Author Topic: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge  (Read 19849 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12582
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #638 on: March 12, 2014, 08:19:07 AM »
skeptic

you keep posting outrageous claims without any sort of support whatsoever. 
examples:
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,26445.msg605453.html#msg605453
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,26445.msg605550.html#msg605550
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,26445.msg605560.html#msg605560
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,26445.msg605564.html#msg605564

These are all professions of faith and are no replacement for evidence.  I tried to help you in another thread by posing specific questions.  I even made it a fill-in-the-balnk.  You blew me off.

You seem to miss the entire point of this site is to provide evidence.  I really, really, really need you to start supporting these claims of yours.  If you do not, your posting privileges here will have to be curtailed.   


Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

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

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #639 on: March 12, 2014, 08:45:48 AM »
It seems this is going nowhere. I don't think anyone listens to me. Rather than yell and curse and let my emotions get the better of me, I will do what Jesus did and stand back in silence.

Listening to your claims and accepting your claims are two separate things.
"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

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Angus and Alexis

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1487
  • Darwins +71/-24
  • Gender: Male
  • Residential Tulpamancer.
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #640 on: March 12, 2014, 08:51:11 AM »
It seems this is going nowhere. I don't think anyone listens to me. Rather than yell and curse and let my emotions get the better of me, I will do what Jesus did and stand back in silence.

In other words.

"My bullshit speeches were promptly discarded and torn the shreds by people, because of this, i will now scurry away and proclaim that others did things wrong"

This happens too often.
Rule 1: No pooftas. Rule 2: No maltreating the theists, IF, anyone is watching. Rule 3: No pooftas. Rule 4: I do not want to see anyone NOT drinking after light out. Rule 5: No pooftas. Rule 6: There is NO...rule 6.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
  • Darwins +61/-14
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #641 on: March 12, 2014, 09:04:06 AM »
If this can't be done, then atheism is a belief.

A lot of atheists falsely think that atheism just means "without belief" but it actually means, "No God." Atheism is a positive claim that God does not exist. Agnosticism is the view where they don't have an opinion either way.

Sure, some atheists like to say, "Atheism just means that we lack belief in God" but this is an attempt by modern atheists to redefine the word. The word NEVER meant that. The word always meant "No God."

I even heard some of them say, "Atheism means that we don't think there is enough evidence for God." But, this backfires too because there ARE theists out there who agree with this statement, but believe in God anyway. So, this definition gets thrown out the window too.

The proper meaning of "lacking belief in God" means that you believe God is there, but you don't believe in Him. Sort of like having a friend who betrays your trust and you lose your faith in him. The friend still exists, but you lose your belief in your friend. So, this is why "lacking belief" backfires and actually means you DO think God is real, you just lost faith in Him.

So, that leaves atheism as meaning "No God" which is a positive claim. So, any atheists out there want to defend their positive claim of "No God?"


I guess you have us all pinned up against the wall.

Since it is impossible to definitively prove a negative, then I guess any concept or idea is possible.  Prove I can not jump over the moon in a single bound and run beyond the speed of light.  if you ask me to prove it I will simply say I need not prove it to you.

in your world with your hard definition of atheism I guess all is possible and there for to not accept this fact is somehow dishonest.  Santa, the easter bunny, are just as valid as jesus.  I challenge you to prove that jesus and god are not just a conspiracy created by a series of authors through out the years.  For that matter prove anyone actually believes in god.

I believe I can not run at the speed of light, I believe that I am not a figment of someones elses imagination.  But I can't prove it so I guess it is simply a belief.


personally I believe some things are so unlikely as to be virtually false in such a way as to be indistinguishable from absolute falsehood.  But you are correct that absolute falsehood is pretty hard to prove.   Even If I admitt I can not run the speed of light, I could be lying to hide the fact from you.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5094
  • Darwins +586/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #642 on: March 12, 2014, 09:32:22 AM »
How does that apply to the search for the higgs boson prior to the finding of the Higgs Boson.
The difference is, Higgs theorized (that is to say, demonstrated theoretically and conclusively) the existence of the boson particle named for him, and we eventually developed scientific methods to discover it.  That is nothing like what you're claiming for 'consciousness' - you can't even keep your own statements consistent, let alone cohesive.

