A Proof That God Exists
Imhotep

Winter Garden, FL

#326 Apr 8, 2013
A word about plagiarism

In a public forum like Topix it is irrelevant.

Plagiarism is defined as the highest form of flattery - Provided you are not attempting to earn money off of someone else's thoughts Or research.

If this occurs thou shalt be introduced to thy Holy court system Courtesy of a lawyer For the plaintiff.

Now for those sticklers who insist on sources it isn't very hard to scan Bing or Google for a word or phrase. I prefer the sources and where these 'sources' got their information, I want all details not just one.

We are not writing research papers here or selling anything. Entertainment only

Much ado over nothing regarding spelling

Spell Checker

Eye halve a spelling checker
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss Steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
it nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
its letter perfect awl the weigh
my checker tolled me sew.

----------

"Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#328 Apr 8, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
As in spontaneous self generating life?
Or nothing exploding and creating everything?
I can't help you there. I don't buy into that bull.
-------

Perhaps because you have already bought so much of "bull" that you
are now only selling it and bying no more. I can see that. Nothing can create anything exploding or not.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#329 Apr 8, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Please prove this implication.
<quoted text>
The fact that something cannot cause itself means it either is caused by something else or that it is uncaused. That is logic applied to this situation. Neither possibility implies the existence of a Creator-an intelligent caused that planned the effect.
The Primal Cause aka the Creator was not caused.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#330 Apr 8, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
There are, of course, many sins one can commit in the eyes of religion. Among the greatest is the sin of having an original thought. Religion disapproves of original thought the way Dracula disapproves of sunlight.
Meeting for the first time in March 1985, the Jesus Seminar has periodically brought together dozens of university scholars and gospel specialists representing every shade of Christian thought, plus a few Jews and atheists.
In their initial study, the scholars collected more than 1500 versions of approximately 500 Jesus parables, aphorisms, dialogues, and stories written during the first 300 years of Christianity.
After 6 years of debate and reflection the consensus was that 82% of the words attributed to Jesus were fake.
In phase two, between 1991 and 1996, the Jesus Seminar considered 387 versions of 176 'Jesus events'. Their conclusion: 84% of the activities attributed to Jesus were bogus.
In contrast, Caesar's words and deeds are fully documented by multiple witnesses.
Caesar was an eyewitness to many of the events he describes in his commentaries. He wrote not for posterity but to have an immediate impact on the power players in Rome as he schemed to advance his own career.
The elapsed time between the wars and Caesar's own writing was a matter of months or at most a few years.
In contrast, the elapsed time between the gospel reports and the supposed events that they describe is at least 40 years for 'Mark' and 60-70 years for the other three Gospels.
And just who was witness to that fabulous nativity, 30-odd years before the grande finale?
At the most generous understanding,'Luke' and 'Matthew' were recording hearsay testimony a century after angels, shepherds and wise men went calling.
The unembellished truth is that the gospel accounts were written by eyewitnesses to nothing but their own skills of fabrication.
For good reason, based on spatial and temporal proximity alone, historians give more credence to Caesar's commentaries than to the gospels, no matter how prolifically they were copied
-------

That's the first post you have written that I agree with in almost every word. I just can't find the connection with the issue in discussion.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#331 Apr 8, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said anything caused itself. Why are you claiming that I did? In fact, I specifically agreed that nothing can cause itself.
In the case of the universe, that means there are two possibilities: either it is caused by something outside of the universe or it is uncaused. Neither possibility requires a Creator, or even an uncaused cause.
-----

And if it was caused by something outside of the universe and it was not the Primal Cause aka the Creator, keep going: What could it
have been?

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#332 Apr 8, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I haven't claimed to have a proof of my viewpoint. You did.
-----

Not really a proof; change that into an evidences. My mistake.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#333 Apr 8, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
You may want to look into quantum mechanics. Virtual particles do, in fact, come into existence without causes.
-----

Never mind quantum mechanics. Just give me an example of something that has come into existence without having been caused.
Imhotep

Winter Garden, FL

#334 Apr 8, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
-------
That's the first post you have written that I agree with in almost every word. I just can't find the connection with the issue in discussion.
It was just a rambling brain dropping based on the various comments I've seen on topics. ;)

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#335 Apr 8, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you are conceding that you do not, in fact, have a proof of the existence of God?
----

Do you have one that the universe caused itself into existence?

