No Proof is NO PROOF for Inexistence of God.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by logical7

 

I'm tired of arguing philosophy with you. You still haven't provided incontrovertible proof that "God" exists. Present your case or admit it's purely belief and get off the soap box.

edit on 13-2-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

when did i claim that??? I said i have few hints and i shared it, you have alternate theory to explain that by code, divine principle(whatever that means)
if you are tired, i am not forcing you to keep posting.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by logical7

 

thats not possible objectively "insufficient data!"

We've captured plenty of evidence of ghosts. It's a little sad that even ghosts are more substantial than your pet deity.

maybe He is much Smarter to remain unseen till He wants. Kind of proves who created whom.

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by logical7

 

Leaving God out of this for moment .................................
What a bizarre statement! "No Proof is NO PROOF"

maybe it was chosen for that reason.

reply to post by logical7


I know this will sound a little childish and possibly naive. But all the answers about creation and man are found in the bible. I know you all think I'm crazy for suggesting that God is powerful and loving enough to provide us a book written by the power of God through the hands of men that actually tells the truth.

Could you imagine if God really did this, now that is love?

You see you are arguing fact from fiction and I admit I once contemplated that argument. You see the problem is I have had an experience with God and so have my children. We all talk to God, and we hear him telling us things and giving us answers that defy our own understanding. In this way we know that God is truly the one talking to us.

I know it sounds crazy but God is real and I know it 100%. You can say that we are all delusional and that my children have been brainwashed by me and the bible. If you are right we will take it anyway. We have all found a kind of love that we believe can only be explained by God. We don't see many people having the kind of loving relationships that we have with one another or with God.

So like I said for us every word of the bible is the truth. God did love us enough to provide a book that leads us down the path towards him. He did provided us a book that answers all the who, what, and whys. Quite honestly all knowledge apart from love and the pursuit of God is meaningless, just like Kings Solomon lamented.

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by logical7

 

It is not that complicated. DNA is a language, a machine that communicates with other machines to produce what we call life.

Intelligence is well intelligence.

Occam's razor is a logical principle attributed to the mediaeval philosopher William of Occam. The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed.

We are machines that are literally ran by approximately 100 trillion other machines, that we call cells.

We are machines that communicate with each other in an intelligent precise manor, with such mathematical precision that it is truly mind blowing. The capacity of our mind to contemplate and coordinate literally thousands of thoughts per second. Emotions that are tied to those thoughts to our environment and the others that surround us.

Science is left with an incomplete, convoluted, impossible to prove, full of best guess theories that explain how all of this came from nothing.

Or we can recognize that the level of intelligence at work in life and the physical world is so mind blowing that it points to intelligence.

Intelligence from intelligence or intelligence from chaos. Occam's razor always has been pro God.

The minimum assumption needed is the design itself. The design points to a designer. It would be like looking at Thomas Kinkaid's work and believing that someone though a bucket of paint on the canvas and this is what appeared. Since no one would believe that why would anyone believe that we were once a bucket of paint simply thrown on a blank canvas?

thanks for presenting it in a nice way.

reply to post by eight bits


i am not much interested to investigate every supernatural being in all the myths and likely tests to differentiate them, as i have told, i dont have enough information due to my nonsupernatural limited existence and too many myths, furies, demons, greek gods, roman gods etc.
I am also lazy as i have said right at the start.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Those stories that were amalgamated existed before the Judaic god was ever thought of. Ra, Mythra, Odin, and Zeus all existed before "God". Ash Wednesday is today. Did you know that Ash Wednesday is not actually Christian? It is based on the Nordic tradition of marking one's forehead with ash in order to receive the protection of Odin. Wednesday was originally Odin's Day. And another name for Odin is Ygg, which means World Ash. The Norse practice which has become known as Ash Wednesday was itself, drawn from the Vedic Indian religion. Ashes were believed to be the seed Agni , the Indian fire god. It is from this name that the Latins used for fire, ignis. It is from this root word that the English language got the words, ignite, igneous and ignition. Agni was said to have the authority to forgive sins. Ashes were also believed to be symbolic for the purifying blood of the Vedic god Shiva, which it is said had the power to cleanse sins. As I said: amalgamation. Dozens of ancient cultures have been dismembered and their remains absorbed into the cannibalistic cult of Christianity. Dozens of religions blended together under one name, and their origins demonized to hide the lie. That's just ONE example. So as they say: come at me bro.

my quote that you put before this reply can be my reply again.
You are refuting religions and myths, if God exists, He still is a reality. Try and keep the topic clear, we are not discussing "God of which religion is real?"
If God exist then it would be long before history, wait even long before universe. Myths develop when people try to explain events that they dont yet understand. If a cult absorbs pagan ritual its not related to topic.

