Does God Exist?

Religions > Atheism > Does God Exist?

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 10 of 16

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Richard"
Date:	17 Dec 2004 07:25:34 AM
Object:	Does God Exist?

Does God Exist?
There are three answers to this question:
1) Yes, God does exist - this can be based on belief, evidence or the
combination of the two.
2) I don't know if God exists - this stance is a result of being unsure or
unconvinced about the evidence and having no clear beliefs
3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.
So a person can be unsure as to whether God exists, but never sure He
doesn't exist.
Atheism defined as the belief that God does not exist is nothing more than
that - a belief system. There is no evidence to prove that He does not
exist, and even if there was no evidence to prove that He does exist, that
would still leave a person at number 2 - unsure.
So to profess oneself as an atheist is nothing more than a belief system of
people who feel the need to discredit the existence of a person they claim
does not exist.
Richard
.

User: "Zachriel"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	22 Dec 2004 08:42:34 PM

"Bubba" <bubbakes@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:pp2ks0tqvpkk7tc6kvsmmidjni1q0sur21@4ax.com...

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Yes you can find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Maybe I am having a brainfart, but can you give an example of how you
can find evidence that something doesn't exist?
I always thought it was nearly impossible to prove a negative, inspite
of the xtian fundies attempts to throw arguments back at
non-believers..

Sorry for the delay in responding. I have been mulling over the best
way to address this issue.
First the nuts and bolts of your paragraph: When you say the largest
prime number does not exist, are you making a statement about
infinity? Any statement putting limitations on infinity is obviously
proven wrong and is contradictory.

<snip>
There is a standard and simple proof by Euclid. There is no largest prime
number.
http://primes.utm.edu/notes/proofs/infinite/euclids.html
.

User: "wcb"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	23 Dec 2004 12:05:18 AM

Bubba wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Aside from unread christians, who claims an omnibenevolent omnipotent
god? The God of the bible has the ultimate capacity for good and evil
according to the bible.

All major theologians since Tertullian?
Almost every god believing man in the street?
Who believes in a god who does moral evil?
Who believes in a weak, limited god?
Not the 100 million or so evangelical or fundy Americas
out there who belioeve in god but not evolution.
Basically the omni-everything god IS the model of god for most
people. You can expect almost all Moslems would agree, it is
the model of god presented in the Quran.
It is not the model of god in the OT of course, that god
is stupid, evil, nasty, savage and ammoral, but nobody among
Christians will admit it.
The god of the bible creates good and evil, that is natural evil,
earthquakes, storms, droughts, floods.
The warning here is, god punishes a peoples temporally
for their failings, a message still bleated by today's
xians fundy types. Not that god is morally evil.
You have a choice, the omni-everything god or the omni-nothing
god of the bible.
For example, the omni-everything god is omnsicent, he knows
weverything, ask any man in the street. The bible god lies
to Adam to trick Adam into not eating from the magic fruit
tree of knowledge.
He is not omnisceint enoughto see his lie won't work for long.
Exodus 7, odd tale. God is setting Moses up as a leader, and
all of a sudden, out of the blue, god is trying to kill Moses.
And fails! What?! An omnipotent god can't kill a single
waek human? He can kill all the first born of Egypt and can't
manage to kill Moses?
Do you think the average man in the street would know this verse,has
reflected on it and thought what it means in relationship
to claims god is omnipotent.
Bwahahahahahah! No, god is omnipotent, he can do anything!
Ask anybody sitting in any church pew!
Bluntly, the Omni-everything god is what is preach in loud angry
voices among the evangelicals and fundies and Catholics and
by every TV and radio preacher and it is what people mean when
they say "God".
And anybody who has argued god with xians long, and I have here
since 1995, knows this. God is omnipotent to almost all people.
When pople say god, they men this omni-everything god, not a
god so weak he could not manage to kill Moses as per Exodus 7.
Or didn't realize lying to Adam as per Genesis 2 would not work.
Try and get a xian to admit that if the bible is true, god is not
omnipotent or omniscient!

To elaborate on the biblical god,,,
If a well versed christian or jew said that an all powerful god
created the universe and everything in it, how can you disprove it?

Can god do the impossible, the improbable, make 2 + 2 =5,
or create a square circle?
That is, does god make the rules, the laws and the
logic of the Universe?
If Yes, he could make man with free will such that man freely
only chooses to do moral good.
But we see man do moral evil. If god could do this and did not,
he would then be the sustaining cause of all moral evil, and thus
not omnibenevolent as claimed, but omnimalevolent, resonsible for
all moral evil. none of which would exist except specifically
because of god.
Not cool!
So no, god does not make the rules and laws and logic of
the Universe.
Then where do they come from? Since he cannot control
these things, he cannot have created them and they must
be outside and beyond him.
And if they are beyond him, outside him he cannot have
created them nor a Universe at large that has these things.
Therefore he cannot have created the Universe.
So much for omnipotence too, or the claim god is the greatest
and most powerful thing imaginable. The Universe at large is
greater still. Outside of god, beyond him, seperate from
god and not dependent in any way on god.
So god is either not the creator of the Universe as claimed,
or is unutterablly and totaly evil.
Choose your horn of the dilemma now.
Its not only easy to prove god cannot have created
the Universe, but almost trivial to do so.
And we have to wonder about a Bible god that suposedly
makes the entire earth, but can't manage to kill a puny
human, Moses, in Exodus 7. Or in Judges 1, can't handle
chariots of iron.
As a myth, this all sort of sucks, logic-wise.
Most people being ignornt of the bible and logic challenged
never notice.

If they say he is an omnibenevolent god, obviously there are
contradictions. But how do you prove there is no god?

The omni-everything god is a maximalist god, all that can be
claimed for god is claimed for god. But that all self destructs.
So, not only does an omni-everything god collapse, but the idea
of a maximalist god collapses too.
There is no way to patch that up, its a step down.
How about the bible god?
That is a god that is said to have done specific things at
specific times at specific places involving certain people.
But biblical archaeology has now, over 100 years proven the
old testament is not history. There were no patriarchs, no
Egyptian captivity, no exodus, no Joshua and Moses on a genocidal
invasion of Canaan. And no god before the Israelites as pillar
of smoke and fire, no Moses on the mount with god.
God as a character in a book passed off as history disappears
as that history is debunked as myth.
Rather, the Israelites were ironage farmers who peacefully
spread across Samaria and Judea in unfortified hilltop farms.
These were typical Canaanites, not a people who starting with 70
illiterate sheep herders, were in Egypt 430 years.
So that god is gone. No more existant than any other character
in a novel.
Now we have disposed of two gods, the bible god, and the
omni-everything god.
Now, the burden of proof swings to the claimant that god exists.
After all, what are the laws and rules and logic of a Universe
that we know now god cannot even in pronciple create?
we know many of these rules and ho wthe work, physics, chemistry
biology. These thinsg rule our gods that have intelligence and
ability to act, and are disemboddied entities.
No gods can exist.
If you think so, its is now up to you to prove, hard evidence
only, that such a thing can be, and that it is and to show hard
evidence for details.
There is no room for supernaturalism left in the Universe,
as far as we can see.
Sciencer has pretty much managed to explain things rather
successfully because it abandoned any ides of supernatutalism.
We no longer need little nature gods to explain rain, and
fertility, and drought and successful harvests.
We can't go back there, to those gods, that sort of
religion either.
There is no room for lesser gods in a Universe where nature gods
are obsolete and an omni-everything god creator of the Universe
is disproven.
Wanky mythical gods who have been debunked don't work either.
A maximalist god is impossible.
There is no room in the Universe for a god anymore.
Unless its a minor god about like a fairy or leprechaun.
But the known laws, and rules, and logic of the universe don't
have room for magic and petty magic fairy things and minor godlets.
And its not my problem as an Atheist, as a believer, the believer
now has teh obligation to set out any theories of god and prove
that god does exist with overwhelming evidence, and that does not
mean making assertions.

Most of the bible contradicts what we know today as scientific fact.
But what about people who claim god or gods or space aliens created
this ball of mud?

They have an obligation to show hard evidence, adequate evidence.
Not toss out assertions and demand we debunk them.
Which in cases like Van Daniken aren't hard anyway.

We can explain what we see now, and deduce with some accuracy what
happened before us, but how can we prove there is no god(s)?
btw, I must reiterate, I am an atheist.

At this point, one admits that the idea of god is dead, and proof
of that is pretty hard. There is not much room left for a god
and no need for one.
The only gods left are rhetorical gods. Maybe a god that makes
the Universe made it and then does nothing?
But without evidence, its about like saying a million faries made the
Universe. Rhetorical but empty claims are not acceptable.
There is no god. This too is an empty assertion, but one empty
assertion is equal of any other.
Tghe only wat they can overcome a smirking, arrogant admittedly
empty claim, "Gods cannot exist and I offer no evidence just this
claim" is not to counter with equally empty claims, but produce claims that
are well supported by hard evidence, by which I mean, not more empty
assertions.
Having knocked down the major claims for god, there is
nothing left, it cannot be filled with empty assertions.
Nor assertions backed by more empty assertions and
deductions and bad logic and word games.
Which is all theology has given us for 2600 years.
That is, theological methodology is obviously flawed.
And is no longer acceptable. Because it has given us
easily falsifiable gods.

Since from the rationalist's perspective it is a evil to not provide
sufficient evidence, I'm surprised more of you do not take up the
argument from evil and go with strong atheism.

I have been doing just that.
Pointing out also we have two gods. The omni-everything god,
and the mythical bible god, not the same as I showed

For example, surely an
Omnipotent Omnibenevolent God would offer sufficient evidence that any
reasonable atheist would conclude He is. But reasonable atheists don't.
Either

I argued that for years. But it mainly involves arguing the biblical
god. The bible is full of contradictions.
How can you apply the same arguments to non-biblical gods?
Pacific islander gods for example, have historically little impact on
current events, but yet there is a creation myth behind it. How can
you disprove there wasn't a "great turtle" who after creation, died
out and left us to our own devices?

Comparing the biblical god to the omni-everything god
points out glaring differences.
And of course there is the problem of battling myths.
And of course we have the recent problem of archaeology debunking
the OT as history. God imbedded in history as doing this or
that a this place at this time disappears with the debunked history.
Modern archaeology has given us Atheist a LOT of
ammunition.

1) God is not
2) God is Omnibenevolent but not Omnipotent since he would like to, but
cannot, delivet the evidence.
3) God is Imnipotent but not Omnibenevolent since He could deliver the
evidence, but will not deliver the evidence.
4) God delivered but atheists are not reasonable

Cheers,
Bubba

--
Dance, monkeys, dance!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Bubba"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	25 Dec 2004 08:06:50 PM

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:05:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Aside from unread christians, who claims an omnibenevolent omnipotent
god? The God of the bible has the ultimate capacity for good and evil
according to the bible.

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

The god of the bible is evil, as well as good. Only the unread
Christians say otherwise.

Basically the omni-everything god IS the model of god for most
people. You can expect almost all Moslems would agree, it is
the model of god presented in the Quran.

It is not the model of god in the OT of course, that god
is stupid, evil, nasty, savage and ammoral, but nobody among
Christians will admit it.

The god of the bible creates good and evil, that is natural evil,
earthquakes, storms, droughts, floods.

The warning here is, god punishes a peoples temporally
for their failings, a message still bleated by today's
xians fundy types. Not that god is morally evil.

You have a choice, the omni-everything god or the omni-nothing
god of the bible.

<snip>

To elaborate on the biblical god,,,
If a well versed christian or jew said that an all powerful god
created the universe and everything in it, how can you disprove it?

Can god do the impossible, the improbable, make 2 + 2 =5,
or create a square circle?

Assuming that God exists, yes he can make a square circle.
We would still call it a square. A rose by any other name....

That is, does god make the rules, the laws and the
logic of the Universe?

If Yes, he could make man with free will such that man freely
only chooses to do moral good.
But we see man do moral evil. If god could do this and did not,
he would then be the sustaining cause of all moral evil, and thus
not omnibenevolent as claimed, but omnimalevolent, resonsible for
all moral evil. none of which would exist except specifically
because of god.

Not cool!

So no, god does not make the rules and laws and logic of
the Universe.

Then where do they come from? Since he cannot control
these things, he cannot have created them and they must
be outside and beyond him.

And if they are beyond him, outside him he cannot have
created them nor a Universe at large that has these things.
Therefore he cannot have created the Universe.

So much for omnipotence too, or the claim god is the greatest
and most powerful thing imaginable. The Universe at large is
greater still. Outside of god, beyond him, seperate from
god and not dependent in any way on god.

So god is either not the creator of the Universe as claimed,
or is unutterablly and totaly evil.

Choose your horn of the dilemma now.

Its not only easy to prove god cannot have created
the Universe, but almost trivial to do so.

How and why? Your argument doesn't hold much water.
I totally agree, that most Christians are wrong in their beliefs,
based on what is actually written in the bible. The Bible is full of
contradictions and impossiblities.
Looking at it from a logical standpoint, the Bible was written by the
hand of man(wether it was divinly inspired or not), it is bound to
have a wealth of mistakes and mistranslations.
However, how can you disprove the idea that any god created this ball
of mud?

How about the bible god?
That is a god that is said to have done specific things at
specific times at specific places involving certain people.
But biblical archaeology has now, over 100 years proven the
old testament is not history. There were no patriarchs, no
Egyptian captivity, no exodus, no Joshua and Moses on a genocidal
invasion of Canaan. And no god before the Israelites as pillar
of smoke and fire, no Moses on the mount with god.

The specifics of the Bible are debateable. I for one would love to
see a cite on the specifics to which you refer.
I am reasonably certain that a lot of things didn't happen as written
in the Bible, but isn't it possible that archeologist haven't
unearthed the evidence yet?
The same argument can be applied to Evolution. Isn't it possible that
they haven't discovered all the transitional fossils to support the
theory? Evolution is a sound and supportable theory, but it does have
a few gaps that need to be filled.

God as a character in a book passed off as history disappears
as that history is debunked as myth.

Rather, the Israelites were ironage farmers who peacefully
spread across Samaria and Judea in unfortified hilltop farms.
These were typical Canaanites, not a people who starting with 70
illiterate sheep herders, were in Egypt 430 years.

So that god is gone. No more existant than any other character
in a novel.

Now we have disposed of two gods, the bible god, and the
omni-everything god.

Now, the burden of proof swings to the claimant that god exists.

I agree, if people say there is a god, it's up to them to prove it.
However, earlier in this thread I asked how to prove a negative.
You simply haven't offered a logical argument that proves there is no
god. You have indicated the god of the bible doesn't exist as
depicted in the Bible, but not proved that god(s) do not exist.

After all, what are the laws and rules and logic of a Universe
that we know now god cannot even in pronciple create?
we know many of these rules and ho wthe work, physics, chemistry
biology. These thinsg rule our gods that have intelligence and
ability to act, and are disemboddied entities.

No gods can exist.

If you think so, its is now up to you to prove, hard evidence
only, that such a thing can be, and that it is and to show hard
evidence for details.

I don't believe in any gods, but I can't prove they don't exist, or
did exist at one time.
I can't prove the exact origin of life on earth either.

Most of the bible contradicts what we know today as scientific fact.
But what about people who claim god or gods or space aliens created
this ball of mud?

They have an obligation to show hard evidence, adequate evidence.
Not toss out assertions and demand we debunk them.
Which in cases like Van Daniken aren't hard anyway.

Again, I asked how to prove a negative. I agree totally that
assertions should be proven, not the negative.

We can explain what we see now, and deduce with some accuracy what
happened before us, but how can we prove there is no god(s)?
btw, I must reiterate, I am an atheist.

At this point, one admits that the idea of god is dead, and proof
of that is pretty hard. There is not much room left for a god
and no need for one.

The only gods left are rhetorical gods. Maybe a god that makes
the Universe made it and then does nothing?
But without evidence, its about like saying a million faries made the
Universe. Rhetorical but empty claims are not acceptable.
There is no god. This too is an empty assertion, but one empty
assertion is equal of any other.

Comparing the biblical god to the omni-everything god
points out glaring differences.
And of course there is the problem of battling myths.
And of course we have the recent problem of archaeology debunking
the OT as history. God imbedded in history as doing this or
that a this place at this time disappears with the debunked history.

Modern archaeology has given us Atheist a LOT of
ammunition.

Certainly, but it doesn't eliminate gods. It only debunks certain
writings of gods.

Cheers,
Bubba

Cheers,
Bubba
.

User: "XL"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	26 Dec 2004 10:19:09 AM

Bubba wrote:

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:05:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

... I am an atheist.
...
Assuming that God exists ...

Assuming there might be a deity is what characterizes theism sir.
.

User: "Virgil"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	26 Dec 2004 01:46:40 PM

In article <CNBzd.288766$HA.67602@attbi_s01>, XL <xl@xl.net> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:05:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

... I am an atheist.

...

Assuming that God exists ...

Assuming there might be a deity is what characterizes theism sir.

If that were true then Septic XL Troll, the Craven Capon, would be the
foremost theist.
.

User: "wcb"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	26 Dec 2004 10:23:30 AM

Bubba wrote:

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:05:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Aside from unread christians, who claims an omnibenevolent omnipotent
god? The God of the bible has the ultimate capacity for good and evil
according to the bible.

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

The god of the bible is evil, as well as good. Only the unread
Christians say otherwise.

Ohhhhhh? Try to get one to admit it!
I have been hanging around here since 1995.
Haven't managed yet!
"God is goooooood!" "Oh yeah, lets see what the bible
actually says!"
And you will see some fancy excuse mongering and tap
dancing.
God is omnipotent, omnibenvolent and that is the
thing all Christians claim. I have experience in this,
trust me.

<snip>

To elaborate on the biblical god,,,
If a well versed christian or jew said that an all powerful god
created the universe and everything in it, how can you disprove it?

Can god do the impossible, the improbable, make 2 + 2 =5,
or create a square circle?

Assuming that God exists, yes he can make a square circle.
We would still call it a square. A rose by any other name....

No, the rules of math would differ. We would not notice,
its diffrent, but we'd use different rules and terminology.

How and why? Your argument doesn't hold much water.

It holds all the water you need.
You know, its a pisser, people just scan through this
with brain half turned off, don't even bother really
trying to understand it, its simple, and brush it off.
And this is a problem with me. People jabbering and jibbering
AT ME, but unwilling to think or take time to deal honestly
with a good argument.
No, its airttight and a good argument.
Obviously, you didn't take time to do it justice.
You don't point out where its wrong, I note most pointedly.
If you are going to barge your butt here and pick arguments,
you do have a bit of an obligation to actually read and
understand a counter argument.
The argument holds water. You just either aren't bothering
to think about it or can't think.
I showed you above, that the omni-everything god with specific claims,
greater than anything imaginable, creator of all, omni-everything,
collapses.
Don't understand it? Read it again until you do!
Slow down and engage brain before starting.
I tire of people who get sloppy, lazy, and don't even put
for simple effort for a simple argument.

I totally agree, that most Christians are wrong in their beliefs,
based on what is actually written in the bible. The Bible is full of
contradictions and impossiblities.
Looking at it from a logical standpoint, the Bible was written by the
hand of man(wether it was divinly inspired or not), it is bound to
have a wealth of mistakes and mistranslations.
However, how can you disprove the idea that any god created this ball
of mud?

I just did above. You didn't bother to do the argument
justice.
So, why waste more time with you?
--
Dance, monkeys, dance!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Bubba"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	26 Dec 2004 06:23:51 PM

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:23:30 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 06:05:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Aside from unread christians, who claims an omnibenevolent omnipotent
god? The God of the bible has the ultimate capacity for good and evil
according to the bible.

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

You seem to be focusing on the Christian fundementalist viewpoint.
I am guessing that most read Christians, Jews, Muslims don't claim
that God is omnibenevolent.
You have given plausible reasons for refuting the Christian fundi
arguments.
However, it doesn't answer my original question.
How can you disprove any god or gods? Forget the christian viewpoint.
How can you disprove any generic gods, or even space aliens creating
this world?

The god of the bible is evil, as well as good. Only the unread
Christians say otherwise.

Yes, but the majority of Christian posters on these newsgroups seem to
be of the "fundi" types.
These are the ones that seem to have the most ridiculous arguments.
Again, how do you prove that any god didn't create this? I have
heard enough of the christian arguments.
Look at it this way, prove that a supernatural or alien being didn't
create this world.

God is omnipotent, omnibenvolent and that is the
thing all Christians claim. I have experience in this,
trust me.

<snip>

To elaborate on the biblical god,,,
If a well versed christian or jew said that an all powerful god
created the universe and everything in it, how can you disprove it?

Can god do the impossible, the improbable, make 2 + 2 =5,
or create a square circle?

Assuming that God exists, yes he can make a square circle.
We would still call it a square. A rose by any other name....

No, the rules of math would differ. We would not notice,
its diffrent, but we'd use different rules and terminology.

isn't that basically what I said? a rose by any other name...?

How and why? Your argument doesn't hold much water.

your argument is against biblical god. You haven't argued against all
types of gods or supernatural beings.

If you are going to barge your butt here and pick arguments,
you do have a bit of an obligation to actually read and
understand a counter argument.

barge my butt? look at the thread, you responded to my post first.
I understand your argument, but it doesn't address the complete
question. You have argued against biblical god only.

The argument holds water. You just either aren't bothering
to think about it or can't think.
I showed you above, that the omni-everything god with specific claims,
greater than anything imaginable, creator of all, omni-everything,
collapses.

Don't understand it? Read it again until you do!
Slow down and engage brain before starting.

I tire of people who get sloppy, lazy, and don't even put
for simple effort for a simple argument.

No reason to be rude is there?

I just did above. You didn't bother to do the argument
justice.

So, why waste more time with you?

You still haven't answered the question. You should think outside the
christian "box"
Cheers,
Bubba
.

User: "wcb"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	27 Dec 2004 04:40:18 AM

Bubba wrote:

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

You seem to be focusing on the Christian fundementalist viewpoint.

No. You aren't getting this are you?
This is standard theology 101. It was claimed long
ago by ancient Greeks philosphers who invented the idea
of a perfect god, the prime mover god. The idea of
an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god was
taken into christianity with neo-Platonism and
Stoic theology. It has been bedrock dogma of Catholic
theology since the beginning. It was part and parcel of protestant
Christianity also. Liberal, moderate, evangelical, Catholic
and findamentalist theologians all agree.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent.
Show me a single serious theologian that denies any
of these three things. There have actually been a few, but
nobody in teh world of Christianity can even name them, or takes
them seriously. I know you can't name them.
This is basic Christianity, Judaism, Islamic theology.
Its what billions, not millions, billions of people
understand god to be. And not fundamentalists by any means.
Its the basic theology of every large and small
christian denomination one can think of. All of them.
Really, you just don't get it.
Come back when you have read more and understand
more.
Otherwise you just waste my time.

I am guessing that most read Christians, Jews, Muslims don't claim
that God is omnibenevolent.

Just wrong.
You have obviously never read the Quran.

You have given plausible reasons for refuting the Christian fundi
arguments.
However, it doesn't answer my original question.
How can you disprove any god or gods? Forget the christian viewpoint.
How can you disprove any generic gods, or even space aliens creating
this world?

I did it already. But you just will not think.
You wil not be reasonable and rational.
Go away. Don't waste my time any more.

The god of the bible is evil, as well as good. Only the unread
Christians say otherwise.

God is omnipotent, omnibenvolent and that is the
thing all Christians claim. I have experience in this,
trust me.

<snip>

To elaborate on the biblical god,,,
If a well versed christian or jew said that an all powerful god
created the universe and everything in it, how can you disprove it?

Can god do the impossible, the improbable, make 2 + 2 =5,
or create a square circle?

Assuming that God exists, yes he can make a square circle.
We would still call it a square. A rose by any other name....

No, the rules of math would differ. We would not notice,
its diffrent, but we'd use different rules and terminology.

isn't that basically what I said? a rose by any other name...?

How and why? Your argument doesn't hold much water.

your argument is against biblical god. You haven't argued against all
types of gods or supernatural beings.

If you are going to barge your butt here and pick arguments,
you do have a bit of an obligation to actually read and
understand a counter argument.

barge my butt? look at the thread, you responded to my post first.
I understand your argument, but it doesn't address the complete
question. You have argued against biblical god only.

No reason to be rude is there?

I just did above. You didn't bother to do the argument
justice.

So, why waste more time with you?

You still haven't answered the question. You should think outside the
christian "box"

Cheers,
Bubba

--
Dance, monkeys, dance!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Bubba"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	27 Dec 2004 07:36:02 AM

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:40:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

You seem to be focusing on the Christian fundementalist viewpoint.

No. You aren't getting this are you?
This is standard theology 101. It was claimed long
ago by ancient Greeks philosphers who invented the idea
of a perfect god, the prime mover god. The idea of
an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god was
taken into christianity with neo-Platonism and
Stoic theology. It has been bedrock dogma of Catholic
theology since the beginning. It was part and parcel of protestant
Christianity also. Liberal, moderate, evangelical, Catholic
and findamentalist theologians all agree.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent.

Show me a single serious theologian that denies any
of these three things. There have actually been a few, but
nobody in teh world of Christianity can even name them, or takes
them seriously. I know you can't name them.

This is basic Christianity, Judaism, Islamic theology.
Its what billions, not millions, billions of people
understand god to be. And not fundamentalists by any means.
Its the basic theology of every large and small
christian denomination one can think of. All of them.

Really, you just don't get it.
Come back when you have read more and understand
more.
Otherwise you just waste my time.

Forget omnibenevolent, omnipresent, etc,, can you disprove that a
supernatural entity of any kind did not create this world? Or a space
alien?
Cheers,
Bubba
.

User: "wcb"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	27 Dec 2004 09:53:12 AM

Bubba wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:40:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

You seem to be focusing on the Christian fundementalist viewpoint.

No. You aren't getting this are you?
This is standard theology 101. It was claimed long
ago by ancient Greeks philosphers who invented the idea
of a perfect god, the prime mover god. The idea of
an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god was
taken into christianity with neo-Platonism and
Stoic theology. It has been bedrock dogma of Catholic
theology since the beginning. It was part and parcel of protestant
Christianity also. Liberal, moderate, evangelical, Catholic
and findamentalist theologians all agree.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent.

Show me a single serious theologian that denies any
of these three things. There have actually been a few, but
nobody in teh world of Christianity can even name them, or takes
them seriously. I know you can't name them.

This is basic Christianity, Judaism, Islamic theology.
Its what billions, not millions, billions of people
understand god to be. And not fundamentalists by any means.
Its the basic theology of every large and small
christian denomination one can think of. All of them.

Really, you just don't get it.
Come back when you have read more and understand
more.
Otherwise you just waste my time.

Forget omnibenevolent, omnipresent, etc,, can you disprove that a
supernatural entity of any kind did not create this world? Or a space
alien?

Forget omni-benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient?
No. why should I since its the default god
of all the world's major religions and almost
all god believers.
If you wanna try to tell us space aliens created the world,
fine, show evidence.
Supernatural? That is a concept that has died.
All we see now here is a sorry pathetic god of the gaps.
I can simply point to how this concept has died
and how it is now no longer viable. Its now the theists
burden to prove such a thing might be.
Sorry. Its a word that cannot even be defined anymore.
So its a dead issue.

Cheers,
Bubba

--
Dance, monkeys, dance!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Bubba"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	27 Dec 2004 09:12:31 PM

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:53:12 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:40:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered.
Why pose faux problems?

You seem to be focusing on the Christian fundementalist viewpoint.

No. You aren't getting this are you?
This is standard theology 101. It was claimed long
ago by ancient Greeks philosphers who invented the idea
of a perfect god, the prime mover god. The idea of
an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god was
taken into christianity with neo-Platonism and
Stoic theology. It has been bedrock dogma of Catholic
theology since the beginning. It was part and parcel of protestant
Christianity also. Liberal, moderate, evangelical, Catholic
and findamentalist theologians all agree.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent.

Show me a single serious theologian that denies any
of these three things. There have actually been a few, but
nobody in teh world of Christianity can even name them, or takes
them seriously. I know you can't name them.

This is basic Christianity, Judaism, Islamic theology.
Its what billions, not millions, billions of people
understand god to be. And not fundamentalists by any means.
Its the basic theology of every large and small
christian denomination one can think of. All of them.

Really, you just don't get it.
Come back when you have read more and understand
more.
Otherwise you just waste my time.

Forget omnibenevolent, omnipresent, etc,, can you disprove that a
supernatural entity of any kind did not create this world? Or a space
alien?

Forget omni-benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient?

No. why should I since its the default god
of all the world's major religions and almost
all god believers.

If you wanna try to tell us space aliens created the world,
fine, show evidence.

Supernatural? That is a concept that has died.
All we see now here is a sorry pathetic god of the gaps.
I can simply point to how this concept has died
and how it is now no longer viable. Its now the theists
burden to prove such a thing might be.

If you go back and read the thread, the entire point of this
discussion is to disprove all possiblities by the supernatural or ID.
I remind you yet again, that I am an atheist, and do not believe there
is or was any supernatural entity that created this world/universe.
However, I can not prove it. Therefore the original question.
You have pointed out that omnibenevolent gods don't exist. I agree.
No major religeon or theology adequately proves the existance of their
particular god or gods.
I also should remind you that many gods have not had the
characteristics of omnibenevolence, like Mars, Arjuna, Hera, etc..
Can you disprove that any entity did not create this world, wether by
"intelligent design"(yes, I recognize a lot of flaws), by conscious
effort, or by accident. Include space aliens in the mix too.
I do not doubt that most of the gods in the major religeons are very
flawed in description, and most likely have never existed outside the
minds of men.
But can you disprove all entities from creation?
That is the point of this thread. Prove the negative.
And I remind you again, I think the burden of proof is on the one
claiming the creative process. But can you prove the negative
argument? And how do you arrive at that conclusion?

Sorry. Its a word that cannot even be defined anymore.

So its a dead issue.

Cheers,
Bubba

User: "wcb"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	28 Dec 2004 05:45:38 AM

Bubba wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:53:12 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 10:40:18 +0000 (UTC), wcb
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

Easy now wcb, I am an atheist. I am just posing a simple question.
No need to get your hackles up.

Its a question that was easily answered

If you go back and read the thread, the entire point of this
discussion is to disprove all possiblities by the supernatural or ID.

And somewhere along the line I mentioned that supernatural has no meaning.
It is now defined only in opposition to the natural that has, since
Max Planck, slipped away as a meaningful word.
What is supernatural, that that is not natural.
What is natural?
As Neils Bohr pointed out, you can only experiment
and what you can see or measure is what is. In the quantum world,
theorization about what happens, say between an electron
freed from a cathode by heat and when it passes through
a non-uniform magnetic field has no real meaning.
But there is no room for god there either.
All that matters is phenomenon that exists and can be
measured, vcan be seen to exist, can be handled.
With this, supernaturalism died. It died early in classic
physics and chemistry with the death of vitalism.
All that is left of supernaturalism is god of the gaps.
Now, what my proof did was, take out god as defined.
Since THAT collapses, it can be in effect, measured.
In a real scientific manner, by noting the expected
phenomenon entailed by simple claims, god is ruled out.
Now, even supernatural, if found to be a real aspect
of reality, cannot support a god that cannot exist because
the defined god self destructs. Many a physics theory
has likewise, died the death of a logical debunking.
We ARE doing physics here.
If you cannot measure it, it is not real.
And for good measure, if you can measure it it has
either a particle nature or a wave nature, never both.
Another Bohr rule that has so far held up to all tests.
God is said, to have a few certain attributes.
Like electrons or photons, or bosons.

Physicists often show an idea is false because it involves
claims that create contradictions.
Thus classical physics was destroyed whe Michaelson and Morely showed
that the closing speed of two beams of like is C, not 2XC.
All was at a loss to explain that until Einstein and Lorenze
and others explained it.
Likewise, our supernatural god has some claims made for it.
Like Michealson and Morley's naive theories, in practice, it
doesn't work.
Michelson and Morely doomed the ether theory.
My demonstration that god as defined is not possible destroys
the theory that god, like light needing ether to propagate as
a wave in, needs supernatural ether to exist in.
Explaining light was the only reason for theoretical ether.
Explaining god is the only reason for the claims of a
supernatural world. Neither can be shown to exist on their own.
Both were theorized only to support another empty theory.
So you see, this does all have a very direct bearing on
the discussionm.
I am trying to treat god with as much rigor as Dirac or
Lorentz or Hiesenberg or Bohr treated quantunm physics.
When god is debunked, the necessity for supernatural
disappears. It is a meaningless concept, like the interstellar
all encompassing ether.
It cannot be measured, it does not exist in a very real quantum
physics sense. Bohr's notion is the bedrock of the Copenhagen
interpretation. It works. This idea has a very real 80 year track
record of great success.

I remind you yet again, that I am an atheist, and do not believe there
is or was any supernatural entity that created this world/universe.
However, I can not prove it. Therefore the original question.

You can if you try. I did not make the assertions made for god,
theology has. It is THE major theory amongst all believers
and theologians of all major theologies.
You treat this like physics, you take the claims and
reason about them.
This isn't rocket science.
You don't need tensor calculus to deal with it.

You have pointed out that omnibenevolent gods don't exist. I agree.
No major religeon or theology adequately proves the existance of their
particular god or gods.

They make claims. They try to prove it, Aquinas's 5 ways for example.
Its just that they prove rather inadequate. Not only do they try,
but for some centuries, it was canonical law that there was proof of god.
Denying that, claiming faith was adequate without evidence was fideism,
a heresy. Look it up.
So, I am playing by theology's own rules.
I do nothing without a reason, often several.
Unfortuneatley, due to lack of ability on part of almost
everybody dealing with this, I never manage to get past
the teaching people how to reason stage.
Stopping people from playing word games or abandoning all reason
along the way.
We don't have any Augustines or Amselms or Aquinases out there in
net loonie land.
There is a LOT more to this than what you have seen so far.
But its like explaining calculus to dogs so far.

I also should remind you that many gods have not had the
characteristics of omnibenevolence, like Mars, Arjuna, Hera, etc..

Nobody believes in them. So it doesn't matter, does it?
Its like quantum physiscists ignoring fairies.
What everbody belives, so it maytters, what theology has taught, so it
matters is god is omnipotent omniscient, omnibenevolent creator of all.
Since this is the standard model god, its the one to reason about.
Why you cannot get that through your thick skull is beyond me.
Other gods can be dealt with, but why bother since NOBODY IS
ARGUING THEM! or even cares.
Is this getting through? Are you wasting my time?

Can you disprove that any entity did not create this world, wether by
"intelligent design"(yes, I recognize a lot of flaws), by conscious
effort, or by accident. Include space aliens in the mix too.

I did. Aliens are not in the mix.
Because NOBODY BELIEVE ALIENS CREATED THE UNIVERSE!
Why are you wasting your time on a non-issue?
Because you like wasting your time?
Nobody is arguing that so you can't even define alien
in a reasonable fashion here for sake of argument.
Its thus not up to serious claim par.
You cannot have a god creating the world when that god can be
shown to not exist.
God is an old idea, that is the burden of believers to prove.
the problem is, they don't do that.
"You say god does not exist, well burden is on you to
prove that claim".
So I did it. Its not my burden, but god is such and old
idea that it seems natural that I am the new boy on the block,
challenging an established idea.
Now, aliens. If the god thumpers change their claims to avoid
disproof, since its not an established, and cient idea being challenged,
one challenges the alien claims by
1. Demanding adequate definition.
2. Hard evidence.
3. Reminding them it is their burden of evidence.
Aleins are not an old, established idea.
4. Reminding them that there is a current claim (god)
that by ignoring, they are assumning explicitly false.
Do we want them pinty headed IDers teaching god don't
exist in our schools? Passing 4th grade is hard enough.
5. Demand they prove that it is false if they intend to
displace it with aliens.
6. If that cannot do that, offer them my proof.
You get the idea. 4, 5 and 6 knocks the stuffing out
of this sort of stunt. You just have to be logical about
all of this and lay it out.
Otherwise you get a lot of goal post moving.
This isn't rocket science.
If its fairies and magic ponies or whatever, the principle
still applies.

I do not doubt that most of the gods in the major religeons are very
flawed in description, and most likely have never existed outside the
minds of men.

No ***** Sherlock!
Now, most people will assert vigously god exists.
They will not vigorously assert Zeus or Odin, or
Mithra exist.
Why? I'll let you do this one.
Hint: Gods come in types.

But can you disprove all entities from creation?
That is the point of this thread. Prove the negative.

Yes. If I debunk god, than the supernatural disappears too.
The problem is, I cannot debunk what is not even defined.
I refuse to do that and demand the opponent do that.
Then there is always a rich source of disproof.
"What do you mean by supernatural?"
I can debunk almost anything, but only if I don't do any
of my opponent's work for him.
And demand that a claim must be admitted to displace
other claims. That is the way to handle ID monkeys.

And I remind you again, I think the burden of proof is on the one
claiming the creative process. But can you prove the negative
argument? And how do you arrive at that conclusion?

By doing it more than a few times.
There are some tricks to it.
We both know its the same old creationist god guff.
You make 'em admit it.
Then move to the debunk god gambit.
If they won't, you go to the next natural step,
they have explicitly abandoned god. Get it spelled
out explicitly. If they won't, make it an issue.
Move to the debunk god gambit.
Damned if they do, damned if they won't
Again, the omni-everything god is a maximalist god.
Debunked, you can never go back.
You hang up the argument here. They admit it and
take the consequences or refuse to and get denounced
for games and dishonesty and you debunk the maximum god.
Head you win, tails you win.
Lesser god ideas aren't that much fun. Remind them of that.
They are playing games. Its a matter of playing the right
games back at them.
You do not let them set a dishonest agenda.
That is your upfront battlecry.
--
Dance, monkeys, dance!
Cheerful Charlie
.

User: "Bubba"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	22 Dec 2004 05:44:00 PM

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Yes you can find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Universal negatives are proven when they involve a contradiction. For
example, the largest prime number does not exist. Scientists conclude
perpetual motion machine does not exist. The argument from evil says an
Omnibenevolent Omnipotent God does not exist.

Since from the rationalist's perspective it is a evil to not provide
sufficient evidence, I'm surprised more of you do not take up the
argument from evil and go with strong atheism. For example, surely an
Omnipotent Omnibenevolent God would offer sufficient evidence that any
reasonable atheist would conclude He is. But reasonable atheists don't.
Either

1) God is not
2) God is Omnibenevolent but not Omnipotent since he would like to, but
cannot, delivet the evidence.
3) God is Imnipotent but not Omnibenevolent since He could deliver the
evidence, but will not deliver the evidence.
4) God delivered but atheists are not reasonable

User: "thomas p"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	18 Dec 2004 04:52:40 PM

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:17:34 +0000 (UTC), Alan Wostenberg
<awostenberg@psalmweaver.com> wrote:

Bubba wrote:

3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Yes you can find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Do you have any evidence to offer? No? There is not much more to
say, but I am sure you will continue to say it.
.

User: "stoney"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	18 Dec 2004 01:51:14 PM

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:26:30 +0000 (UTC), Bubba <bubbakes@shaw.ca>
wrote:

3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Yes you can find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Depends.
Omnicharacteristics self-destruct on its own.
Broken logic.
Binary logic in a non-binary situation.
The Bible itself (utilized as a inerrant source document as many
xtians claim it to be) indicates god doesn't exist.
/quote
Message-ID: <a6f49994.0206171114.3180bb90@posting.google.com>
1 John 4:8 asserts "God is love." If you have any problem with that,
speak up now.
1 Corinthians asserts "Love is not jealous." If you have any problem
with that, speak up now.
The above two verses are in the form "A is B", and "B is not C." (A =
"God", B = "Love", C = "Jealous") Therefore, by deductive logic (this
is where logic comes in to refute your God), "A is not C." Combining
the two verses, we see the conclusion is "God is not jealous."
However, the third verse is in the form "A is C". So, you are left
with "A is C" and "A is not C." That's not logically possible, due to
the appropriately named law of contradiction. So, your God cannot
logically exist as described in the Bible.
If you think your God exists, then necessarily there's something wrong
with either the two verses in your precious New Testament "Christian"
Bible, or else there's something wrong in the Old Testament verse, in
which God happens to be dictating the first of several versions of the
Ten Commandments. (Elsewhere in the Old Testament, God insists His
name is "Jealous".)
However, if the Bible is assumed to be true, then the "love/jealousy
trilemma" of 1 John 4:8 ("God is love"), 1 Corinthians 13:4 ("Love is
not jealous") and Exodus 20:5 ("I the Lord thy God am a jealous God")
dispatches the Christian God out of logical existence.
-Wayne Delia
One can utilize the Christian's own verbage against them.
/quote
Message-ID: <3D4E746E.33FAC2F2@hotmail.com>
I can prove there is no god.
In fact, I possess absolutely irrefutable, uncontrovertible, tangible
evidence that no god exists; evidence so convincing that you will feel
foolish if you've ever even entertained the ridiculous notion that a
god of any kind exists.
Now it's your turn to prove that I don't actually have this evidence.
If you are unable to refute that, then you'll begin to get a clue why
it's unreasonable to demand of anyone that they prove a universal
non-existence.
-Wayne Delia
/end
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.

User: "Bobby D. Bryant"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	17 Dec 2004 11:55:41 PM

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Bubba <bubbakes@shaw.ca> wrote:

3) No, God doesn't exist - this answer involves belief only, as you can
never find evidence that something doesn't exist.

Yes you can find evidence that something doesn't exist.