Quote from: Jesuis
Human consciousness exists and there are teachers teaching humanity how to expand that awareness beyond the body's physical limitations..And their are student who do the practice and they write books on what they have done. Many people have had the OBE, some by accident and others by practice.
A lot of this is nonsense; it sounds like you're stringing words together to make sentences because you like the way they sound, honestly.

Out-of-body experiences are based not on actually 'projecting' yourself out of your body, but on affecting the part of your brain associated with kinasthesia (the perception of movement) to create the illusion of moving outside of your body.  Then the other parts of the brain attempt to fill in the holes.  It's the same process that happens in dreams.

Quote from: Jesuis
You can read the evidence of their experiences. You can be taught in a class. What other evidence you are asking me to supply. Stop asking for something as you are not sure of what you are asking for. Make it clear what evidence you need. I called your attention to the experiences of Paul Twitchell in the book he wrote called the Tigers Fang.
This is not evidence, Jesuis!  I could teach a class on dragon-riding, even write books about it, but that wouldn't prove the existence of dragons that you could ride on.  But that forms the sum and total of the 'evidence' you can provide, people writing books about it and teaching classes about it.  What you need is something like a clinical trial (since you're talking about presumed human abilities), some way to isolate the variables so that we can check them scientifically and determine what might actually be causing them.  But just simply repeating your claims that these people touch the divine doesn't cut it and never will.

Quote from: Jesuis
It may have taken us this long to have this much empathy but it was always with the help of theists not atheists that we are accomplishing these things. That much is historically clear.
That's because for the majority of human history, we've been chained down by unproven theistic beliefs (which includes your beliefs, Jesuis).  If someone admitted to being an 'atheist', they would be driven out or killed by their community.  Is that an example of how 'theists' have enhanced human empathy?  Not even decades ago, it was thought to be perfectly okay to slaughter people by the thousands, or millions, merely because they didn't share a religion or ethnicity - Saddam Hussein attempting to use poison gas on the Kurds after the First Persian Gulf War being an example of this, not to mention the efforts by Adolf Hitler, a Christian, to exterminate millions of Jews during the Second World War.  I could recount dozens of examples where followers of a religion were perfectly willing to engage on pure butchery directed at nonbelievers.

Tell me this, Jesuis - if atheism had not been a crime punishable by death or exile for most of human history, do you think that advances in empathy, morality, and ethics would still have been limited to gnostic theists?  I don't think it would have, for the simple reason that atheists can be empathic, ethical, and moral, and seem to be the ones pushing such behavior today.

Quote from: Jesuis
No I meant that psychology as you might be thinking is more about the psychotic and not the sane. People who believe in God and do as Mother Teresa, Mahatma Ghandi, Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King did are not considered inhumane of psychotic. Their message is on humanity not inhumanity. That psychology does not get processed by the psychologist because they are so busy with the more inhumane disruptive personality.
No, psychology is about dealing with human behavior, which means both normal and abnormal.  They have to establish norms before they can determine if someone is outside of the norm.  Also, I think you're confusing psychology - the study of human behavior - with psychiatry - the medical treatment of abnormal behavior.

Quote from: Jesuis
You are always higher than me - you know there is no God. That ladder has been climbed.
Wrong, Jesuis.  I describe myself as an apatheist - one who neither knows nor cares whether gods exist.  In short, I don't know if gods exist or not, and I don't particularly care whether they do either.  I'll listen if someone makes claims, but I really have better things to do than try to find gods who seem bound and determined to hide from their 'creations'.

Quote from: Jesuis
You have not been paying attention.
This is insulting.  I have been paying attention to every single word you've written.  Your inability to explain yourself, to remain coherent and cohesive, is nobody's fault but your own.  That you would blame another person's lack of understanding of your confusing theology on them not paying attention is purely contemptible.

Quote from: Jesuis
All life is conscious, it is the awareness part that is being debated. In the human form that level of awareness has evolved beyond the physical limitations imposed on it by the senses. Buddha sat under a tree and attained enlightenment. He created the eight fold path. Of course it was no some walk in the park it was a determined effort on his part after having learned many techniques from others.
How do you know all life is conscious?  As long as your beliefs rest on an unexamined assumption, you cannot claim that they're knowledge.

How do you know Siddhara Gautama (known as the Buddha by some) actually attained enlightenment?  Buddhist beliefs in enlightenment rely on the ability to be reborn into life after life, which is categorically unproven and frankly unprovable.  When you take out those beliefs, you're left with (as Graybeard said) the equivalent of a self-help manual - impressive for the time, but we've done better since.

