Can anyone Prove there is no God?
LCNlin

United States

#220 Aug 22, 2013
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Until you (or anyone else) can present indisputable evidence that your 'god' exists, non-belief is the default position.
If You say so !
LOL

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#221 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if I created, say, a thinking, self-willed robot, I shouldn't be allowed to dictate its behavior and actions? I shouldn't be able to provide it with rules designed to help keep it out of trouble and to get along with others of its kind? It's not quite the same, obviously, but the creator certainly has EVERY right to make up His own rules (and God set them up thousands of years ago, not "as He goes along").
What if you created millions of little robots and instructed them to keep telling you how great you were?

People would think you were crazy.

“My name is Trunks...”

Since: Jun 10

the alternate future

#222 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
No no, someone called Lelouch0. You've been quite respectful and it's refreshing!
That would be me. I would like to know how you perceive me as rude. Perhaps it was not befitting of me to ask you to provide evidence for the existence of this deity you call God? I think every atheist or agnostic wants to see why religious people believe what they believe, but it seems every time we may have courteously asked for an explanation, they curtly avoid the subject or dodge the answer by calling it a mystery.

Do you know there's a word in the dictionary called uncreated, which means existing without having been created. Care to explain, my good man, how this term makes any sense at all? Logically speaking, everything has to be made by something, even your God. Nothing can exist without nothing. A book can't exist without being written.

The mystery answer does nothing to answer the question of the logic behind God's supposed existence. From a passage in Dan Barker's marvelous book "Losing faith in faith: Where did I come from? I find myself sitting up here in heaven and I look around and notice that there is nothing else besides myself and the objects that I have created. I have always existed, you say. I did not create myself, because if I did, then I would be greater than myself. So where did I come from?"
Thinking

Royston, UK

#223 Aug 22, 2013
Their meglomaniac god hss Alzheimers.
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
What if you created millions of little robots and instructed them to keep telling you how great you were?
People would think you were crazy.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#224 Aug 22, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Their meglomaniac god hss Alzheimers.
<quoted text>
Undoubtedly.
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#225 Aug 22, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Natural selection is not a random process. You've had this explained to you several times a day for a week, and you STILL make the same moronic arguments.
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as "objective morality." Morality is RELATIVE. Every thought of right and wrong occurs in the head of an individual human being with subjective ideas on the subject.
Your assertion that morality is objective is a subjective OPINION based on wishful thinking.
<quoted text>
Caring, or altruistic behavior, is clearly of product of evolution. It is behavior that was naturally selected for because it helps individuals (and therefore species) to survive and thrive. Individuals inclined to help others tended to survive better, live longer and have more children, so the genetic makeup that they had was favored and naturally promoted in the gene pool.
<quoted text>
False. No one says there is no morality. Each of us has a sense of some kind of right and wrong, although it may vary wildly from individual to individual and culture to culture (Sharia law, anyone?).
Most of us would have a problem with stealing.
There is no ABSOLUTE morality given by a God that you cannot prove or demonstrate even exists.
And the reason a society passes laws is to prevent a situation where everything is up for grabs. It has nothing to do with some mythical divine being's wishes.
This is simply all incorrect. I am tired of the same old illogical, nonsense. If you can come up with something that Christianity has NOT refuted numerous times, let me know!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#226 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
This is simply all incorrect. I am tired of the same old illogical, nonsense. If you can come up with something that Christianity has NOT refuted numerous times, let me know!
You have refuted NOTHING.

You cannot prove your God exists, nor that "morality is absolute," whatever that really means.

I have stated the common sense fact that every time the question of morality comes up, it is as a thought in the mind of an individual human being, which means it is a subjective point of view on the world or a subjective opinion.

Now it's up to you to prove that morality is absolute. You can begin by explaining what that actually would MEAN. Then explain how you now it IS "absolute," and not just an assertion you are making as a part of one of your own subjective opinions.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#227 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
This is simply all incorrect. I am tired of the same old illogical, nonsense. If you can come up with something that Christianity has NOT refuted numerous times, let me know!
The actual facts that christianity has managed to take credit for?

Is the following:
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#228 Aug 22, 2013
Lelouch0 wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be me. I would like to know how you perceive me as rude. Perhaps it was not befitting of me to ask you to provide evidence for the existence of this deity you call God? I think every atheist or agnostic wants to see why religious people believe what they believe, but it seems every time we may have courteously asked for an explanation, they curtly avoid the subject or dodge the answer by calling it a mystery.(1)
Do you know there's a word in the dictionary called uncreated, which means existing without having been created. Care to explain, my good man, how this term makes any sense at all? Logically speaking, everything has to be made by something, even your God.(2) Nothing can exist without nothing. A book can't exist without being written.
The mystery answer does nothing to answer the question of the logic behind God's supposed existence. From a passage in Dan Barker's marvelous book "Losing faith in faith: Where did I come from? I find myself sitting up here in heaven and I look around and notice that there is nothing else besides myself and the objects that I have created. I have always existed, you say. I did not create myself, because if I did, then I would be greater than myself. So where did I come from?"
(1) I haven't dodged; I answer and all I get back is angry ignorance and illogical responses. Lets face it, atheists don't want our reasons, they want fodder for their insults.

