occasionally stubbing my toe would be quite adequate.

What part did I play in my friend Nancy's deafness. In my friend Jack's leg lost to diabetes. In my friend Andy's impending death due to prostate cancer? Don't give me this blanket "we create suffering" crap. There are better explanations, all natural, and none of which require that I play "payback time" my whole life because A&E were compulsive. Don't run around laying guilt trips on people when it's all in your head. Spouting off about a loving god and then going all grovelly is sicking to watch.

You want spam? I can get you a link for Viagra. Or get you an offer to help some poor Nigerian prince. Would that make you feel better?
Never trust an atom. They make up everything!

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #82 on: February 24, 2012, 10:17:14 PM »
An insect, which cannot even think in our level have evolved and have the ability to fly, and those amazing eyes, this just happened because of the survival of the strongest? the confection of lungs, wings, the stomach system, the circulatory system, the way everything works in life is simply explained by "random" and "the survival of the strongest"?

Insects don't have lungs.

Offline Augusto

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Darwins +3/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #83 on: February 24, 2012, 10:28:20 PM »
There is an interrogative sentence and an afirmative sentence, the first talks of an insect, the second talks of a random organism and not about... thank you for that precious piece of trolling.

You know guys? maybe I am in the wrong place, I don't want you to provoque me, causing us all a bad time without reason. I wish you all luck in your worship to "Random", the god of yours.

Let me know by PM if there is anyone that want to represent the atheist side on a debate, if there is, "good", if there isn't "good too", but I'm stopping this open troll topic right now, at least consider me out.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 10:36:35 PM by Augusto »

Offline Asmoday

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Darwins +14/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #84 on: February 24, 2012, 10:34:13 PM »
The argument of good requiring evil / bad and happiness requiring sadness also falls flat on the face if you bring it up in conjunction with a (supposedly) omnipotent creator.

If there happens to be such a thing as an omnipotent creator, which God is according to his followers, then good and happiness have no requirements. With an omnipotent creator the only reason for the existence of something is that the creator wants it to exist. There are no necessities in such a case.
If God had wanted, he could have created a world without evil and without suffering where people still appreciate good and happiness in the same way as they appreciate both now. The only reason for suffering to exist in this world is because God likes people to suffer.


The claim that good requires evil also creates some rather severe problems regarding some of the core elements of the Christian myth.
What about heaven? How will people appreciate it to be in heaven if there is no evil and no sadness in heaven?
« Last Edit: February 24, 2012, 10:40:33 PM by Asmoday »
Absilio Mundus!

I can do no wrong. For I do not know what it is.

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #85 on: February 24, 2012, 10:39:20 PM »
I’d like to start by pointing at revelations in the bible; most of them have been proven to become true.
Which ones?

Your reply (Lucifer) gives no light whatsoever in any point; I already gave some initial arguments, so stop asking questions and offering absolutes.

After a couple pages of evasion, you finally identified 2:
Well Monkeyball I have several reasons to believe in God, one of those is this:

Jeremiah 31: (Bringing the remnant of Israel from all corners of the earth to be a nation again)
...
Ezekiel 36 (Why this is done)
...
This is said after the announcement of several different torments Israel was going to suffer, all of them already happened, I would recommend anyone who wants to discuss Ezekiel to take 20 minutes to read this book, so, Israel was going to be without home and be disseminated around the earth and He would bring them back home, which happened after WWII.

Jeremiah was a defeatist saying that the Babylonians would level Jerusalem which was a probability.  He also said they would make a comeback.  Since he believed in the Joseph to Moses story that was a guess.

Ezekiel was living in Babylon during the captivity in a period when the Babylonians had backed off oppression and were allowing the Jewish neighborhoods considerable rights.  Ezekiel had hope that the Babylonians would go further and allow the return.  For that purpose he became a hack prophet at the court sucking up to the king and making failed prophecies.

And the Jews were allowed to return and rebuild the temple.  These events happened about 590 to 538 BCE.

That fits better than WW2. 

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #86 on: February 24, 2012, 10:41:23 PM »
There is an interrogative sentence and an afirmative sentence, the first talks of an insect, the second talks of a random organism and not about... thank you for that precious piece of trolling.
No, you had 2 rhetorical questions.  The first talks of a winged insect and the second of lungs and wings.

You are a liar.