Quote from: Jesuis
Nothing is accidental. Consciousness is likened to energy it cannot die. A person being born with high levels of empathy has been so inclined in his evolutionary journey.
No, you liken consciousness to energy and claim that it cannot die.  Leaving aside the fact that energy isn't 'alive' to begin with and thus cannot 'die' - the saying is that energy can neither be created or destroyed, it merely changes form - how do you demonstrate consciousness outside of living things?  How do you demonstrate that consciousness has an independent existence to begin with?  Where's the evidence?

Quote from: Jesuis
Words are limited. Has anyone ever convinced anyone of anything on a debate forum like this? Granted If I had got you to read said books I would not have been having this discussion for the words and their meanings are clearly in there and you might have used them better than me.
Indeed, words are limited.  That's why I think you'd be better off focusing on what you actually want to say rather than trying to make it sound 'mystical'.  When you compound the inherent limitations of words by using words which are confusing and contradictory, you create nothing but problems for yourself.

Also, I take offense at your presumption that if I had read these books of yours, I'd have turned into a believer in your religion[1].  Do you seriously think that all people have to do is read a book and they'll magically be convinced to follow your religion?  The mere fact that someone believes in something and writes a book about it does not demonstrate that the thing they believe in exists.  The sooner you figure that out, the better, because it's getting tiresome to have to keep refuting the same basic points because you ignore my refutations.

Quote from: Jesuis
Yes it is my certainty that gets everyone up on the wall. I am forcing a critical thinking change which ain't coming. Theists know God and atheists don't -- which is evident.
Your certainty gets everyone upset because you don't have any basis in fact for being so certain to begin with.  It's arrogance that fuels your belief, not knowledge, and the fact that you don't recognize this will cause you no end of trouble.  By the way, think about what you just said here - you're trying to force people to change their minds, but it isn't working.  Doesn't that suggest to you that a change in tactics might be called for?

And no, gnostic theists do not know god. They think they know god, but they have no evidence for it (aside from purely subjective stuff which they could have dreamed up out of nothing), and never have.  What's worse is you, a self-proclaimed 'atheist', pretending that you are more certain than they are even though you only have their beliefs to go on.

Quote from: Jesuis
No Consciousness is a God's creation. Mind is a tool that has desires in it to experience the environment of the physical universe but that it has overpowered man. The mind leads us throughout life to a death that indicates life has no purpose. The consciously aware say the mind is deluding us and we need to put it in check. We need to be more aware and not less.
Except you've said that gods are mental creations.  You don't get to excuse your own god from that.  If gods are mental creations, and consciousness is the creation of gods, then consciousness is created (or more accurately, caused) by the mind.  You say we need to be more aware, not less; I agree.  That means understanding things for what they actually are, not making things up in order to pretend that we understand them.

Are you willing to admit that your mind could be deluding you into these beliefs you hold?

Quote from: Jesuis
What is a sufficiently developed mind in your mind?
I don't know for sure what a sufficiently-developed mind is.  All I know is that certain higher-order life-forms appear to demonstrate consciousness, while the rest apparently don't.  If someone can find evidence to show that other life-forms are conscious, then I'll consider it - but what I won't accept is someone arbitrarily declaring that all life is conscious and that consciousness is like energy when they don't have a single whit of evidence to demonstrate this.

Quote from: Jesuis
According to the theists The mind has desires some positive and others negative.
Irrelevant, as desire does not demonstrate consciousness.

Quote from: Jesuis
What that means is that anything that helps us to know our true selves is a positive desire and anything that makes us less aware and more addicted to the body and keeps out attention at the senses level makes us less and less aware of our higher self.
No, what it means is that you hold beliefs that you can't demonstrate, let alone prove.
 1. It is much more likely that I would have become even more skeptical of it after reading them because they appear to be focused on trying to convert people into belief rather than presenting real evidence to support it.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2751
  • Darwins +53/-444
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #643 on: March 12, 2014, 10:34:08 AM »
If this can't be done, then atheism is a belief.

A lot of atheists falsely think that atheism just means "without belief" but it actually means, "No God." Atheism is a positive claim that God does not exist. Agnosticism is the view where they don't have an opinion either way.