(2) The rule of causality says that "Anything that has a beginning must have a cause." God does not have to have been created if He had no beginning. God exists outside of this universe, so He does NOT have to abide by its rules! Beyond this, you are making my point for me. You said "everything has to be made by something." Exactly what I have been saying: the universe HAD to be made by something/someone! It could not possibly have come from nothing and it could obviously not have made itself!

And speak of abiding by rules, origins from nothing, long ages, and evo violate the most fundamental laws of physics and biology. Energy cannot be added or destroyed, 1st law of T-dynamics; All of energy and matter are deteriorating over time, 2nd law of T-dynamics; living organisms cannot come from non-living material; increases in complexity cannot come from lesser complexity(lesser anatomical features becoming complex organs, non-functionality to functional), etc.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#229 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
(1) I haven't dodged; I answer and all I get back is angry ignorance and illogical responses. Lets face it, atheists don't want our reasons, they want fodder for their insults.
If your "reasons" are ludicrous or not rational?

Then what do you expect?

You have no **rational** basis for believing as you do-- none.

If you did have a **reasonable** answer?

There would be no atheists--

-- but your arguments remain unconvincing.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#230 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
(2) The rule of causality says that "Anything that has a beginning must have a cause." God does not have to have been created if He had no beginning. God exists outside of this universe, so He does NOT have to abide by its rules!
1) special pleading-- if your god can "always exist"? So can the universe.

2) Quantum physics proves that events at the quantum level, are all uncaused-- they happen without a cause of any kind.

The universe itself could be also.

3) If your god is **outside** the universe? HE IS NOT IN IT.

If he is not IN it? He cannot do ANYTHING TO IT OR ANYTHING IN IT.

Period.

If he CAN do things in it? HE MUST THEREFORE BE IN IT ALSO.

Meaning?

He has to follow it's rules.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#231 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
And speak of abiding by rules, origins from nothing, long ages, and evo violate the most fundamental laws of physics and biology.
Lie.

You are demonstrating that you are 100% ignorant of both physics AND biology.

That's pretty sad, even for you.

Proof http://www.talkorigins.org/
FollowerofChrist wrote:
Energy cannot be added or destroyed, 1st law of T-dynamics;
Lie. Energy AND MATTER cannot be created or destroyed at the MACRO LEVEL OF THINGS.

At the quantum level? Not so much...
FollowerofChrist wrote:
All of energy and matter are deteriorating over time, 2nd law of T-dynamics;
Lie. You just contradicted your first "law"...!

Idiot.

You seriously have NO GRASP of entropy, which is what the second law is talking of-- which pertains to a CLOSED system.

The Earth? NOT CLOSED.
FollowerofChrist wrote:
living organisms cannot come from non-living material;
False. You have no proof for this claim.
FollowerofChrist wrote:
increases in complexity cannot come from lesser complexity(lesser anatomical features becoming complex organs, non-functionality to functional), etc.
False. Temporary,**LOCAL** increase of complexity is quite possible-- so long as the **TOTAL** system of entropy increases.

So long as the SUN is dumping ENERGY into Earth?

The entropy of the **EARTH** can **DECREASE**.

Because the **TOTAL** entropy of Earth+Sun is on the INCREASE.

So you are WRONG.

Again.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#232 Aug 22, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
The rule of causality says that "Anything that has a beginning must have a cause."
THis is philosophical bullshit. Science in the real world trumps this, Red a book about Quantum Mechanics. At the finest levels of the universe, there are uncaused phenomena all the time.
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
God does not have to have been created if He had no beginning.
The universe (in whatever prior forms it had) does not have to have been created if it had no beginning. Who needs your God? LOL
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
God exists outside of this universe,
Prove it. And, in fact, explain what that even MEANS, in scientific terms, not Sunday School pieties.
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
Beyond this, you are making my point for me. You said "everything has to be made by something." Exactly what I have been saying: the universe HAD to be made by something/someone! It could not possibly have come from nothing and it could obviously not have made itself!
You are making our point for US! If everything needs a creator then your God needs a creator too. Infinite regression, all the way back. You cannot claim an exemption to this inflexible rule just because ... well ... you NEED one in order to try and make sense.
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
And speak of abiding by rules, origins from nothing, long ages, and evo violate the most fundamental laws of physics and biology. Energy cannot be added or destroyed, 1st law of T-dynamics; All of energy and matter are deteriorating over time, 2nd law of T-dynamics; living organisms cannot come from non-living material; increases in complexity cannot come from lesser complexity(lesser anatomical features becoming complex organs, non-functionality to functional), etc.
Complete nonsense. None of what you write is anywhere NEAR correct or understood in the right context.

