god logical debate Dms thread #1

[Durrge]

ha another thread questioning the existence of God. Pitting Christians against atheists in an argument that will never end, becuse one side cannot convience the other side into thinking their way. The way i see it Dancingmustard is you made this thread just to argue your belief(or lack there of one), just look at your posts thats all youve been doing, quoteing one person and trying to come up with another point to try and disprove their comment. But if you are not arguing for the sake of argument, then ill give you proof of Gods existence:

[jonesthecurl]

Ok DM lets hear what your theory on how the world came about is.

DM, and frankly most people on all sides of the debate are a bit fed up with people (also on all sides of the debate)warping the discussion in various topics into an indistinguishable mess of posting the same stuff over and over.
As a result he has, quite sensibly split the debate up into several threads in the (apparently forlorn) hope that we can discuss this one bit at a time.
The purpose of this particular thread is to discuss the assertion that one cannot prove the existence of God/the gods.
Agree or don't agree- or post something you personally believe to a complete or partial proof that the statement "You can't prove god exists" is incorrect.

If your point is that : the universe exists, as is apparent to us all - and that in itself is sufficient proof of the existence of a god who created it, hen that would be a reasonable point to make in this thread.

I consider that it is likely to be rigorously contested, but it would be a fair thing to propose.

JJ, have I managed to express what you actually wanted to say below?

"We are here, the universe is here, therefore god created it, therefore god exists"?

Oh, and durgge would this also summarize your point too, or were you making a different one?

[JJM]

Ok DM lets hear what your theory on how the world came about is.

DM, and frankly most people on all sides of the debate are a bit fed up with people (also on all sides of the debate)warping the discussion in various topics into an indistinguishable mess of posting the same stuff over and over.
As a result he has, quite sensibly split the debate up into several threads in the (apparently forlorn) hope that we can discuss this one bit at a time.
The purpose of this particular thread is to discuss the assertion that one cannot prove the existence of God/the gods.
Agree or don't agree- or post something you personally believe to a complete or partial proof that the statement "You can't prove god exists" is incorrect.

If your point is that : the universe exists, as is apparent to us all - and that in itself is sufficient proof of the existence of a god who created it, hen that would be a reasonable point to make in this thread.

I consider that it is likely to be rigorously contested, but it would be a fair thing to propose.

JJ, have I managed to express what you actually wanted to say below?

"We are here, the universe is here, therefore god created it, therefore god exists"?

Oh, and durgge would this also summarize your point too, or were you making a different one?

Out of curiosity do you believe in God?

[Simon Viavant]

Question mark JJ.

[jonesthecurl]

Ok DM lets hear what your theory on how the world came about is.

DM, and frankly most people on all sides of the debate are a bit fed up with people (also on all sides of the debate)warping the discussion in various topics into an indistinguishable mess of posting the same stuff over and over.
As a result he has, quite sensibly split the debate up into several threads in the (apparently forlorn) hope that we can discuss this one bit at a time.
The purpose of this particular thread is to discuss the assertion that one cannot prove the existence of God/the gods.
Agree or don't agree- or post something you personally believe to a complete or partial proof that the statement "You can't prove god exists" is incorrect.

If your point is that : the universe exists, as is apparent to us all - and that in itself is sufficient proof of the existence of a god who created it, hen that would be a reasonable point to make in this thread.

I consider that it is likely to be rigorously contested, but it would be a fair thing to propose.

JJ, have I managed to express what you actually wanted to say below?

"We are here, the universe is here, therefore god created it, therefore god exists"?

Oh, and durgge would this also summarize your point too, or were you making a different one?

Out of curiosity do you believe in God.

That's a question for a separate thread.
Is your point "this universe of aching beauty MUST have been created by God, therefore God exists"?

[JJM]

That is part of it. There is also proof that the flood happened. clams found on mountains.

[Simon Viavant]

Jesus Christ you are so fucking retarded.

[jonesthecurl]

Jesus Christ you are so fucking retarded.

Naughty Simon.
If we get into insults thisis just another iteration of the same bullshit.
The correct response is to challenge JJ's assertion, if you feel it's false, or ask him to expand upon it if he hasn't explained himself clearly enough.

