Author Topic: Probabilities of God's existence debate  (Read 57100 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #464 on: February 14, 2014, 03:55:42 PM »
Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact. Your belief in the dictionary that keeps changing its meaning is what we have problems with regarding Christians and the bible.

What makes your definitions more "real" than those used by other people?
Relative to the theists it is a statement of fact. Relative to the atheist is is also a statement of fact.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 04:32:13 PM by Jesuis »
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11208
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #465 on: February 14, 2014, 03:56:33 PM »
I guess in your world view on "life" its "source" its "consciousness" and who you "really are" is not part an academic subject?

Is your god alive?

Still waiting for an answer to this, Jesuis.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12548
  • Darwins +301/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #466 on: February 14, 2014, 04:06:17 PM »
Relative to the theists it is a statement of fact.

That doesn't answer my question.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #467 on: February 14, 2014, 04:34:34 PM »
Not part what an academic subject?
Self realisation.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #468 on: February 14, 2014, 04:37:55 PM »
I guess in your world view on "life" its "source" its "consciousness" and who you "really are" is not part an academic subject?

Is your god alive?

Still waiting for an answer to this, Jesuis.
I have issues with this. "your god" I also do not know if we are on the same page with the word "alive".
Also not sure if this is a distraction of the threads topic.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11208
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #469 on: February 14, 2014, 04:39:06 PM »
I have issues with this. "your god" I also do not know if we are on the same page with the word "alive".
Also not sure if this is a distraction of the threads topic.

By "your god" I mean the one you believe in. As for "alive", we'll go with your definition, whatever it is. My definition is not relevant to the point I want to make.
This is going somewhere; trust me.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #470 on: February 14, 2014, 04:40:03 PM »
Relative to the theists it is a statement of fact.

That doesn't answer my question.
It is my answer - relatively speaking. Tell me the answer you want me to say and I will say it according to your script.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #471 on: February 14, 2014, 04:41:49 PM »
I have issues with this. "your god" I also do not know if we are on the same page with the word "alive".
Also not sure if this is a distraction of the threads topic.

By "your god" I mean the one you believe in. As for "alive", we'll go with your definition, whatever it is. My definition is not relevant to the point I want to make.
This is going somewhere; trust me.
I do not have a god that is alive nor do I believe in any that comes up in your mind.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11208
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #472 on: February 14, 2014, 04:43:29 PM »
I do not have a god that is alive nor do I believe in any that comes up in your mind.

If he/she/it is dead, how can it possess a consciousness? Or is he/she/it also non-sentient to the point of not possessing a mind?
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #473 on: February 14, 2014, 04:52:25 PM »
I do not have a god that is alive nor do I believe in any that comes up in your mind.

If he/she/it is dead, how can it possess a consciousness? Or is he/she/it also non-sentient to the point of not possessing a mind?
How can he/she/it (whatever that means in your head) be dead?
Define he she it? Define death? Define consciousness as you understand it. Again this non sentient being - what do you understand it to be? Where is this going?
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11208
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #474 on: February 14, 2014, 05:04:12 PM »
How can he/she/it (whatever that means in your head) be dead?

If something is not alive, by definition, it is dead. While we may have problems defining both terms, the truth is that something is either one or the other. Yes, even viruses.

Define he she it? Define death? Define consciousness as you understand it. Again this non sentient being - what do you understand it to be? Where is this going?

Non-sentient means it can't think like humans and other animals. Since I just explained above that "not alive"="dead", what you claim here is not a contradiction of what I said above. If anything, it strengthens my argument.

The point I was going to make, which is now moot since you just admitted your god is dead (go Nietzsche!), was that, if every living thing needs a creator, then so does your god. And the god that created he/she/it. And the god that created the god that created he/she/it. And so on ad infinitum. I expected you to "counter" (if it can even be called that) with a special pleading fallacy, after which I would explain that your argument was fallacious, and therefore wrong.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #475 on: February 14, 2014, 06:26:49 PM »
How can he/she/it (whatever that means in your head) be dead?
If something is not alive, by definition, it is dead. While we may have problems defining both terms, the truth is that something is either one or the other. Yes, even viruses.
Why do we have problems defining both terms? 
Why is "life and death" suddenly "true" because it is observed?
We know making conclusion fro sight observation is illusive ie flat earthers.