Since: Dec 10

Fogelsville, PA

#336 Apr 8, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
The Primal Cause aka the Creator was not caused.
More special pleading.
Logic failure.

"Here are the rules that you must follow.... But I don't have to follow them."

Gee, you can't lose that way can you? LOL!!

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#337 Apr 8, 2013
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
I can not PROVE that Santa Claus does not exist. The best I can do is to point out there is no evidence for his existence.
Does this mean that in your mind Santa Claus is a viable assertion?
BTW...this is exactly the case as with your God. There is no evidence of his existence, merely assertions from people such as yourself. And my point (as is polymath's) is that you have failed to prove your proposition. In which case we have no reason to accept your proposition.***WE*** do not have to prove your God does not exist, anymore than we do not have to prove Santa Claus does not exist. Without evidence, there is no reason to believe.
------

The universe is evidence for the existence of God. Prove to me that it caused itself into existence and I will quit God.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#338 Apr 8, 2013
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
If your Primal jizzswallower wasn't created then why did the universe have to be created?
------

I don't have an answer for hypothetical questions.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#339 Apr 8, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
So your response to having your logical fallacy pointed out, is to say "I know you are, so what am I?"
Hey, when you come up with some real proof of god, without resorting to childish logical fallacy, an infantile tactics, let me know.
you have failed. Your idea that "The universe exists, so it must prove there is a god." Doesn't fly. Your continued babbleing about "Everything has to follow this or that laws of phyisics except my argument" is childish, and fails.
-----

And your idea that the universe has caused itself into existence, do you think it flies? Balderdash!
Imhotep

Winter Garden, FL

#340 Apr 8, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
-------
That's the first post you have written that I agree with in almost every word. I just can't find the connection with the issue in discussion.
http://jesusneverexisted.com/

Here's something else you might find interesting

MITHRAS = CHRISTIANITY?

This religion, cloaked in mystery and secrecy, has captivated the imaginations of scholars for generations. Many facts discovered sheds vital light on the cultural dynamics that led to the rise of Christianity. The National Geographic Society’s book “Great Religions of the World,” page 309 writes; “By Jesus’ time, East and West had mingled here for three centuries. Down columns of boulevards walked Roman soldiers loyal to the Persian god Mithras.” Mithras was a Persian deity. He was also the most widely venerated god in the Roman Empire at the time of Jesus. The Catholic Encyclopedia as well as the early Church Fathers found this religion of Mithras very disturbing, as there are so many similarities between the two religions, as follows:

1) Hundreds of years before Jesus, according to the Mithraic religion, three Wise Men of Persia came to visit the baby savior-god Mithra, bring him gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense.
2) Mithra was born on December 25 as told in the “Great Religions of the World”, page 330; “…it was the winter solstice celebrated by ancients as the birthday of Mithraism’s sun god”.
3) According to Mithraism, before Mithra died on a cross, he celebrated a “Last Supper with his twelve disciples, who represented the twelve signs of the zodiac.
4) After the death of Mithra, his body was laid to rest in a rock tomb.
5) Mithra had a celibate priesthood.
6) Mithra ascended into heaven during the spring (Passover) equinox (the time when the sun crosses the equator making night and day of equal length).

As you can now see, Christianity derived many of its essential elements from the ancient religion of Mithraism. Mithraism became intertwined with the cult of Jesus to form what is known today as “Christianity.”

Although literary sources on this religion are sparse, an abundance of material evidence exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman Empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east.

The temples were usually built underground in caves, which are filled with an extremely elaborate iconography (illustrating by pictures, figures and images). There were many hundreds of Mithraic temples in the Roman Empire, the greatest concentrations have been found in the city of Rome itself.

MITHRAS = CHRISTIANITY?

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/mithraschristiani...

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#341 Apr 8, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
NO, your ego demands special pleading for all of the rules you demand that others follow.
1. Can matter come from non-matter? No...Except for your god.
2. Do all things have a beginning? Yes.....Except for your god.
3. Can non-matter created matter? No.....Except for your god.
----------

You are all wrong as usual. I demand no one to follow me. We are forbidden to proselytize. Atheists are the ones who even go hostile
when theists do quite on their God and turn to Atheism.

To the first clause above you are wrong. God is not matter.
To the second clause I'll give you the point. God has no beginning.
To the third clause, wrong again. God is not matter.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#342 Apr 8, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course we have!
the nothing you're referring to is God.
And you haven't seen her either!
In fact not one living Homo sapiens has!
Oh I know you have your book but then so do 100 other religions and they all say, move or less the same thing. Vivid imagination!
Perhaps you should take the time to read it cover to cover you might actually learn something.
The greatest way to become irreligious is to READ this silly book.
Example:
Today’s scholars can only use the known, that is historical reigning Roman Emperors as a reference in determining dates.
So, since the BuyBull clearly and unambiguously claims that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the King, then he, Jesus, had to have been born no later than 4 B.C.
What a delicious irony!
Jesus could only have been born a minimum of four years before the birth of Jesus.
After you stop laughing though, consider the import of this paradox.
Lol
-------

Don't go into that of when was Jesus born because you are going to get trapped in a spider's web. Jesus was indeed born in the same year Herod died aka 4 BCE. But why are you getting into this non-sequitur that has nothing to do with the issue under discussion?

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#343 Apr 8, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
An evangelical atheist is one who not only believes there is no god or other supreme being, but is obsessed with convincing everyone around them to become an atheist too, usually through hard-line intolerance (the kind they accuse other religions of).
When cornered they usually try to put down their opponent's religion and bash them for 'blind faith', not realizing that their belief that there is no god is no more or less valid or provable than the other guy's belief that there is one.
------

I consider their "gospel" nothing but verbal juggling that explains
nothing.

Since: Feb 13

El Monte, CA

#344 Apr 8, 2013
The serpent was right wrote:
<quoted text>
More special pleading.
Logic failure.
"Here are the rules that you must follow.... But I don't have to follow them."
Gee, you can't lose that way can you? LOL!!
-----

"Here are the rules that you must follow... But I don't have to follow them." That's an embarrassing lying statement. You yourself
know that I have never said that. You are simply putting words in my mouth wich were never in my mind. No wonder the username you have chosen for yourself. At least watch for your credibility. Ohter people are reading your posts.
Imhotep

Winter Garden, FL

#345 Apr 8, 2013
Shibolet wrote:
<quoted text>
-------
Don't go into that of when was Jesus born because you are going to get trapped in a spider's web. Jesus was indeed born in the same year Herod died aka 4 BCE. But why are you gett

ing into this non-sequitur that has nothing to do with the issue under discussion?
There isn't any proof of God I can point that out easily and have been.

This is not my problem Christians have this Obvious conundrum that requires an apologist which in itself is ridiculous.

they More than this worry about.
Lincoln

United States

#346 Apr 8, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Any example?
<quoted text>You really aren't paying attention are you? It is not for anyone (religious or not) to disprove pixies or gods. It is for those who suggest they exist to define them and prove their existence.
Clearly Abrhamic gods and these ones....
http://www.godchecker.com/
are nonsense. Atheism only exists because of beliefs in gods. That is why nobody mentions apixie-ists, because almost nobody believes in pixies. When such superstition eventually deminishes to a level where few seriously believe in gods, atheism will virtually vanish too.
Relgiion = superstition. And if faith is blind, it cannot command much respect from intelligent people. One should only believe anything as far as the belief can be justified by reason and evidence.
None of that is evangelical, it's just common sense.
Thatcher is dead.
Atheism is alive in England and as dead as Thatcher in the US

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 Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... 3 min Wilcox 1,155
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Regolith Based Li... 32,461
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 5 hr Science 1,412
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 hr Dogen 78,757
what science will NEVER be able to prove Aug 11 Eagle 12 - 5
News What Ever Happened to the New Atheists?by Ellio... Aug 7 nanoanomaly 1
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) Aug 5 yehoshooah adam 4,381
More from around the web