Sure, some atheists like to say, "Atheism just means that we lack belief in God" but this is an attempt by modern atheists to redefine the word. The word NEVER meant that. The word always meant "No God."

I even heard some of them say, "Atheism means that we don't think there is enough evidence for God." But, this backfires too because there ARE theists out there who agree with this statement, but believe in God anyway. So, this definition gets thrown out the window too.

The proper meaning of "lacking belief in God" means that you believe God is there, but you don't believe in Him. Sort of like having a friend who betrays your trust and you lose your faith in him. The friend still exists, but you lose your belief in your friend. So, this is why "lacking belief" backfires and actually means you DO think God is real, you just lost faith in Him.

So, that leaves atheism as meaning "No God" which is a positive claim. So, any atheists out there want to defend their positive claim of "No God?"


I guess you have us all pinned up against the wall.

Since it is impossible to definitively prove a negative, then I guess any concept or idea is possible.  Prove I can not jump over the moon in a single bound and run beyond the speed of light.  if you ask me to prove it I will simply say I need not prove it to you.

in your world with your hard definition of atheism I guess all is possible and there for to not accept this fact is somehow dishonest.  Santa, the easter bunny, are just as valid as jesus.  I challenge you to prove that jesus and god are not just a conspiracy created by a series of authors through out the years.  For that matter prove anyone actually believes in god.

I believe I can not run at the speed of light, I believe that I am not a figment of someones elses imagination.  But I can't prove it so I guess it is simply a belief.


personally I believe some things are so unlikely as to be virtually false in such a way as to be indistinguishable from absolute falsehood.  But you are correct that absolute falsehood is pretty hard to prove.   Even If I admitt I can not run the speed of light, I could be lying to hide the fact from you.

That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.

If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 10:35:39 AM by skeptic54768 »
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1349
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #644 on: March 12, 2014, 10:52:41 AM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.

If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.

This is an intellectual slight of hand used by theists all the time.
Is a belief in god as irrational as a disbelief in god? It is a question of reasonableness.
Is it reasonable to believe in something that you have absolutely no evidence for?
I would say no. The onus remains with you to provide evidence of what you believe in.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2751
  • Darwins +53/-444
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #645 on: March 12, 2014, 10:56:34 AM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.

If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.

This is an intellectual slight of hand used by theists all the time.
Is a belief in god as irrational as a disbelief in god? It is a question of reasonableness.
Is it reasonable to believe in something that you have absolutely no evidence for?
I would say no. The onus remains with you to provide evidence of what you believe in.

But atheists believe in things which have no evidence:

Materialism
Naturalism
Reality existing independently of all minds
Other minds exist
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2250
  • Darwins +76/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #646 on: March 12, 2014, 10:58:51 AM »
If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof.

I don't have any evidence that invisible pink unicorns don't exist either. Now what?

Quote
You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.

I don't believe you.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2771
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #647 on: March 12, 2014, 11:02:03 AM »

That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.

If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.

As I've kept pointing out in this thread, it would help if you gave us the exact definition of the word "belief" you are using here.  I keep asking for an exact definition, but you either ignore it or dance around it.

So again, what is the exact definition of the word "belief" you are using here?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #648 on: March 12, 2014, 11:05:31 AM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.
So what evidence do you have that flobort doesn't exist?  What evidence could you possibly bring to bear to indicate that flobort doesn't exist?
So what evidence do you have that The Prince of Space doesn't exist?  What evidence could you possibly bring to bear to indicate that The Prince of Space doesn't exist?

Would you say that you do not possess the belief that flobort or The Prince of Space exist?

Quote
If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.
I agree with the first part.  My atheism is not based on positive evidence of the non-existence of a deity.  It is based on the lack of evidence for the existence of a deity.  Exact same reason I do not possess the belief that flobort, The Prince of Space, Big Foot, the Loch Ness Monster, leprechauns, faeries, unicorns, Vishnu, body thetans, good Nickelback songs, the universal aether, demons, quark stars, moon dragons, Earth dragons, Durga, vampires, sentient black smoke, The Avatar - master of all 4 elements, table-top cold fusion devices, ghosts, Hogwarts, Hector the Well Endowed, elves, Nemesis, Planet X, Time Cube, Takezo Kensei, lizard people, the fountain of youth, Atlantis, and snake oil with curative properties.