Define he she it? Define death? Define consciousness as you understand it. Again this non sentient being - what do you understand it to be? Where is this going?
Non-sentient means it can't think like humans and other animals. Since I just explained above that "not alive"="dead", what you claim here is not a contradiction of what I said above. If anything, it strengthens my argument.
Your explanation does not have any truths and so the deduction is going to be wrong.
We either to know what life is or we do not.
Theists say Life is the conscious spiritual life giving energy whose real nature is truth love and consciousness.
We know for a fact that we cannot automatically give conscious life to any dead form in a hospital although we know it has every atom in place.

The point I was going to make, which is now moot since you just admitted your god is dead (go Nietzsche!), was that, if every living thing needs a creator, then so does your god. And the god that created he/she/it. And the god that created the god that created he/she/it. And so on ad infinitum. I expected you to "counter" (if it can even be called that) with a special pleading fallacy, after which I would explain that your argument was fallacious, and therefore wrong.
Well I did not admit anything, but if that helps you end the debate then fine.
What I am saying is that this process we have used to deduce these things is done with our minds and its creations. We know that our minds tells us all these imaginary stuff - and that draws it's own logic which is flawed giving us beliefs. According to the theists the answer to what life is lies in us. We must first know who we are to know what life is. Otherwise it is all speculation. Theists say we are "conscious spiritual beings" our souls are caught in a physical realm where our minds are tools used to deceive us.

According to the theists "If we want the truth" we need to "stop our minds" from deceiving us and go within.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1348
  • Darwins +101/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #476 on: February 14, 2014, 06:40:55 PM »
According to the theists the answer to what life is lies in us.

I disagree with this.  Theists believe the meaning of life comes from their god
It's one of the reasons I'm an atheist today.  I decided to take my religion seriously, and that's when it started to fall apart for me.
~jdawg70

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #477 on: February 14, 2014, 09:33:17 PM »
According to the theists the answer to what life is lies in us.

I disagree with this.  Theists believe the meaning of life comes from their god
He does not believe it. He claims he knows it. We could nail them to crosses but that only increases the believers and the faithful.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #478 on: February 14, 2014, 10:37:03 PM »
Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact.

Nope. Not a statement of fact.  A statement of... Wishful thinking?  Self delusion?  Mistaken identity?   Whatever, it is, fact ain't it.  You cannot know god, as xians have defined him.  He's (allegedly) infinite.  However much you (think) you know, it is 0% of the whole.

And that even sets aside the utter lack of evidence, utter lack of interaction, and presumes a god existing in the first place.


Your belief in the dictionary that keeps changing its meaning is what we have problems with regarding Christians and the bible.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.



The problem with this method of thinking is that we end up looking outside ourselves to find answers to things that lie within us.

Then you misunderstand.  These fields all tell us things about ourselves and how we really work, not just how we think we work. 

Additionally, in what way is any religion not "looking outside ourselves"? 

It is not found in the field of psychology, neurology or cognitive science because you only learn what someone else discovers that is physical and not an accurate depiction relative to you per se.

You and I are talking about categorically different topics.


It has no answers to the self "life giving energy" that is you - only the self can find its eternal self.

I disagree.  The fields which I mentioned can illuminate the fact that there is no eternal self, at least not as imagined by the lunatics and frauds call saints and holy men.  And that is an answer of sorts, though not one you are likely to be happy with.

The human body is the instrument and the laboratory for you to know the truth about you - and its same the place where the tests for you are repeatable at the tenth door, the third eye, the ajna chakra.

That's just silly.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2014, 10:40:26 PM by screwtape »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #479 on: February 15, 2014, 12:50:55 AM »
Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact.