You are abysmally ignorant and uneducated and have no idea how much you embarrass yourself when you sling a lot of half-baked shit like this around.
LCNlin

United States

#233 Aug 22, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
You have refuted NOTHING.
You cannot prove your God exists, nor that "morality is absolute," whatever that really means.
I have stated the common sense fact that every time the question of morality comes up, it is as a thought in the mind of an individual human being, which means it is a subjective point of view on the world or a subjective opinion.
Now it's up to you to prove that morality is absolute. You can begin by explaining what that actually would MEAN. Then explain how you now it IS "absolute," and not just an assertion you are making as a part of one of your own subjective opinions.
"I have stated the common sense fact..."

only your opinion ?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#234 Aug 23, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
This is simply all incorrect. I am tired of the same old illogical, nonsense. If you can come up with something that Christianity has NOT refuted numerous times, let me know!
If Christianity has refuted Evolution, why isn't every single hospital in the world busy swapping all their medicines for bibles?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#235 Aug 23, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
(2) The rule of causality says that "Anything that has a beginning must have a cause."
As stated, this rule of causality is simply FALSE. Virtual particles appear spaontaneously, without cause, and disappear equally spontaneously. But we can measure their effects.

A rule that is closer to the truth is 'everything that has a cause, has a physical cause that is earlier in time'. Everything we know supprts this formulation of causality.
God does not have to have been created if He had no beginning.
But you have not shown that God exists! You cannot use a property of an object before you show existence. Of course, like I said, we know of *many* events and things that are uncaused, but all of them are physical.
God exists outside of this universe, so He does NOT have to abide by its rules! Beyond this, you are making my point for me. You said "everything has to be made by something." Exactly what I have been saying: the universe HAD to be made by something/someone! It could not possibly have come from nothing and it could obviously not have made itself!
The universe is the collection of all things, but is not a thing in itself. Any causes are *inside* the universe because there is no 'outside' the universe (in this usage of the word).
And speak of abiding by rules, origins from nothing, long ages, and evo violate the most fundamental laws of physics and biology. Energy cannot be added or destroyed, 1st law of T-dynamics; All of energy and matter are deteriorating over time, 2nd law of T-dynamics; living organisms cannot come from non-living material; increases in complexity cannot come from lesser complexity(lesser anatomical features becoming complex organs, non-functionality to functional), etc.
Don't attempt to argue the laws of thermodynamics unless you have actually taken a class in them. Life from non-life does not change the amount of energy in the total system, so it doesn't violate the 1st law. Increases of complexity can be driven by entropy considerations, especially when the system is out of equilibrium with a huge heat source (the sun), so they do not violate the 2nd law.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#236 Aug 23, 2013
LCNlin wrote:
<quoted text>
"I have stated the common sense fact..."
only your opinion ?
Well, think about it. I'm not claiming my whole point about morality is anything other than my opinion. And it wouldn't matter if I were saying morality is relative or morality is absolute. It's still my opinion, because that's all human beings HAVE is their opinions and the opinions of like-minded fellow humans with whom they cluster and congregate.

But the common-sense "fact" that I refer to above is that every time the issue of morality comes up, it is because it is a thought in an individual human being's brain. Care to dispute that?

And what can be "absolute" about a thought in an individual human's brain?
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#237 Aug 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
If your "reasons" are ludicrous or not rational?
Then what do you expect?
You have no **rational** basis for believing as you do-- none.
If you did have a **reasonable** answer?
There would be no atheists--
-- but your arguments remain unconvincing.
Find one argument I have made that you can prove illogical or unreasonable. And there will be atheists as long as the only alternative is a being to whom they would have to be accountable!
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#238 Aug 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
1) special pleading-- if your god can "always exist"? So can the universe.
2) Quantum physics proves that events at the quantum level, are all uncaused-- they happen without a cause of any kind.
The universe itself could be also.
3) If your god is **outside** the universe? HE IS NOT IN IT.
If he is not IN it? He cannot do ANYTHING TO IT OR ANYTHING IN IT.
Period.
If he CAN do things in it? HE MUST THEREFORE BE IN IT ALSO.
Meaning?
He has to follow it's rules.
1. Scientists for the most part have accepted that the universe had to have had a beginning. The Theory of Relativity, as well as other discoveries, has certified that.

2. "[QM] never produces something out of nothing." I know little about this, but I trust the source: CMI.

3. Weak, humanistic thinking. Don't feel bad, we all do it sometimes.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#239 Aug 23, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
Find one argument I have made that you can prove illogical or unreasonable. And there will be atheists as long as the only alternative is a being to whom they would have to be accountable!
"Faith" does not equate to "knowledge". Every argument in which you claim to "know" something which is, in turn, based on an initial premise which requires "faith", is illogical and unreasonable.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Regolith Based Li... 80,087
News Atheist inmate wins right to practice his faith... (Aug '15) 2 hr Eagle 12 - 173
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 14 hr Eagle 12 - 32,607
what science will NEVER be able to prove 21 hr Eagle 12 - 10
How To Get To Heaven When You Die (Jan '17) 21 hr Eagle 12 - 106
News People's forum - Get off the fence of religious... (May '10) 21 hr Eagle 12 - 69
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Sep 20 The pope 258,485
More from around the web