There is no God

[TySixtus]

TAB19:

You take it as an insult to be asked a question? You are full insults including the greatest , which is to question God.

Says you. Excuse me for not quaking in my boots.

You were the one who brought up your 6 year old daughter’s ability to be logical.

That’s right, I did. In what way does my daughter’s logical ability relate to my having her when I was 18? And further, what that has to do with my atheism? I’ll wait for an answer.

We are not afraid to die. We are living as He commands and will be rewarded in Heaven.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, besides vacuous comments concerning how great your god is and how I’m missing out?

Ty

 

[buffalo]

TySixtus:

Sure. You still need to provide some evidence as to religion being the source of that truth, and not a coincidence.

Or, if you want to claim that theology has been the source for truth, it is also the source for non-truth.

Your argument:

1. Most people are religious.
2. People produce truth.
3. Since people produce truth, and most people are religious, religion is directly responsible for introducing truth into our existence.

Fallacious as it is (as I’ve pointed out) I won’t argue with it. Instead, I’ll provide the logical extension of your proof.

1. Most people are religious
2. People produce falsehood.
3. Since people produce falsehood, and most people are religious, religion is directly responsible for introducing truth into our existence.

Do you agree with my proof? If not, why not?

Ty

Some can surely be coincidence. Much truth is learned by accident. It does not negate the fact because of the method.

So can we agree that some of the truth of religions may have come by accident and some thorugh reason?

 

[kev7]

AnAtheist:

Easy, for any human, not only atheist. We simply define, what existence in reality means.

I can. How about this definition: Something exists, if it is detectable by its interacting with other existing things.

How do you detect what is inside a black hole? How do you have any knowledge of how things interact with each other inside a black hole? Man can’t even take a mesurement! What is on the other side of a black hole? do the laws of physics not break down?

You see, this definition doesn’t provide any proof that there are no other forms of reality and existance.

Even though I can only see the inside of the box I’m in that doesn’t mean there are not other boxes. That doesn’t mean there is not a room with many boxes. That doesn’t mean that there wasn’t someone that made those boxes.

As long as there is a possbility there is NO assertion of truth.

Perhaps it would helpfull to think outside of the box. That is after all why man has an imagination.

If it wasn’t important for man to keep all possibilites open to him, behond that which he can prove with his limited understanding , the he would not have an imagination. There would be no need for it

We wouldn’t even be as smart as the computers we made.

The joke here is that even computers are smart enough to know that Null doesn’t equal false. every variable a computer works with is either defined, false, or true. Even a computer keeps all possibilties open to it!

Atheism rejects mans need to keep all possibilites open to him.

 

[EnterTheBowser]

I’ve got a suggestion to everyone posting in this thread: read the rules for this forum. I quote: “It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs.” (emphasis mine). Let’s keep the discussion civil.

Anyways, I don’t have much time - bus to catch. Just a few things:

kev: “ProofOfGod” is not a variable. And this defining all forms of existence stuff - this is, in a sense, exactly what we’re trying to do. We’re trying to figure out what exists. You seem to be arguing that we can’t try to find out if something exists without first knowing if it exists or not. This is not true.

Furthermore, you seem to be asserting: theism is as good as atheism because atheism is based on faith in men and theism is based on faith in God. I guess the question is: if you don’t have faith in reason, how can you even make arguments? Making arguments presupposes the primacy of reason. Furthermore, you accept reason as dominant in everything you do, every practical matter (eg will this fire hurt if I touch it?)- except for this one particular issue. Reason is one of those inescapable things.

Moreover, I could just as easily argue that your faith in God is based in your faith in the power of faith. If you don’t believe in the power of men to understand things, why do you accept faith? It is a human act, after all. (and by the way - reason works a hell of a lot better than faith)

 

[TAB19]

TySixtus:

So then why in hell are you guys still doing it? Is it fun?

If an outside observer were to view this debate, who do you think would come across childish and condescending? The atheist, who presents rational arguments and asks for some proof?

Or the Christians, who are attempting to diagnose me over the internet, while skillfully avoiding the questions I have raised?

If there is a god, he’s probably ashamed of you guys. I would be.