The code existed before the universe
existed as it is today, I think.
Otherwise, something else had to
create the code in order to create the
universe. Which would require a god.
Which would require a consciousness, which would then invite temptation
for judgment. Which would make me
hate being alive because I'd never
know if my choice was my own. My
own sanity is irrelevant as well, seeing
as how no god would allow us to do what we're doing to each other.

i appreciate the honesty of this reply!

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Water is animate. Everything is animate. At the deepest level, there are particles in motion. The only time particles are not in motion is when matter has reached 0 kalvin, which essentially means that all heat (generated by motion) is gone. Not to mention the bacteria inside the water. And the foreign material that is almost always floating around.

i meant alive but i get your point. The bacteria however uses that random motion of molecules for their own movement, in a sense they dont do it, they dont have a choice but to get kicked around.
Being alive is different, a simple scientific definition is one that can reproduce. Water cant. Spider can.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

if you mean a physical god then even i dont. Maybe you mean a passive divine principle, would you explain and correct me if i am wrong. In its purest form? Subtle or passive, yes. A falling building is not subtle, but the force that brought it down is.

yes God is very Subtle, its like a secret joke that only the one who understands it gets it.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Scientists are still working on that. Even so, that does not mean the first ridiculous answer you can come up with is fair game, because even without a definite answer, there are probabilities and requirements already in place. Your answer does not qualify.

i never claim that take my alternative if your's doesnt have answers.
Just dont claim scientific backing when there's none. I learnt about "spontaneous generation" when they tried to create amino acids by creating earthlike conditions experimentally and using sparks to duplicate lightning. It was a failure but its still taught as explanation for evolution.

reply to post by logical7

my quote that you put before this reply can be my reply again.
You are refuting religions and myths, if God exists, He still is a reality. Try and keep the topic clear, we are not discussing "God of which religion is real?"
If God exist then it would be long before history, wait even long before universe. Myths develop when people try to explain events that they dont yet understand. If a cult absorbs pagan ritual its not related to topic.

I would rather you didn't use that particular piece as a reply again. I would have to humiliate your beliefs with another example of amalgamation. My point in providing that intriguing little history lesson is that every ritual, every tradition, every belief in Christianity, is (again) an amalgamation of an older culture that was stomped out by Christianity in order to preserve its ill-gotten integrity. This includes "God". I believe we call it plagiarism these days. Plagiarism essentially means that your claims based on plagiarized material are not valid because that material is used out of context and therefor irrelevant to your claims. Which makes your claims groundless, because every bit of proof was stolen from another case.

Which brings us back to the idea of "no proof". I believe it's already been pointed out that your initial premise is ridiculous enough without having to pick apart your measly defense. If I have to explain it, then it probably won't do any good to explain it anyway. Let's look at that last line in the above quoted selection again:

If a cult absorbs pagan ritual its not related to topic.

It's very much related. It means your "God" was created by cultural thieves and chopshoppers. Do you know what it's called when a car is stolen, disassembled in an obscure location, and reassembled using select parts from the original model as well as select parts from other similarly obtained models to create a new model?

It's called 'illegal'. It's a federal offense. And it basically means the car in its intact state is worthless because no one wants to handle tainted products. It's dishonorable. And that means the car is no longer valid in any sense of the word. All you can do is scrap it.

Just like an amalgamated "God". And that, ILL-logical7, is why pagan rituals are relevant. Because they are historical evidence that your "God" came from a shopshop. My evidence that he was faked is evidence that he doesn't exist. Capiche?

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by logical7

 

I know this will sound a little childish and possibly naive. But all the answers about creation and man are found in the bible. I know you all think I'm crazy for suggesting that God is powerful and loving enough to provide us a book written by the power of God through the hands of men that actually tells the truth.