[Simon Viavant]

Many people have already tried that, me included. He will just repeat his same statement, not understand any other argument and say it's irrelavent because he doesn't understand it, and get mad at you for being off topic, then you repeat your own arguments and the cycle continues until it goes on for pages. I can give you some threads if you want evidence.

[jonesthecurl]

Which is I think DM's whole point in splitting the topic up.
Don't think I don't expect these threads to fail, but guys, let's try.

[Gregrios]

ha another thread questioning the existence of God. Pitting Christians against atheists in an argument that will never end, becuse one side cannot convience the other side into thinking their way. The way i see it Dancingmustard is you made this thread just to argue your belief(or lack there of one), just look at your posts thats all youve been doing, quoteing one person and trying to come up with another point to try and disprove their comment. But if you are not arguing for the sake of argument, then ill give you proof of Gods existence:

That is probably the best arguement a person can make. I refuse to believe all that beauty and perfection just popped out of nowhere. I've actually sat down numberous times and thought about this. I have a very hard time believing that the world came into existence without purpose or a creator. It really does amaze me how some people look at the possiblity of God's existence and still think that everything appearing out of thin air is the more logical answer. It's kinda funny actually.

[jonesthecurl]

OK we now seem to have three people saying:
"You want proof God exists? Just look around you. Where did this come from if not from god?"
Please tell if this a good summary of your argument before people try to refute it.
If this is not what the argument is, it would be pointless for others to attempt to refute it.

Using my move-the-meeting-on skills I would summarise the (relevant) points so far thusly:

DM: Nobody can prove God exists. Whatever you say to the contrary, the atheists can poo-poo.
Three other people: The Universe exists, it is marvellous, it must have been made by someone, that someone is God.

Is this a fair summary?
If so we can proceed.

[Gregrios]

OK we now seem to have three people saying:
"You want proof God exists? Just look around you. Where did this come from if not from god?"
Please tell if this a good summary of your argument before people try to refute it.
If this is not what the argument is, it would be pointless for others to attempt to refute it.

Using my move-the-meeting-on skills I would summarise the (relevant) points so far thusly:

DM: Nobody can prove God exists. Whatever you say to the contrary, the atheists can poo-poo.
Three other people: The Universe exists, it is marvellous, it must have been made by someone, that someone is God.

Is this a fair summary?
If so we can proceed.

I can't speak for the other two but as far as I'm concerned, you gotter.

[jonesthecurl]

OK we now seem to have three people saying:
"You want proof God exists? Just look around you. Where did this come from if not from god?"
Please tell if this a good summary of your argument before people try to refute it.
If this is not what the argument is, it would be pointless for others to attempt to refute it.

Using my move-the-meeting-on skills I would summarise the (relevant) points so far thusly:

DM: Nobody can prove God exists. Whatever you say to the contrary, the atheists can poo-poo.
Three other people: The Universe exists, it is marvellous, it must have been made by someone, that someone is God.

Is this a fair summary?
If so we can proceed.

I can't speak for the other two but as far as I'm concerned, you gotter.

Thanks, greg.
For the topic to move on ( and not descend into "yah, you're another"), we need substantive opinions to discuss.

[Ray Rider]

OK we now seem to have three people saying:
"You want proof God exists? Just look around you. Where did this come from if not from god?"
Please tell if this a good summary of your argument before people try to refute it.
If this is not what the argument is, it would be pointless for others to attempt to refute it.

Using my move-the-meeting-on skills I would summarise the (relevant) points so far thusly:

DM: Nobody can prove God exists. Whatever you say to the contrary, the atheists can poo-poo.
Three other people: The Universe exists, it is marvellous, it must have been made by someone, that someone is God.

Is this a fair summary?
If so we can proceed.

Along similar lines is the kalam cosmological argument:
1. Whatever had a beginning had a cause;
2. the universe had a beginning;
3. therefore, the universe had a cause.
That uncaused First Cause and Prime Mover is God, who had no beginning and therefore had no need of a cause. However, as you and I both know, these arguments have already been argued in circles numerous times between atheists and theists, which is why Dancing Mustard is simply wasting his time in starting these topics.

"But Further, it is an assured truth, and a conclusion of experience, that a little or superficial knowledge of philosophy may incline the mind of man to atheism, but a further proceeding therein doth bring the mind back again to religion. For in the entrance of philosphy, when the second causes, which are next unto the senses, do offer themselves to the mind of man, if it dwell and stay there it may induce some oblivion of the highest cause; but when a man passeth on further, and seeth the dependence of causes, and the works of Providence, then, according to the allegory of the poets, he will easily believe that the highest link of nature's chain must needs be tied to the foot of Jupiter's chair."
-Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626) Advancement of Learning

"It is funny to watch people argue so loudly against something which they don't believe exists."
-A certain person here on CC

[Strife]

ha another thread questioning the existence of God. Pitting Christians against atheists in an argument that will never end, becuse one side cannot convience the other side into thinking their way. The way i see it Dancingmustard is you made this thread just to argue your belief(or lack there of one), just look at your posts thats all youve been doing, quoteing one person and trying to come up with another point to try and disprove their comment. But if you are not arguing for the sake of argument, then ill give you proof of Gods existence:

Alteration: Image's of nature and the final frontier have been removed because they have nothing to do with god, and took up too much space.

I'm sorry to intrude, I usually only read these debates, but this guy/girl is a blatant retard... To start things off here, more than just Christians believe in god. You're a jackass if you believe that "only my religion is right so their god's not real therefore only christians believe in god." Also, if you're going to capitalize one, you must capitalize the other. It looks very unprofessional(I know, "I'm not a professional, I'm just a jackass me no n33dz prp3r gr4mm4rz pnct10n nD sp3el1ngz"), so to add to it looks incredibly sloppy. Keep in mind you should only take my advice if you want your driveling post to be taken seriously. Next, your spelling, it fails. The way i see it, the only reason you posted that was to try and make fun of DM by thinking you're exploiting his way of exploiting, making you Alpha Exploiter. But instead, you turned up this abortive retrograde post. There's so much wrong with what you said... What I stated was just the beginning, I mean "or lack there of one." What in the blazes does that mean, you can't just take some words, through them into a jumble, and hope it makes sense. For the sake of the Human race it just doesn't work that way. To see such an atrocity, the slaughter of the entire English language and Alphabet in a single posting, makes me lose nearly all hope in the survival of Humans. If you're going to make fun of someone's post, don't maim your own.

[daddy1gringo]

Now hold on, that's something entirely different. I assert that I know God exists, and a good deal more about Him. I do NOT assert that I can prove that he exists to anyone else. As a matter of fact I have asserted from the beginning that I cannot.

Well when I say that I mean that you can't be 100% sure that He exists. Even if you believe that you have had some sort of revelation, there's always the slight possibility that your mind is fooling you.

Even if you think you have logical and/or scientific proof, one way or the other, there's always the possibility that your mind is fooling you.

This is kind of off-topic to the thread, but, hey, just wanted to get this straight.

[radiojake]

I've always wondered why people are so worried about the beggining of the universe's existance. Noone will ever know. The point is rather mute because I think more energy should be spent in trying to stop the planet diving into oblivion (well, humans anyway)

Also the perception that there has to be a begining, and therefore a creator, (or big bang) is mere human foly. Just because 'we' have a begining, we assume everything else must also, as that's how we see the world. How do we know that the universe wasn't always here? No begining, just always was.

Either way, I don't care for the answer. It's irrelevant. The continous debate of brainwashed theists vs smug, all knowing science based logic (which, also involves faith. Ever wonder why religion and science clash so much? Because they are so similair in their belief structures for answering all of lifes mysteries) will continue until the combination of the two will bring about the end of humankind. Good riddance to us all when it finally comes.

[john9blue]

I've always wondered why people are so worried about the beggining of the universe's existance. Noone will ever know. The point is rather mute because I think more energy should be spent in trying to stop the planet diving into oblivion (well, humans anyway)

Also the perception that there has to be a begining, and therefore a creator, (or big bang) is mere human foly. Just because 'we' have a begining, we assume everything else must also, as that's how we see the world. How do we know that the universe wasn't always here? No begining, just always was.

Either way, I don't care for the answer. It's irrelevant. The continous debate of brainwashed theists vs smug, all knowing science based logic (which, also involves faith. Ever wonder why religion and science clash so much? Because they are so similair in their belief structures for answering all of lifes mysteries) will continue until the combination of the two will bring about the end of humankind. Good riddance to us all when it finally comes.

Actually, scientists have gauged the beginning of our universe to within a few hundred million years (a fraction of the total lifespan) because of its expansion and the fact that light from that time is just reaching us now. I take issue with the fact that you see science and religion as incompatible (which is exactly the viewpoint that atheists are pushing, because they know that science will always win). I think "the end of humankind" is kind of bleak though, even for the most anti-religious.

[radiojake]

Actually, scientists have gauged the beginning of our universe to within a few hundred million years (a fraction of the total lifespan) because of its expansion and the fact that light from that time is just reaching us now.

How do you know that? Because it was written in a book that some men wrote? That takes some sense of faith to believe what they have written is true. How can you check that this assertion is correct?

I'm clearly not a thiest, but I don't bang on about the prowess of science either.

[john9blue]

How do you know that? Because it was written in a book that some men wrote? That takes some sense of faith to believe what they have written is true. How can you check that this assertion is correct?

I'm clearly not a thiest, but I don't bang on about the prowess of science either.

Heh, well skepticism deserves its own thread, but suffice it to say that I "believe" that the Universe is "probably" that old, because that's what the experts say, which is more proof than I have for "the Universe had no beginning".

[radiojake]

Heh, well skepticism deserves its own thread, but suffice it to say that I "believe" that the Universe is "probably" that old, because that's what the experts say, which is more proof than I have for "the Universe had no beginning".

Indeed there does seem to be more 'evidence' for the former statement to be closer to the truth, I don't actually really think that the universe has no begining, but it's just as logical as the other theories put forward. My main point is that this question doesn't even really matter

[PLAYER57832]

That is part of it. There is also proof that the flood happened. clams found on mountains.

I am NOT going to diverget this thread, but this is not proof of anything. The mountains were once sea floor and that is why there are clam shells up there. It is proof of tectonics, earth movements, not God. (though if you want to debate that fact, let's do it elsewhere.. I am just pointing out here that this is not proof).

[Neoteny]

ha another thread questioning the existence of God. Pitting Christians against atheists in an argument that will never end, becuse one side cannot convience the other side into thinking their way. The way i see it Dancingmustard is you made this thread just to argue your belief(or lack there of one), just look at your posts thats all youve been doing, quoteing one person and trying to come up with another point to try and disprove their comment. But if you are not arguing for the sake of argument, then ill give you proof of Gods existence:

FAIL

[Dancing Mustard]

I am NOT going to diverget this thread

Don't worry about it... Clapper has already gone ahead and de-railed all three.

Now we're back to the regular position of just having one huge "THERE R NO GOD" thread, in which any argument more subtle than "If God is real then he must be a retard", "no u r a retard!! God hates you!! FAG!!", "Screw u, u are a retard, your priest absued you", "Waaah!! Stop that!! Atheists are fanatics just like those dewds who blew up 911!! they r teh sayme thing", "lol at u. That's the dumbest ting I evar herd! God = Leprechaun", "Ontology is 4 real!!!", will be trampled underfoot and in which any semblance of intelligent discourse is doomed to be drowned out by retarded braying.

Apparently Clappy thinks that a single thread of total banality (which is precisely like every other 'no God' thread we've ever had here) is less spammy than three separate threads which attempt to generate fresh, specific and insightful discussions that we've never previously had. Personally that seems odd to me... but I'm sure that it's all for the best really, and certainly not just another example of a dumb person trying to moderate cleverer ones, only to get confused by concepts that she doesn't understand and resorting to the mod-panel in a fit of intellectually-feeble panic.