My lack of belief in that sh*t is the default position - it is the position I take when I have zero information regarding such matters.  If that, in and of itself, entails a 'belief' of some kind, well fine.  But note that the belief that vampires don't exist is superior to the belief that vampires do exist.  If you disagree with that, then I feel sorry for you and the immense amount of fear you must feel each waking moment of your life preparing against the possibility of a vampire attack, being possessed by a ghost, stalked by an elf, and worrying that a train may suddenly appear on the tracks when you look away for a brief millisecond.
"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

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1349
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #649 on: March 12, 2014, 11:06:38 AM »
But atheists believe in things which have no evidence:

Materialism
Naturalism
Reality existing independently of all minds
Other minds exist

Again, the reasonableness of the proposition must be taken into account. Does what we observe fit with the expectation of the explanation?
If so it is reasonable to assume that xyx is the case?

The problem with a belief in god is that it raises more questions than it answers.
Why evil, why so many competing religions, why wasn't my prayer answered WWGHA etc etc ad nauseum and the answers become evermore contrived and irrational 

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2751
  • Darwins +53/-444
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #650 on: March 12, 2014, 11:06:58 AM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.
So what evidence do you have that flobort doesn't exist?  What evidence could you possibly bring to bear to indicate that flobort doesn't exist?
So what evidence do you have that The Prince of Space doesn't exist?  What evidence could you possibly bring to bear to indicate that The Prince of Space doesn't exist?

Would you say that you do not possess the belief that flobort or The Prince of Space exist?

Quote
If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.
I agree with the first part.  My atheism is not based on positive evidence of the non-existence of a deity.  It is based on the lack of evidence for the existence of a deity.  Exact same reason I do not possess the belief that flobort, The Prince of Space, Big Foot, the Loch Ness Monster, leprechauns, faeries, unicorns, Vishnu, body thetans, good Nickelback songs, the universal aether, demons, quark stars, moon dragons, Earth dragons, Durga, vampires, sentient black smoke, The Avatar - master of all 4 elements, table-top cold fusion devices, ghosts, Hogwarts, Hector the Well Endowed, elves, Nemesis, Planet X, Time Cube, Takezo Kensei, lizard people, the fountain of youth, Atlantis, and snake oil with curative properties.

My lack of belief in that sh*t is the default position - it is the position I take when I have zero information regarding such matters.  If that, in and of itself, entails a 'belief' of some kind, well fine.  But note that the belief that vampires don't exist is superior to the belief that vampires do exist.  If you disagree with that, then I feel sorry for you and the immense amount of fear you must feel each waking moment of your life preparing against the possibility of a vampire attack, being possessed by a ghost, stalked by an elf, and worrying that a train may suddenly appear on the tracks when you look away for a brief millisecond.

Yes, exactly! You BELIEVE all those things don't exist!
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6631
  • Darwins +798/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #651 on: March 12, 2014, 11:10:18 AM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.

If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.

This is an intellectual slight of hand used by theists all the time.
Is a belief in god as irrational as a disbelief in god? It is a question of reasonableness.
Is it reasonable to believe in something that you have absolutely no evidence for?
I would say no. The onus remains with you to provide evidence of what you believe in.

But atheists believe in things which have no evidence:

Materialism
Naturalism
Reality existing independently of all minds
Other minds exist

No, what we believe is that there are some total idiots who think we believe stuff like that. But even that isn't a belief, because you've just proven it. None of those four items are required to be an atheist or maintain an atheist point of view. I do believe that you can take Berkeley and shove him up your ass, but that's beside the point.

An atheist discounts the god belief of others. Just like other made up stuff, there is no evidence that any of the thousands of gods proposed actually exists. That why you guys have to depend on belief, because there is no other way for you to confront the total lack of proof your deity provides.

If you guys didn't bring up the silly notion of gods, we wouldn't have to dismiss it. What we don't believe is you.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2751
  • Darwins +53/-444
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #652 on: March 12, 2014, 11:11:52 AM »
The problem with a belief in god is that it raises more questions than it answers.
Why evil,

Free will.

why so many competing religions,

People want to believe anything other than the truth of Christianity.

why wasn't my prayer answered

Not every prayer MUST be answered. To think every prayer should be answered would be SPAG, as you are creating a God in your mind that should answer all prayers and disbelieving based on your own strawman God.