Nope. Not a statement of fact.  A statement of... Wishful thinking?  Self delusion?  Mistaken identity?   Whatever, it is, fact ain't it.  You cannot know god, as xians have defined him.  He's (allegedly) infinite.  However much you (think) you know, it is 0% of the whole.
xtians do not get to define God only the theist get to define it because they know and Jesus did not define it that way.

And that even sets aside the utter lack of evidence, utter lack of interaction, and presumes a god existing in the first place.
Where did he say that there was no evidence for what he said exists? Se Atheists do not know God. And the theists do. 

Your belief in the dictionary that keeps changing its meaning is what we have problems with regarding Christians and the bible.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

I am trying to say words keep changing in meaning and the dictionary keeps adapting with time. We cannot assume we know the meaning of the intent of word/s from so long ago nor can we rust in them now. It is what we have problems with when addressing things said in the old testament and it has changed to mean something else in the new testament. The human mind and its thinking process does not have truth in it. It is a changing process and the words we use that emanate from it changes with time. Truth become very illusive. Only the truth remains the truth for all time or it never was true.

The problem with this method of thinking is that we end up looking outside ourselves to find answers to things that lie within us.

Then you misunderstand.  These fields all tell us things about ourselves and how we really work, not just how we think we work.
Really? - like what? I did ask what was life? And I get nothing from these books.

Additionally, in what way is any religion not "looking outside ourselves"?
A theist is not talking about a religion. He is talking to his followers about God and the raising of their mindset so that they can know too. Religion is not him.

It is not found in the field of psychology, neurology or cognitive science because you only learn what someone else discovers that is physical and not an accurate depiction relative to you per se.

You and I are talking about categorically different topics.
.
Theists are talking about God and we are talking about the probabilities of its existence.
Since theists are the ones who know my references are of what they say. What methods they have used to know and how we too can use the same methods.

It has no answers to the self "life giving energy" that is you - only the self can find its eternal self.

I disagree.  The fields which I mentioned can illuminate the fact that there is no eternal self, at least not as imagined by the lunatics and frauds call saints and holy men.  And that is an answer of sorts, though not one you are likely to be happy with.
Well proof would be a way forward but we seem to be ignoring the facts.  Has anyone tested a real theist?

The human body is the instrument and the laboratory for you to know the truth about you - and its same the place where the tests for you are repeatable at the tenth door, the third eye, the ajna chakra.

That's just silly.
You are entitled to your opinion, so am I. But the tradition of inner travel is well investigated by humans on a daily basis.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #480 on: February 15, 2014, 01:01:02 PM »
Jesuits,

Sorry.  I cannot tell what you are trying to say.  Could you repost your reply with the quotes fixed?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #481 on: February 15, 2014, 08:34:40 PM »
Nope. Not a statement of fact.  A statement of... Wishful thinking?  Self delusion?  Mistaken identity?   Whatever, it is, fact ain't it.  You cannot know god, as xians have defined him.  He's (allegedly) infinite.  However much you (think) you know, it is 0% of the whole.

And that even sets aside the utter lack of evidence, utter lack of interaction, and presumes a god existing in the first place.

Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact. It is not wishful thinking.
1. From a theist perspective it is a fact
2. From an atheist's perspective it is also a fact.
You are disagreeing with the" theists perspective" when in reality you can only know what it right from your perspective.


I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

I am saying that there are some people on here so fixated on the words and its meanings as presented in the dictionary that "their belief" that this meaning is true or fixed prevents us from building a foundation to have a more humane debate where truths are established.  Similarly all beliefs result in this deadlock.

When I presented a statement of fact using the word atheist and theist you and others instantly disagreed with it. I saw this disagreement from both sides the same way we see religious folk or they see us. They are words of believers used to create more believers - and believers of one thing or the other only fight with each other. They always fight to prove what they believe is right. (I called that fight a form of cognitive dissonance) since the two cannot come together because no one knows anything that is true. A theists Knows God and an atheist does not remains a fact. So we can build on this without a fight. Thus raising the consciousness of believers.

Therefore IMHO the two words need to be corrected in the minds of believers before there is any meaningful progressive discussions or debates to present a scientific foundation of established truths.


Then you misunderstand.  These fields all tell us things about ourselves and how we really work, not just how we think we work. 

Additionally, in what way is any religion not "looking outside ourselves"? 

The fields you speak about does not tell us anything about us. For instance - I do not know what my twin brother is thinking, nor why he likes certain things that I do not. It does not tell me why he fell down and broke his leg or is so much more intelligent than me. Nor does it tell me why he is now dead and I am still alive. It does not answer why a healthy person just suddenly dies.
So the theists are saying "by looking within ourselves we can know what is really going on". Once we know what life is where it comes from where it is going we will understand all these things about ourselves. To do that we need to elevate our thinking process.


You and I are talking about categorically different topics.

Of course we are and to suggest that neurology, cognitive science and psychology helps us understand these things about our true selves is wrong.
We are talking about the "real conscious life" "in" "every human being" and these suggestions of the workings of the brain, blood, neurons does not do it justice. If I was to ask you to show me your intelligence you would find yourself in a realm of mental stupor. The theists are talking about something beyond mind and matter when they talk about self consciousness soul spirit etc.  The self  as they say is the conscious energy that is eternal and "created" (word that is limited) in the image of God(another word also limited).  These things must be experienced like you know you have intelligence but you cannot whip it out and show me.


I disagree.  The fields which I mentioned can illuminate the fact that there is no eternal self, at least not as imagined by the lunatics and frauds call saints and holy men.  And that is an answer of sorts, though not one you are likely to be happy with.

No they cannot. Also lunatics frauds and holy men are not theists. A theist knows God. A lunatic is a lunatic, a fraud is a fraud and a holy man is a holy man.


That's just silly.

That is just silly your lack of intelligence. So much for whipping it out.
You need to prove that it does not exist to make such statement. The inner travels through what is known as the tenth door is well documented around the theists.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12682
  • Darwins +709/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #482 on: February 15, 2014, 10:39:08 PM »
Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact. It is not wishful thinking.
1. From a theist perspective it is a fact
2. From an atheist's perspective it is also a fact.

You are welcome.  However, your statements are ipse dixit.  Sure, theists may think of god as fact, but that does not make it so.  Facts have to be verifiable.  We can talk about the facts of, say, baking, because we where opinions differ, we can go and observe who is right and who is wrong.  Not so with gods.  Theists pretty much all define god so as to be impossible to verify in any way.  That is the trade off they have made.

You see, once upon a time gods were thought of in the same way you and I may think of geese or clouds - obvious, tangible entities.  But as people got smarter and better at sorting out the real from unreal, it became obvious that gods were in the latter category.  Since so many had invested so much in gods, they could not just accept the fact that gods are imaginary.  Instead they redefined them so as to be unassailable.  But the trade off is, the very definition that makes them undisprovable also makes them unprovable. 

So, you're fucked. You don't get to talk about facts when it comes to knowing gods.  At best you can talk about blind faith and beliefs and do violence on anyone who disagrees. 

As an atheist, I can tell you 100% that there are no theists who know god whether one exists or not.  So you are mistaken on that count as we'll.



The fields you speak about does not tell us anything about us. For instance - I do not know what my twin brother is thinking, nor why he likes certain things that I do not. It does not tell me why he fell down and broke his leg or is so much more intelligent than me. Nor does it tell me why he is now dead and I am still alive. It does not answer why a healthy person just suddenly dies.
So the theists are saying "by looking within ourselves we can know what is really going on". Once we know what life is where it comes from where it is going we will understand all these things about ourselves. To do that we need to elevate our thinking process.

I disagree.  You are speaking too broadly.  When you get done to more specifics, I think all that can be explained.  Additionally, looking "within yourself" answers absolutely nothing about you twin. 

I think introspection is a good thing.  But it has a very narrow limits to what it can achieve, and requires additional external information, particularly from the fields I mentioned.

We are talking about the "real conscious life" "in" "every human being" and these suggestions of the workings of the brain, blood, neurons does not do it justice.

No.  It is fundamental to it.  You cannot have a conversation about consciousness without discussing something tangible.  What exactly is the "real conscious life" and why do you put it in quotes?  You seem to be clouding the discussion with vagaries and ambiguity.  For your own sake, you should try to avoid that. 

Btw, I never mentioned blood or neurons.

If I was to ask you to show me your intelligence you would find yourself in a realm of mental stupor.

I think if I were in a realm of mental stupor, whatever that means, it would because you have obscured the point we are even talking about.

The theists are talking about something beyond mind and matter when they talk about self consciousness soul spirit etc. 

Yeah, I know.  I used to be a theist once myself.  And the whole idea begs the question.


The self  as they say is the conscious energy that is eternal and "created" (word that is limited) in the image of God(another word also limited).  These things must be experienced like you know you have intelligence but you cannot whip it out and show me.

There is no reason to posit a self, as they define it, no reason for me to believe it, and no way for them to establish it as a reality.

No they cannot. Also lunatics frauds and holy men are not theists. A theist knows God. A lunatic is a lunatic, a fraud is a fraud and a holy man is a holy man.

How ever is one to tell them apart?  The symptoms of each are identical...


That is just silly your lack of intelligence. So much for whipping it out.

Aw, did that strike a nerve?  Poor you.

You need to prove that it does not exist to make such statement.

No, I don't.  You have the burden of proof.  In addition to that, you would need explain how your idea would be falsified.  "Can't prove it isn't" is a failure as a method of proof.  There are an infinite number of ideas you cannot prove do not exist, but it would be preposterous to believe in them.


The inner travels through what is known as the tenth door is well documented around the theists.

Yeah.  Well documented.  Great.  Kindly provide the documentation and I will happily look at it.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #483 on: February 16, 2014, 03:31:44 PM »
Thanks - but my statement "theists know god and atheists don't" is a statement of fact. It is not wishful thinking.
1. From a theist perspective it is a fact
2. From an atheist's perspective it is also a fact.

You are welcome.  However, your statements are ipse dixit.  Sure, theists may think of god as fact, but that does not make it so.  Facts have to be verifiable.  We can talk about the facts of, say, baking, because we where opinions differ, we can go and observe who is right and who is wrong.  Not so with gods.  Theists pretty much all define god so as to be impossible to verify in any way.  That is the trade off they have made.

You see, once upon a time gods were thought of in the same way you and I may think of geese or clouds - obvious, tangible entities.  But as people got smarter and better at sorting out the real from unreal, it became obvious that gods were in the latter category.  Since so many had invested so much in gods, they could not just accept the fact that gods are imaginary.  Instead they redefined them so as to be unassailable.  But the trade off is, the very definition that makes them undisprovable also makes them unprovable. 

So, you're fucked. You don't get to talk about facts when it comes to knowing gods.  At best you can talk about blind faith and beliefs and do violence on anyone who disagrees. 

As an atheist, I can tell you 100% that there are no theists who know god whether one exists or not.  So you are mistaken on that count as we'll.

What statement here are a verifiable facts?
Lets see if we can redo this on a new thread. As This is distracting from the logic. Theists say "Thou shall not lie" you cannot say you know god if you don't if you are a theist.

As for the threads Purpose I have already suggested two books for "the probabilities of Gods existence." if anyone cared to read them and comment.

1. The case for for God by Karen Armstrong
2. New Proofs for the Existence of God by Robert J Spitzer. 

According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13039
  • Darwins +354/-85
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #484 on: February 16, 2014, 06:34:43 PM »
Probabilities aren't facts, they're opinions. Unless non-biased sources can confirm the probabiliry then they'll always be opinions.


These are the basic arguments both books probably make with historical facts thrown in:

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Top_ten_arguments_for_the_existence_of_God

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #485 on: February 16, 2014, 08:08:17 PM »
Probabilities aren't facts, they're opinions. Unless non-biased sources can confirm the probabiliry then they'll always be opinions.

These are the basic arguments both books probably make with historical facts thrown in:

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Top_ten_arguments_for_the_existence_of_God

-Nam

You can do better than that. This is the first line from that web site.
"Do you believe in God? If so, at some point in time, someone convinced you that God does exist. "
The problem with that line is that if forgets we were all born Tabula Rasa. 
Everything anyone knows - someone has taught them at some point in time.
All your beliefs are based on it.

God is taught by theists. Man creates stories when they hear about God for their own negative or worldly mental interests.
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/5e7ed624986d
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13039
  • Darwins +354/-85
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #486 on: February 17, 2014, 12:45:57 AM »
No one is taught to be an atheist. You're born that way.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #487 on: February 17, 2014, 01:23:09 AM »
No one is taught to be an atheist. You're born that way.

-Nam

How do you know what you were when you were born?
Do you remember telling your mom I am an atheist?
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6758
  • Darwins +819/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #488 on: February 17, 2014, 01:27:58 AM »
No one is taught to be an atheist. You're born that way.

-Nam

How do you know what you were when you were born?
Do you remember telling your mom I am an atheist?

I can't speak for Nam. I do, however, remember telling my mom that you were an atheist.  ;D

I was told I was a christian when I was young. I assumed I was. Only because others said those words to me. When I got old enough to figure out that I wasn't, I quite making that claim. Granted, it took me until I was 11 to figure it out, but I was slow. So yes, I did tell my mom I was an atheist (well, not really, I hadn't heard the word, I just told her that there is no god and let it go at that.) But only after I figured out I'd been duped.

Had no one ever tried to make a christian out of me, I could have skipped that part. And I wish I had.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5252
  • Darwins +600/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #489 on: February 17, 2014, 02:34:29 AM »
Saying that people start out atheistic is pretty much worthless, because infants start out being pretty much ignorant of everything anyway.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #490 on: February 17, 2014, 02:44:05 AM »
No one is taught to be an atheist. You're born that way.

-Nam

How do you know what you were when you were born?
Do you remember telling your mom I am an atheist?

I can't speak for Nam. I do, however, remember telling my mom that you were an atheist.  ;D

I was told I was a christian when I was young. I assumed I was. Only because others said those words to me. When I got old enough to figure out that I wasn't, I quite making that claim. Granted, it took me until I was 11 to figure it out, but I was slow. So yes, I did tell my mom I was an atheist (well, not really, I hadn't heard the word, I just told her that there is no god and let it go at that.) But only after I figured out I'd been duped.

Had no one ever tried to make a christian out of me, I could have skipped that part. And I wish I had.

That is why the law says "Thou shall not lie" .
If you are not a Christian people should not say to you that you are. Or that they are.
Technically Jesus (a Theist) took his followers(Christians) with him if they knew him, believed in him and did what he told them. Free will is not interrupted so chances are few went with him.

According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #491 on: February 17, 2014, 02:50:42 AM »
Saying that people start out atheistic is pretty much worthless, because infants start out being pretty much ignorant of everything anyway.
Actually they start of innocent and pure. Ignorant of those who are older and already here with their corrupted egotistical ways and desires and they will use and abuse them through that journey of life to the end. Only a theist has a pure intention for them. To remain pure and innocent and to know God. 
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13039
  • Darwins +354/-85
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Probabilities of God's existence debate
« Reply #492 on: February 17, 2014, 03:52:30 AM »
No one is taught to be an atheist. You're born that way.

-Nam

How do you know what you were when you were born?
Do you remember telling your mom I am an atheist?


Seeing how I didn't know anything when I was born nor does anyone else, the conclusion is I or everywhere else didn't know what a god or gods were therefore the conclusion is one is born an atheist. Just like one is born a baby, or is it now your implication we're not born babies but something else?

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.