Ty

I can take the blasting. It is fun being Catholic. More insults I see. I admit I cannot provide proof over the internet. I appreciate you coming to debate Catholics.

 

[TySixtus]

Ahimsa:

Ty,

Which of these are you denying?

(1) The reality of a realm of existence that is not currently measurable or detectable by modern science.

You’re equivocating here. The Christian does not say this “realm of existence” is “not currently knowable”, He says it is “unknowable”, In other words, it will never be able to be known. No matter how much time or scientific effort is expended, we will always be confounded because we cannot truly comprehend god.

This is hogwash. So if your original statement was correct, I would deny it. That is, I would disagree with this:

The reality of a realm of existence that is forever not measurable or detectable by science.

Do I deny “other realms of existence”? Well, define what that means and I can tell you. Right now that sentence is meaningless.

(2) The provability of such a realm of existence.

Well until you answer my above question, I cannot answer this succinctly. But I will say that I have no reason to believe there are other “realms of existence”. Only because you haven’t told me what that means yet.

Ty

 

[TySixtus]

buffalo:

Some can surely be coincidence. Much truth is learned by accident. It does not negate the fact because of the method.

It most certainly does negate the fact, with regards to this discussion!

You assert that “Religions contain truth that cannot be found anywhere else” I say that’s nonsense, and asked for a truth that could be found only in religion.

Any thing else is coincidence and not part of this discussion.

Ty

 

[Mijoy2]

TySixtus:

Do you have anything to add to the discussion, besides vacuous comments concerning how great your god is and how I’m missing out?

Ty

Yes. TySixtus, if it hasn’t already been suggested to you, could I recommend you read Mere Christianity by C.S.Lewis? It’s a relative quick read. You can pick up the book at most book stores for 10-15 dollars in paperback.

He addresses much of what has been addressed on this thread. And it is such a relevant time to recommend Lewis with his Narnia story hitting the theaters today.

 

[buffalo]

TySixtus:

It most certainly does negate the fact, with regards to this discussion!

You assert that “Religions contain truth that cannot be found anywhere else” I say that’s nonsense, and asked for a truth that could be found only in religion.

Any thing else is coincidence and not part of this discussion.

Ty

I think I responded to your statement all religions are equally nonsensical. I replied that all religions contain some truths. I agree some have been found through coincidence and some from reason.

 

[TySixtus]

buffalo:

I think I responded to your statement all religions are equally nonsensical. I replied that all religions contain some truths. I agree some have been found through coincidence and some from reason.

But you’ve yet to prove that religion is the cause for the finding of these truths. The only thing you’ve offered is “People are religious”.

Ty

 

[kev7]

EnterTheBowser:

I’ve got a suggestion to everyone posting in this thread: read the rules for this forum. I quote: “It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs.” (emphasis mine). Let’s keep the discussion civil.

Anyways, I don’t have much time - bus to catch. Just a few things:

kev: “ProofOfGod” is not a variable. And this defining all forms of existence stuff - this is, in a sense, exactly what we’re trying to do. We’re trying to figure out what exists. You seem to be arguing that we can’t try to find out if something exists without first knowing if it exists or not. This is not true.

Proof of God is an undefined variable. It is a place holder that we have yet to fill with a truth.

I’m trying to aruge that you can’t find out if something exists if you don’t know what all the possibilites for existance are. I’m not saying that you first need a list of everything that exists.

How can you conclude through your own existance that we are the only examples of existance?

Furthermore, you seem to be asserting: theism is as good as atheism because atheism is based on faith in men and theism is based on faith in God. I guess the question is: if you don’t have faith in reason, how can you even make arguments? Making arguments presupposes the primacy of reason.

I am making that statment. I’m trying to help you understand that we both share faith. If you didn’t have faith in mans abilites then you wouldn’t be an atheist.

Furthermore, you accept reason as dominant in everything you do, every practical matter (eg will this fire hurt if I touch it?)- except for this one particular issue. Reason is one of those inescapable things.

Why must it be one of those inescapable things? Why can’t it just remain a possibility for you. Why do you have to reject the concept of possibilities? Doesn’t the rejection of “possibility” go against human nature itself?

You only have to observe the people around you to know, that man escapes reason all the time. The escape from reason is the foundation of his imagination. Without the ability to be open to possibilities we would never be able to construct a theory.

And that is my point. Your “Theory” is that God does not exists. My “theroy” is that he does.

I can’t convince you that you are wrong and you can’t convince me that I’m wrong.

We can only both have faith.

Moreover, I could just as easily argue that your faith in God is based in your faith in the power of faith. If you don’t believe in the power of men to understand things, why do you accept faith? It is a human act, after all. (and by the way - reason works a hell of a lot better than faith)

I have hope that through Christ I will attain eternal life. It is the desire for eternal life that pushes me toward a truth that is not of mans own.

I accept that faith is a part of every man. I also see the need for hope in every man. Without faith and hope a man can lead himself to commit suicide. That is the result of mans wisdom when it suggests that there is no need for faith in something more then himself.

 

[kev7]

TySixtus:

But you’ve yet to prove that religion is the cause for the finding of these truths. The only thing you’ve offered is “People are religious”.

Ty

I would suggest that the nature of man is to be open to possibilites.

“people are religious” means that people are open to things that are behond the scope of logic.

To reject possibility is to infact go against human nature.
A mans imagination is the source of possibility.

And that is how we come to know God. Through the concept of possibility which is part of our human nature.

 

[buffalo]

TySixtus:

But you’ve yet to prove that religion is the cause for the finding of these truths. The only thing you’ve offered is “People are religious”.

Ty

These truths were packaged in the religion and transmitted to the next generation. As additional truths were stumbled upon or reasoned they too were passed forward. An accumulation of truths thereby exists in religons.

 

[Beaver]

Trouble maker…Satan

 

[Ahimsa]

TySixtus:

Do I deny “other realms of existence”? Well, define what that means and I can tell you. Right now that sentence is meaningless.

But I will say that I have no reason to believe there are other “realms of existence”. Only because you haven’t told me what that means yet.

Ty

I think we can all agree that the physical world exists – quarks, atoms, molecules, viruses, trees, gorillas, planets, galaxies, universe(s), etc. All these things science can measure and quantify.

Do you think that there is some other “realm” or set of entities that exist (other than “quarks to universe(s)”), and yet are not quantifiable by science?

 

[AnAtheist]

kev7:

Atheism rejects mans need to keep all possibilites open to him.

So does religion. Do you consider, that there may be no afterlife even if there was a god? It is possible.

 

[AndyF]

  No one called you a coward. I simply summarized the options from an atheist point of view. The conclusion is yours.

 "who can't face the world without"

  So that is pointless or without purpose, right?  Does anything that you do, think/action/probagate have an infinite purpose? No, because you and yours have a finite lifespan, right? So by default of YOUR own theory, we are all finite beings and every thought/action we cause is infinitely purposeless, and only serves this existance, even if the subject *is* talk of infinite things. So the end result is you have what you want. You find that you have before you finite people doing purposeless things like yourself. ...Job accomplished. 

   You should now be content, as a negative effect on you must be shunned by the rule of finite beings, as the emulation of heaven is what is desired. 

    Your discontent here serves no purpose in the short(!) run. So I would recommend you consider it a job accomplished,  and go on with your limited life of bliss, and do anything you desire. ;)

    Andy

 

[AndyF]

estesbob:

AMEN! http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Also, having made the BIG step its fun for them to call Jesus stupid and God a a babykiller and see the reaction they get.

 Some are wise enough to let go. At least they have that to their credit. But some like to pack blasphemy as well as a lack of charity in the suitcase for the journey. Can't figure out who that is supposed to impress.

  I guess I'd make a lousy atheist. Don't mind chancing a quarter in a one armed bandit, but for this....... 

  Andy

 

[TySixtus]

AndyF:

No one called you a coward. I simply summarized the options from an atheist point of view. The conclusion is yours.

Another theist who is completely oblivious, it seems.

Do you understand that voicing your opinion as to my sincerity is insulting?

Ty

 

[TAB19]

This may have been mentioned as I have bounced around this thread. A quote from GK Chesterton

“If there were no God there would be no atheists.”