What should God do if someone prays for someone to die and another prays for the same person to live?
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6631
  • Darwins +798/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #653 on: March 12, 2014, 11:20:36 AM »
What should God do if someone prays for someone to die and another prays for the same person to live?

You guys make everything up. The above question is easy. He doesn't exist, so nothing happens. It is not we atheists who get confused by such questions. It is you guys. Don't frickin' project so much.

Asking us about your god quandaries is like asking Dick Cheney what the right thing to do is. He would have no answers either.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #654 on: March 12, 2014, 11:21:38 AM »
The problem with a belief in god is that it raises more questions than it answers.
Why evil,

Free will.
Heaven.

Quote
why so many competing religions,

People want to believe anything other than the truth of Christianity.

People want to believe anything other than the truth of Islam.  Just ask a Christian.

Quote
why wasn't my prayer answered

Not every prayer MUST be answered. To think every prayer should be answered would be SPAG, as you are creating a God in your mind that should answer all prayers and disbelieving based on your own strawman God.

Sure. When I prayed for the safety of family members and one got into a car accident. But, it turned out to be a blessing because the family member got laid off due to being out of work for so long and found an even better job with better pay and more Christian co-workers.

This sure as sh*t sounds like SPAG to me.  Sounds like god didn't answer this prayer - it sounds like you prayed and fit the result to be an 'answered' prayer.

Quote
What should God do if someone prays for someone to die and another prays for the same person to live?
I dunno - maybe f*cking show up, have a talk with both of these people, and explain sh*t to them.  Instead of being silent and allowing them to 'make up' whatever answer their SPAG gave them.
"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

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1349
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #655 on: March 12, 2014, 11:26:36 AM »
The problem with a belief in god is that it raises more questions than it answers.
Why evil,

Free will.

why so many competing religions,

People want to believe anything other than the truth of Christianity.

why wasn't my prayer answered

Not every prayer MUST be answered. To think every prayer should be answered would be SPAG, as you are creating a God in your mind that should answer all prayers and disbelieving based on your own strawman God.

What should God do if someone prays for someone to die and another prays for the same person to live?

These answers seem improbable and raise more questions. There's a whole internet forum devoted to the questions that your answers raise.

edit: I forgot, you didn't answer WWGHA?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 11:28:13 AM by Mrjason »

Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2751
  • Darwins +53/-444
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #656 on: March 12, 2014, 11:28:33 AM »
You guys make everything up. The above question is easy. He doesn't exist, so nothing happens. It is not we atheists who get confused by such questions. It is you guys. Don't frickin' project so much.

Asking us about your god quandaries is like asking Dick Cheney what the right thing to do is. He would have no answers either.

I thought you said that you merely "lacked belief?" Now you're definitively claiming He doesn't exist?

This is getting into head spinning confusion.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1338
  • Darwins +100/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #657 on: March 12, 2014, 11:51:05 AM »
your own strawman God.

Oh Oh!!  Like this???



I'd worship him.  He's kinda like a reverse Prometheus, how he hates fire and all.
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 Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1567
  • Darwins +105/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #658 on: March 12, 2014, 12:15:18 PM »

I thought you said that you merely "lacked belief?" Now you're definitively claiming He doesn't exist?

This is getting into head spinning confusion.

You are doing exactly what you accuse others of. You are assuming that there are no gods who are just using Yahweh as an avatar. The bible actually supports the idea that Yahweh was just an avatar for example when Baal says, call me Yahweh not Baal. I have given the ref for this in the thread called Yahweh as a composite invented god.

"prove there are no gods (or demons) who use Yahweh as a (literary) avatar".



« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 12:43:54 PM by Foxy Freedom »
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5094
  • Darwins +586/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #659 on: March 12, 2014, 12:24:03 PM »
That is my point. If you have no hard evidence to prove God doesn't exist, then it is merely a belief. I don't know why atheists hate the word "belief" so much though. It is anathema to them.
Why is it so difficult for you to understand the concept of a lack of belief?  For example, I lack belief in unicorns.  That is not the same as actively disbelieving in them.  If someone showed me a horse that had a horn growing out of its skull, then I would reconsider my lack of belief (as well as checking on whether it was a fraud), because someone would have showed me evidence demonstrating the existence of a unicorn.