I don't like the word "prove" in empirical inquiries, but you can 'show'
that something doesn't exist by showing that the necessary consequences
don't hold, as was done with the aether.
However, such demonstrations may just mean that the thing under investigation
doesn't have the properties that it was believed to have, and that's where
the difficulty of disproving the existence of deities arises.
Or of Santa Claus, for that matter.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
.

User: "bloodyvikings"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	17 Dec 2004 08:12:11 AM

Richard wrote:

Does God Exist?

Then lost the threads of logic completely.
Richard, a stern lecture for you:
Do NOT tell me what I think, you arrogant, ignorant, prattling
football-rattle-for-God.
God does not exist because 'he' is a patently absurd concept. You cannot
see that because you refuse to look. I cannot make you do that and it is
a near certain bet that you won't.
You posted this to alt.atheism. That makes you a troll.
Now, euphemistically, 'Go forth and multiply'.
.

User: "Richard"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	23 Dec 2004 01:43:27 PM

"bloodyvikings" <spam@spam.not> wrote in message
news:MuudneT5GJXecF_cRVnyrg@brightview.com...

Richard wrote:

Does God Exist?

Then lost the threads of logic completely.

Richard, a stern lecture for you:

Do NOT tell me what I think, you arrogant, ignorant, prattling
football-rattle-for-God.

See what I mean about being emotional about the issue :-)

God does not exist because 'he' is a patently absurd concept. You cannot
see that because you refuse to look. I cannot make you do that and it is
a near certain bet that you won't.

This is what strikes me as interesting, the fact that your belief system
involves believing that something isn't. The only reason I can see for that
is some vested emotional interest, such as a negative childhood you
associate with religion or the actions of some people that you associate
with religion.
You are free to admit that you have no idea whether there is a God or not,
and even that you don't care. But you can never know that there is no God,
as you can never prove that something doesn't exist.
Try stoping for a moment and contemplating how incredible existence actually
is. I think its reasonable that if we need intelligence and consciousness to
enable us to walk accross the road, then the same is also needed for an
infinitely complex universe + beyond.

You posted this to alt.atheism. That makes you a troll.

I hereby grant you freedom from having to look at and reply to any posts
that you don't want to.
Merry Christmas
Richard
.

User: "Tom"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	23 Dec 2004 04:21:39 PM

"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:cqf8q0$h1h$1@kermit.esat.net...

"bloodyvikings" <spam@spam.not> wrote in message
news:MuudneT5GJXecF_cRVnyrg@brightview.com...

Richard wrote:

Does God Exist?

Then lost the threads of logic completely.

Richard, a stern lecture for you:

Do NOT tell me what I think, you arrogant, ignorant, prattling
football-rattle-for-God.

See what I mean about being emotional about the issue :-)

God does not exist because 'he' is a patently absurd concept. You cannot
see that because you refuse to look. I cannot make you do that and it is
a near certain bet that you won't.

His 'belief' system? I can't understand why fundamentalist Christains always
think that something happened to cause a person to reject a god or gods.

You are free to admit that you have no idea whether there is a God or not,
and even that you don't care. But you can never know that there is no God,
as you can never prove that something doesn't exist.

In most instances you are correct. However, on the case of the god of the
Hebrew bible, so many attributes are ascribed to this god that are easily
proven to be false. If this god did exist, he wouldn't be a god by
definition.

Try stoping for a moment and contemplating how incredible existence
actually
is. I think its reasonable that if we need intelligence and consciousness
to
enable us to walk accross the road, then the same is also needed for an
infinitely complex universe + beyond.

Yes, it really is incredible. Now you stop for a moment and reflect on the
story of god as described in the bible, the utter stupidity of the story of
Jesus being the 'son of god'. That alone should show that your god doesn't
exist.
No Richard, there are good explanations as to how life arose in this solar
system and none of them include your version of god.

You posted this to alt.atheism. That makes you a troll.

I hereby grant you freedom from having to look at and reply to any posts
that you don't want to.

Merry Christmas

Richard

We'll give you the same freedom,jerk!
.

User: "Richard"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	24 Dec 2004 07:14:12 AM

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:QAHyd.22480$LQ1.17521@fe04.lga...

"Richard" <nospam@nospam.none> wrote in message
news:cqf8q0$h1h$1@kermit.esat.net...

"bloodyvikings" <spam@spam.not> wrote in message
news:MuudneT5GJXecF_cRVnyrg@brightview.com...

Richard wrote:

Does God Exist?

Then lost the threads of logic completely.

Richard, a stern lecture for you:

Do NOT tell me what I think, you arrogant, ignorant, prattling
football-rattle-for-God.

See what I mean about being emotional about the issue :-)

God does not exist because 'he' is a patently absurd concept. You

cannot

see that because you refuse to look. I cannot make you do that and it

a near certain bet that you won't.

His 'belief' system? I can't understand why fundamentalist Christains

always

think that something happened to cause a person to reject a god or gods.

You are free to admit that you have no idea whether there is a God or

not,

and even that you don't care. But you can never know that there is no

God,

as you can never prove that something doesn't exist.

Try stoping for a moment and contemplating how incredible existence
actually
is. I think its reasonable that if we need intelligence and

consciousness

to
enable us to walk accross the road, then the same is also needed for an
infinitely complex universe + beyond.

Yes, it really is incredible. Now you stop for a moment and reflect on the
story of god as described in the bible, the utter stupidity of the story

Jesus being the 'son of god'. That alone should show that your god doesn't
exist.
No Richard, there are good explanations as to how life arose in this solar
system and none of them include your version of god.

You posted this to alt.atheism. That makes you a troll.

I hereby grant you freedom from having to look at and reply to any posts
that you don't want to.

Merry Christmas

Richard

We'll give you the same freedom,jerk!

I'll answer all your above points by reminding you that I am not Christian.
Richard
.

User: "Jos Flachs"
Title: Re: Does God Exist?	24 Dec 2004 06:54:53 PM

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 13:14:12 -0000, "Richard" <nospam@nospam.none>
wrote:

We'll give you the same freedom,jerk!

I'll answer all your above points by reminding you that I am not Christian.

Ah yes, you seem to be interested in gods with six arms rather than a