Could you imagine if God really did this, now that is love?

You see you are arguing fact from fiction and I admit I once contemplated that argument. You see the problem is I have had an experience with God and so have my children. We all talk to God, and we hear him telling us things and giving us answers that defy our own understanding. In this way we know that God is truly the one talking to us.

I know it sounds crazy but God is real and I know it 100%. You can say that we are all delusional and that my children have been brainwashed by me and the bible. If you are right we will take it anyway. We have all found a kind of love that we believe can only be explained by God. We don't see many people having the kind of loving relationships that we have with one another or with God.

So like I said for us every word of the bible is the truth. God did love us enough to provide a book that leads us down the path towards him. He did provided us a book that answers all the who, what, and whys. Quite honestly all knowledge apart from love and the pursuit of God is meaningless, just like Kings Solomon lamented.

i believe that, its possible to know God's "existence" by logic as you pointed but not the details. However the thread is about keeping it objective and keeping beliefs out as best as possible. So i dint mention it. thanks for it.

reply to post by logical7


It's understandable sometimes why atheists take on the position they do. Think about it this way:

You are in a room with only a table. The table is not in the light so you can only feel it. You are told there is a cat on the table. You do not believe it because you do not see it. You may hear it from time to time or even feel the wind as it moves but, when you go to touch the cat, you grasp nothing but air.

For some, this is enough to believe there is a cat. For others, it is not. I can fault neither the cat believer nor the "afelinious".

reply to post by AfterInfinity

My point in providing that intriguing little history lesson is that every ritual, every tradition, every belief in Christianity, is (again) an amalgamation of an older culture that was stomped out by Christianity in order to preserve its ill-gotten integrity. This includes "God". I believe we call it plagiarism these days. Plagiarism essentially means that your claims based on plagiarized material are not valid because that material is used out of context and therefor irrelevant to your claims. Which makes your claims groundless, because every bit of proof was stolen from another case.

i am not here(this thread) to defend any religion and you are attacking a religion. Dont do it.
However plagiarism is one explanation especially in a time when everyone wants to take credit for every tiny piece of article.
If Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad peace be upon them said the same things, that can also mean that they have the same source.
The tribes even before that preserved ideas in stories and myths and God starts with Adam pbuh, if people along millennia made up myths added a bit truth and a lot imaginations and scattered around.
A religion comes later and again mentions that bit of truth, is it plagiarism?
I'l again say, dont bring religions to prove you inexisting point.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Because they are historical evidence that your "God" came from a shopshop. My evidence that he was faked is evidence that he doesn't exist. Capiche?

ok you win. If that makes you feel better, however read the book "a history of God" by a historian Karen Armstrong as she may disagree and say that "God"/monotheism existed first and then the pagan ideas and rituals came.

further proof ofGod came to me last night from the GRB from Vela and Carina! Gid exisits for sure and he saw me from the beginning reaching the end in space/time.

Originally posted by BlindBastards
Aside from fairytales in a book, where’s the indisputable evidence that God exists?

You, and the world around you i.e.: everything.

reply to post by logical7

ok you win. If that makes you feel better, however read the book "a history of God" by a historian Karen Armstrong as she may disagree and say that "God"/motheism existed first and then the pagan ideas and rituals came.

Oh, sure. Except for this bit right here, at the very beginning of her book:

Despite its other-worldliness, religion is highly pragmatic. We see that it is far more important for a particular idea of God to work than for it to be logically or scientifically sound.

Or this!

For the first time, the Israelites became seriously interested in Yahweh's role in creation, perhaps because of renewed contact with the cosmological myths of Babylon. They were not, of course, attempting a scientific account of the physical origins of the universe but were trying to find comfort in the harsh world of the present.

OR EVEN THIS!!!

“If your understanding of the divine made you kinder, more empathetic, and impelled you to express sympathy in concrete acts of loving-kindness, this was good theology. But if your notion of God made you unkind, belligerent, cruel, of self-righteous, or if it led you to kill in God's name, it was bad theology. ”

That last one brought a smile to this surly face of mine.

So...how does this support your argument, exactly? Because I only see her agreeing with me.

reply to post by logical7


I have explained it. Divine principle: a code or law that promotes construction and harmony with or without intelligent intent, often through conversion or utilization of chaotic elements.