Quote from: skeptic54768
If you don't have any kind of evidence that God doesn't exist, then atheism is not based on evidence/proof. You are BELIEVING that God does not exist. Otherwise, you guys would be praying.
No, actually, most atheists simply lack belief in gods.  And until someone comes up with evidence of them actually existing, that's not likely to change.  Also, that answers the false dichotomy you just tried to make here, as there are more options than believing that a god doesn't exist and believing (and thus praying) to said god.  For example, there's the lack of belief I just mentioned - due to having no evidence to justify having a belief in a given god - and there's also people who don't really care if a god exists or not, like myself.  There might well be others beyond those four.  The point is that you can't arbitrarily narrow the options down to "either someone disbelieves in X or they believe in it", because that's a false dichotomy.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11141
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #660 on: March 12, 2014, 12:27:54 PM »
*sigh*

Ignored again. That's ok Skep and Jes, I understand that the article I posted was simply too hard for you to comprehend, let alone refute.

Mind giving me a link to your post? I'm pretty sure it would fall under my definition of "best argument", which I've already told skeptic54768 he tends to "miss", but I want to be sure.

skeptic54768, since you apparently "missed" my debate challenge, I'm posting it again. Feel free to say no, although saying no will just support the idea that you're not interested in debate, as will ignoring this post.

You've most likely been challenged to one-on-one debates before, and you declined. If you haven't been challenged, which I doubt, I am hereby challenging you to a one-on-one[1] debate. Pick a topic.
 1. Or would that be "One-on-skeptic"? :P
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 ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6631
  • Darwins +798/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #661 on: March 12, 2014, 01:54:55 PM »
You guys make everything up. The above question is easy. He doesn't exist, so nothing happens. It is not we atheists who get confused by such questions. It is you guys. Don't frickin' project so much.

Asking us about your god quandaries is like asking Dick Cheney what the right thing to do is. He would have no answers either.

I thought you said that you merely "lacked belief?" Now you're definitively claiming He doesn't exist?

This is getting into head spinning confusion.

That's a fact, not a belief. Or rather, I treat it as a fact since I don't believe anyone who claims that there is a god. I know what beliefs are. I have a few myself. None are religious. They don't need to be. They involve real stuff and my personal interpretation about the important parts.

If you want to define my religious stance, label it a "safe assumption" that there are no gods, based on the sources of such claims and their consistent impotence.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6631
  • Darwins +798/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #662 on: March 12, 2014, 02:22:03 PM »
Skep, the problem is this. You are trying to legitimize your stance (a belief) by making sure everyone else has one too. Contrary or otherwise.

It is so important to you that you are willing to abandon both rational thought and rational dialogue to get it.

And it isn't working.

But you can't admit that.

So here you are, in repetition mode, hoping that you'll wear us down. That won't happen.

It is fine that you have your religious beliefs. The bad part is that you keep insisting that we all get on the same leaky life raft before talking about them with you.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2701
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #663 on: March 12, 2014, 02:27:26 PM »
Yes, Skep, and from me too. I don not believe in any gods as there is no evidence for them that satisfies me that they exist. It is no more a belief that you not believing in fairies, or unicorns or dragons (though the ones in Skyrim are awesome!).

Not believing in something is not a belief. Read the words.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1781
  • Darwins +88/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #664 on: March 12, 2014, 02:57:50 PM »
Yes. As I have said before, the assumption that something does not exist based on the fact that you have never seen any evidence of it is in no way the same as a belief that something--especially something intangible and unprovable--DOES exist. It takes a lot more thought, focus and determination to maintain and nurture a belief in something like that than it does to dismiss it and go about your business. It's a far more active process, and even though the word "belief" CAN, technically, be used to describe both, the sense (or definition) of the word in the second case is quite different.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #665 on: March 12, 2014, 03:16:45 PM »
Yes. As I have said before, the assumption that something does not exist based on the fact that you have never seen any evidence of it is in no way the same as a belief that something--especially something intangible and unprovable--DOES exist. It takes a lot more thought, focus and determination to maintain and nurture a belief in something like that than it does to dismiss it and go about your business. It's a far more active process, and even though the word "belief" CAN, technically, be used to describe both, the sense (or definition) of the word in the second case is quite different.

That's essentially my point - skeptic54768 seems pretty inflexible insofar as letting go of the idea that 'lack of belief' can entail a form of belief.  It essentially makes everything some kind of manner of belief.

What he fails to understand is that even if it's conceded (and I've stated I'm willing to do so) that 'I do not possess the belief that unicornsgod exists', that in no way puts 'lack of belief in the existence of unicornsgod' on par with 'belief in the existence of unicornsgod'.  They are not the same thing.
"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

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Prove There Is No God - A Challenge
« Reply #666 on: March 12, 2014, 03:23:57 PM »
No, my point is excellent whether there is no criteria or vague criteria.  Your point skeptic is only good if the criteria is perfect.

So let's look at your criteria.  Okay, someone who believes in Jesus, seems like the standard criteria (one which is pretty odd but I'll ignore that for now).  I'd like to focus on your second criteria of those "who try to live as close to a sinless life as possible".  Who decides what acts, behaviors, thoughts, non-acts, non-behaviors and non-thoughts are sinful?  It can't be a human deciding because humans are not perfect and might make mistakes in deciding what is sinful and what is not.  So "God" is the only one who can decide what is sinful and what is not since only "God" is perfect. 

So, the only way for us to know what is sinful or not is by "God" telling us.  How did "God" tell us?  According to Christians, "God" told us through the Bible.  Ah, but have you read the Bible?  It is not very clear at all, in fact it is downright confusing.  If the Bible is the word of "God" then the word of "God" is not clear and confusing apparently.  It is very easy for everyone to interpret the Bible differently, each person thinking they are doing exactly what "God" wants yet no two people interpret the entire Bible exactly the same way.

Skeptic, your second criteria basically requires a person to be as close to perfect if not entirely perfect in order to be a Christian.  You've basically made it so Christians do not exist, have never existed and never will exist.  For the sake of argument, the only Christian who ever lived was Jesus, and he thought he was Jewish.

No, I said TRY to be as close to sinless as possible.

Is that what you said?  Well if that is what you said, I have something to tell you.  Something that may shock and / or discredit you.  And that something is: I'm not wearing a tie at all!

Whether you said try or not is irrelevant, further more trying is irrelevant as the most important part of your second criteria is the whole sin part.

Why is trying irrelevant?  Here is an example of why trying is irrelevant.

Let's say I want to TRY to be a basketball player.

How big of an impact is trying?  Well if what I mean by basketball player is a virtual version of myself in NBA2K14.

I could also have meant against some 5th graders on a school yard play ground, against some friends my age on a driveway, or college basketball or an NBA basketball player.  How do I measure trying in all of those different instances?  Trying really doesn't matter, it is the goal that matters and how that is defined whether it is "basketball player", “live as close to a sinless life as possible”, “being a nice person”, “being more considerate of others”, “doing well in school” or “swearing less”.  Yes, I could come up with hundreds of examples of where trying doesn't matter for much of anything.


Of course being sinless is impossible. Only Jesus did that. But the key is minimizing your sins as best you can. Someone who just decides to go out on a killing spree and just ask God for forgiveness later is not even close to trying to minimizing their sins.

The thing you don't realize skep, is that those Christian dictators didn't necessarily set out to murder and cause harm to other people due to some evil intent, they did what they thought their “God” wanted.  They probably were trying to live as close to sinless life as possible and probably didn’t even think their actions or in-actions were problems in “God’s” eyes.  We don't know if they simply thought they could get away with murder only to confess their sins so they could get a free ride to heaven. 

Like I said, you've made yourself judge of who is Christian and who is not.  Since only “God” can judge who is Christian and who is not, you, skeptic, have made yourself God.


Compare it to a father who says, "If you try your best, I will be happy." The son gets a 50 after studying until he was sweating profusely and tells his dad that he tried his best. The father is proud.

Now compare a different son who says, "I'm just going to blow off studying and get a 50 and just tell my dad I tried my best." Both situations resulted in failure, but the father is proud of the other son and disappointed in the other one.

How do you know those Christian dictators didn't try to minimize their sins as best they could?  How do you know they weren't doing “God’s” will?  How do you know they didn't make “God” proud?

Those Christian dictators could very well have went out and studied as hard as they could and only scored a 50.  You're assuming they blew off the test.  But how do you know?

You don't know.  You just don't like the idea of people doing things that makes your religion look bad, so again, you've made yourself the judge, you have made yourself God.


My point remains standing.


EDIT: Spelling
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 03:32:46 PM by SevenPatch »
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks