You have 10 seconds to justify why you aren't an Agnostic

im an atheist because i dont believe in a god

im agnostic because i dont know if a god exists

>>578997635
There is no stalemate just because someone claims fairy tales are real. It means they're fucking retarded, and holding on to the belief of "BUT WHAT IF" makes you equally retarded.

Kill yourself.

You have 10 seconds to prove agnosticism is true.

I rather choose one side and don't believe in supernatural than be a fagnostic.

>>578997635
Because I look good in a fedora.

>>578997635
Except he who has the claim must prove that claim and give good evidence to believe it. Burden of proof, bitch.

Atheists don't claim no gods exist, they just have no evidence that any supreme being exists, therefore have no reason to believe it.

God must exist because only life can give birth to life.

Disprove theorem now son.

>>578998438
>>578998438
Use Google for 10 seconds, nigger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

You can't prove or disprove that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster, either

>>578997635
>>578997635
Disproving the existence of god is unecessary.

Whether or not a god exists doesn't really matter. What matters is whether or not supposed god interacts with mankind and what the nature of those interactions are.

We can say with relative certainty that god does not regularly meddle in human affairs. We know this because we do not ever record supernatural behavior either on the macroscopic or microscopic scale. Were a god interfering we should at least occasionally see nature behaving in ways that violate the laws of physics. We literally NEVER see this EVER.

Were god hiding his behavior by cloaking it as natural phenomenon, then said behavior would have to take the form of said phenomenon, thus negating the godly activity. We already have natural phenomena that behave like natural phenomena.

The other possibility is that god does exist and simply doesn't interact at all. In either the "cloaking" scenario or the "isolationist" scenario, one conclusion can be easily made: A god who will not or does not interact in human affairs is operatively no different from a god who does not exist.

I cannot prove god does or does not exist, but I have demonstrated that god does not routinely meddle in the affairs of mankind in a discernible way.

So we can conclude god is a faggot, but not a bigger one than op.

>>578998438
if eternity exists then math more relates to the natural world.

>>578998597
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicorn

>>578998597
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

All organic matter is life douche.

>>578998438
Even if life can only come from life, which has been disproven, that has nothing to do with a transcendent god. It could be literally anything, then. It doesn't get you any closer to a god, faggot.

"we don't know therefor god did it" isn't an argument.

>>578998787
Charcoal is organic. So are diamonds. Doesn't mean it's life.

>>578998438
"Something" greater than ourselves must be out there (even if it's right in front of our eyes and we just don't know it), but it doesn't have to be "God" and assuming you "know" what is actually out there is arrogant, egotistical, and just plain stupid. It could literally be anything, and I refuse to "believe" in something that I have no proof of. This is why I'm agnostic.

>>578998787
This nigger thinks hydrogen or gold is life.

File: 23.jpg (27KB, 338x321px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 338x321px

>>578997635
Because God is a crazy woman.

Actually i can. "Holy book" of an omnipotent, all knowing creature is overfilled with sctientifically disproven mistakes.

*tips lenfedora*

File: 1415048083743.jpg (37KB, 455x568px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 455x568px

How do you define God?

I define God as that which created all this exists.

Therefore, God is real.

You cannot disprove God, unless you say that things do not exist.

BOOM!

>>578999080
Prove to me that your entire reality is nothing but a figment of your imagination.

>>578997635
detecting large quantities of fail in this sector

>>578999080
I call tractors, bananas. You can't prove I didn't mow a field of hay with a banana.

>>578997635
because being agnostic isn't a stance to take. I assume you mean agnostic atheist. it's the same as asking if you think my name is bob. you probably doubt it but can't know for sure so you're an agnostic abobist.

>>578999080
>Thinks calling one thing something else justifies it.

File: 1415765250417.jpg (56KB, 414x480px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 414x480px

My imagination would have no place for fags and /b/

BOOM!

>>578998904

Dead flesh still gives birth to maggots.

>>578997635
I'm a Christian, just because I can't prove god exists doesn't mean I can't believe in him

>lel faggot believing a fairytale
Okay

>>578999169
*isn't

Because I don't believe in ghosts either. The complete absence of evidence for the extraordinary claim just makes me want to write it off. Otherwise I'd have to be agnostic about windigos and other such nonsense.
You can't just make shit up and expect me to buy into it. You're not agnostic about Zeus or Thor. Think about it.

Every single person on earth is technically agnostic because no one knows for a fact whether or not there's a god. So, Christians and Atheists alike are all agnostic on top of whatever else they claim to be.

>>578999267
People imagine things they don't like all the time. Or at least you imagine they do.

>>578999271
No, fly's lay eggs, maggots don't come from flesh you double nigger.

wepawet is my only god.

>>578997814
this
(A)theism is whether or not you believe in god, not whether or not you can know god to be real, or not. Agnosticism is simply an acknowledgement of a lack of knowledge. Saying you're agnostic is like saying nothing at all. We're all agnostic, cunt.

>>578999516

So life gives birth to life. Show me an inanimate molecule that gives birth to an organic molecule.

>>578999280
Then you are willfully ignorant because your worldview doesn't align with reality.

>>578997635
Agnostic has no balls. Not caring to deside - glad I dont have to play poker with your sub-beta ass.

Your spiritual choice is your only and most important choice.

You boneless balless jel

>>578999873
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocell we're working on it. Just because we don't have the answer now doesn't mean any gods exist. God of the Gaps much?

>>578999724
We can be pretty certain that any known concept of god is shit we made up. I'm not agnostic as that implies I have doubt in my knowledge that it's all bullshit. I do not.

>>578997882
>I don't know if agnosticism is true, but something might be true.

>>579000065
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocell

So you an inanimate object of course are working on creating an inanimate molecule that gives birth to life. Lol rich.

" One society will condemn those who
believe in God, and another society will condemn those who do
not. They are both the same. Both are slaves to a belief. To be free from all conditioning is not to seek a better conditioning. I think that is the real crux of the matter, because it is only when the mind is unconditioned that it
can tackle the problem of living as a total process.

Why do you believe in God? What is a belief? You do not believe in something
which is obvious, like the sunshine, like the person sitting next to
you; you do not have to believe. Whereas, your belief in God is not
real. It is some hope, some idea, some preconceived longing which
may have nothing to do with reality. If you do not believe, but really become aware of that reality in your life, as you are aware of
sunshine, then your whole conduct of life will be different. At
present, your belief has nothing whatever to do with your daily life;
so, to me, whether you believe in God or not is immaterial.

So, to be a theist or an atheist, to me, are both absurd. If you
knew what truth is, what God is, you would neither be a theist nor
an atheist, because in that awareness belief is unnecessary. It is the
man who is not aware, who only hopes and supposes, that looks to
belief or to disbelief, to support him, and to lead him to act in a
particular way." J. Krishnamurti

>>579000000

>>578999910
I mean, I guess, I've yet to see it affect my schooling in any way, I don't see it coming into effect if I major in computer science

>>578997635
Because I don't give a shit. I stopped caring about religion a long time ago, there are too many assholes on either side of the argument for me to waste my time with it,

>>579000241
Holy shit go back to school. Are you out of elementary? Go to bed before your mom takes away your ipod.

proud agnostic atheist here

>>578999873
>>578998787
>>578998904
You three all have it wrong..... I'm going to make this very simple:
If something is organic it has carbon in it.
That's all.
No, Nitrogen and Gold are not organic.

>>578998872
This guy right here gets it.

Organic molecules aren't alive, they're molecules

>>579000521

Ah the final battle cry of those that give up. Mother jokes.

I don't believe in a god

>>578999873
inanimate and inorganic are not antonyms. for one, no molecule is "animate". macrostructures are animate. molecules are not; they just behave according to extremely well-established, albeit complicated, physical and chemical laws. and, we've already got self-assembling ribozymes that can engage in spontaneous and efficient self-replication of themselves. your footing is losing ground.

>>578998701
/thread

File: tmp_1388872669298-1258726837.jpg (46KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x333px

Believing or not believing is completely irrelevant, shouting about your belief or impinging on other people's lives is the only problem.

The problem with organised religion is something I like to call 'drowning man syndrome', If you saw a person drowning and where a moral person, you would try and save them, even if it put your life in danger...organised religion replaces life with soul...puts it at a higher premium and puts dogma into that equation. Thats the root cause of the majority of this worlds bullshit.

*tips fedora

>>579000605
Technically all molecules are organic. Organic descends from organised. All molecules are just organised atoms.

I'm a Nihilist.

>>579000627
I give up because you are unreasonable and it's pointless.

>>579000770
no, organic molecules are those containing carbon. there is no discrepancy about this in any branch of science, ever. it is independent of organization.

>>578998701
according to your laws of physics bees shouldn't be able to fly, but they do. does that contradict your ideas of god never interfering?

also you have to consider that according to the bible god created the universe and all things within, thus it would make sense for him to be able to influence events with out us noticing.

>>579001032
That's nonsense.

>>579000862

The simple fact is that the existence of a supreme will never be established.

Religion is just a man made organisation to make sense of life. You dont need it to believe in a supreme nor does believing in a supreme make you any less of a scientist. Some view science as the only tool available to understand the supreme.

>>579001032
http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2000/03/insect-flight-obeys-aerodynamic-rules-cornell-physicist-proves

>>579000770
Look up organic chemistry.
If you're discussing organic and inorganic molecules the discussion is entirely about organic vs. inorganic chemistry. The etymology of the word organic is entirely missing the point.

The difference between organic and inorganic molecules is, as I said before:
Organic molecules have Carbon in them, inorganic molecules do not.
End of discussion.
Debating the word organic and not the field is missing the point.

>>579000973
The organisations observations comes from work done by Alan Turing...that guy was an unfathomable genius.

If God is everything that means he's Satan right?

File: Please Wake Up.jpg (46KB, 540x361px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 540x361px

>>578999397

Trust me, my imagination is much more developed.

>>578997635
If "god" is the truly the omnipotent being many Christians and other theists believe (it?) to be then could it create a wall that it could not move?

>>579001213
Who says god is everything?

>>579000973

Then they should find a different word to articulate that because linguistically organised and organic descend from the same root term and meaning

>>579000103
euphoria intensifies

>>579001213
Neil gaiman did a fascinating short story on that called 'murder mystery'...read it.

>>579001280
Sure, why not?

>>578997635
As a fellow agnostic, fuck you all

File: 1413211498652.jpg (44KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 720x720px

>>579000481

See, you are confusing a belief in God with religion. They are not the same thing.

>>579001208
his intellect doesn't make any difference. the etymology of a word, as >>579001193 said, does not necessarily have any bearing on how the word is applied in a modern context. especially in the sciences, the necessity of properly defining words is apparent and organic is absolutely, irrefutably tied singly to the presence of carbon. read any chemistry, biology, physics, or medicine textbook published in the last century.

>>579001293
To my understanding Christians. But I'm a Nihilist I'm just hallucinating everything anyway.

>>579001412
Because if it could not move something then it wouldn't be omnipotent.

>>579001345
and, i agree. i don't debate the linguistic ties to organization of the word organic. but i don't influence the canonical vocabulary of science.

>>578999080
"I define God as that which created all this exists."

-got any proof he/she created all that exists?

checkmate godman

>>579001280
The more relevent question would be, why where miracles specifically designed to make people believe only occur when people where easy to delude, and stop when cynicism became prevelent.

>>579001532
Well, then, um

Shit

File: 1415391551389.jpg (73KB, 594x528px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 594x528px

>>579000658

My premise is simply that God created all that is.

Therefore, if you think you exist, God exists.

Very simple.

>>579001637
Did I just solve something?

>>579000658
it isnt about what you dont believe in, its about what you do believe in

>>579001431
Muhammad was a tyrant who conquered his place of birth first and slaughtered more people than Attila the hun.
It's like having Hitler as your prophet.

>>579000760

This thread said NOTHING about religion.

That is where you fags lose the argument.

The terms have not been defined, and you already want to through out a new concept.

>>578997635
We can't prove god exists but we have contradicted the bible many times.
We've proven life before man although the bible says otherwise
We've proven that there is space not a heaven, even though the bible says the sky is heaven
We've proven the earth is more than 5000 years old even though the bible says otherwise

The bible and all religions were made to govern people lives.
Would you die for your country in the promise there is an afterlife? But whats to stop suicides? Make a hell in which suicide is a one way ticket. So money to the Church and a lifetime of obedience!
Look at Isis and the like! "Die by war and get into heaven"
I'm not saying there is or isn't a god or gods but all current ones are wrong!

>>578997635
atheist cuz the idea of god came out of a man's brain. i can safely say it 100% does not exist.

>>579001724
and i just launched 1 million potential children into some tissue.

Coincidence? I think not.

>>579001638
>My premise is simply that an invisible wizard is responsible for literally everything.

>Therefore, if you believe in you, you have to believe in the invisible wizard who made you (see: my premise)

>Very simple stuff

>>579001443
I was specifically referring to the biological content of chaos theory that Turing worked on, off the top of my head his work on the random patterning of cow's markings.

No idea what your on about..probably because I have read a few books on the subject.

>>579000065
"a functional protocell has not yet been achieved in a laboratory setting, the goal to understand the process appears well within reach." -the Wikipedia article

this just further proves that life can't be born from nothing: if this cell was the source of all life, how come we don't see examples of it today? if this cell suddenly burst into existence from a couple of stray chemicals mixing, why hasn't it happened naturally since? the mere fact that the cell has to be created in a lab further emphasizes the requirement for an intelligent creator in the genesis of life.

>>579001417
doubt you could even muster a proper erection

>>579001692
Well, there's always God magic to help

How do you know God didn't plant himself in man's brain? We can do that with hypnosis.

File: 1415756375658.jpg (555KB, 2677x1763px) Image search: [Google]

555KB, 2677x1763px

>>579001614

It was my definition.

You don't have to prove a definition.

If you accept that there is existence, my definition explains God.

King Me, Checker Fag

>>579001754
That's why I started by reasoning out belief in a social context, the reason why you loose is because you use logical falacy to prove things.

>>579001917
organic is a term principally applied to chemistry. wherein, and as you used it, it applies to molecules that contain carbon. it makes no note of organization. it literally has nothing to do with chaos theory, or Turing, or cow's markings. and, if you've read so many books on the subject then i'm sure you'll be familiar with extremely basic chemistry.

File: 1415771699029.jpg (54KB, 750x600px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 750x600px

>>579001724

Don't get distracted by a fucking image.

They are irrelevant to the discussion.

Fag

>>579001971
But if it moves the wall then the wall was never immovable by it to begin with, again does not fit the description.

>>579002083
lol just Google Turing, cows, organisation...

File: 521719_4980911259109_585081181_n.jpg (7KB, 198x160px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 198x160px

>>579002105

>>578997635
Christians:
>belief is the path to truth
>make argument based on belief
Science:
>logic & math is the path to the truth
>make argument based on logic & math

Great conversations are going to take place.

File: 1407493936686.jpg (44KB, 480x536px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 480x536px

M00t is god and god is M00t.

>>578997635
posts agnostic meme featuring Jewish actor.

>>579002195
My question was always why would he make the wall in the first place?

>>579001431
>Islam
>religion of peace
>kills anyone that disagrees with any little thing from their Holy book
>strictly regiments entire life

File: 1414109816397.jpg (87KB, 600x435px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 600x435px

>>579001771

Where does the bible say life began? Really?

You are arguing from something you read off the Internets.

Nothing you wrote is discussed in the Bible. NOTHING.

The 500 year age (you refer to) of the Earth was "estimated" by men, not by the Bible.

Men have taken the religious text to bizarre places.

BUT AGAIN---

This thread is NOT about religion, but about the existence of God versus no God.

You are all getting distracted and discussing that which you are clearly not well enough educated to discuss.

>>579001926
we are trying to understand how it could happen naturally and demonstrate it in the lab, just because we haven't shown it yet doesn't mean it's impossible. Just look at the technological advances in science in the last 100 years.

Once we do understand it we just fill in another gap where you put a "god"

>>579002323
Your wrong.

Science makes arguments based on there belief in logic...and sometimes math.
*tips fedora.

File: T.H.Huxley(Woodburytype).jpg (11KB, 241x316px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 241x316px

Huxley - "Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle ... Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable."

>>579002247
just google "organic chemistry". you talked about molecules. molecules fall under chemistry as a field of study. so the application of the term "organic" is thereby to chemistry. where, it always means "containing carbon". what is so complicated about that to you?

File: 1404163421977.jpg (53KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x333px

>>579002195
But anon, God magic

>>579002329
Irrelevant, the question is his ability to do it not the motive behind it..

>>579001905

OK. If you want to call God a wizard. You at least are making a rational argument now.

I do not "believe" in myself, unless you mean that I BELIEVE that I exist.

>>578997635
I am agnostic. Agnosticism is a form of atheism.

File: wt6mc.jpg (91KB, 730x560px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 730x560px

>>579002403
Not only that but the dumb religious cunts derived that figure by adding up all the ages of the people in the bible. Fucking christian fuckwits herrr derp.

>>579002519
My question is who cares anyway? I can't do it.

File: 1415403986114.jpg (64KB, 551x625px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 551x625px

>>579002080

Loose?

Like your mother's vagina?

What is the logical fallacy (NOT Falacy).

You prove you are undereducated.

Time for you to go to bed.

>>579002195
god experiences through humans what it is like not to be able to move the wall

>>579001926
It doesn't prove the process to be impossible at all. If a cell identical to the first cell were to be synthesised spontaneously in nature it would be undetectable and unable to compete with all the more advanced life in abundance. It could be happening quite commonly on the planet and you would have no chance of observing it due to all the uncontrolled variables.... Hence lab tests.
If scientists succeeded in accomplishing that goal then it means this:
It is possible.

If they determine a set of conditions in which it will and will not work then maybe we can discuss the requirement of an intelligent creator or most likely some kind of natural catalyst such as incredibly high temperatures.

>>579002080
>logical falacy

You might want to reconsider when you use terms that are above your understanding.

>>579002403
Genesis is the creation story, and it does not reflect the way in which the secular world understands how life on Earth came into existence.

>>579002491
It's not complicated at all, I just pointed out there is more to it than you where implying.

You need to be able to make a more cohesive conclusion and not rely on throwing points onto a wall and making the ones that stick your conclusion.

I would go as far as to say English is not your first language, or your very young...not that either of those things are bad.

>>579002247
also, here is your "Turing, cows, organization" google result.

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/murray.htm

not a single mention of the word "organic". it's just a chemical equation for the diffusion of compounds during embryonic development of animals, you idiot.

>>579002403
God like beings could exist I suppose

>>579002801
not at all....but ignoring the first point made, the cental conceit, and focusing on a secondry statement is a logical falacy.

the fact that you need to lable yourself with agnostic just proves that you are equally shitty as the atheists and the theists and the fucking muppets

File: fag2.jpg (19KB, 279x262px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 279x262px

>>579002384

You are getting distracted by a fucking image that I posted?

Really?

First of all, you don't understand the religion, any more than you understand Christianity.

But you are confusing the arguments being discussed.

This is NOT about religion, unless you define God as requiring an organized religion. This is a factor which has not been mentioned ONCE in this thread.

I'm Christian just because I like to have faith in something that's better than here. Shit can be shit and it's nice to be able to be like "yo God why is that" and I just feel like someone always has my back when I'm alone and I just can be like "okay God it's gonna get better look out for me dawg"
It's all about faith.

>>579002639
Well the whole base for a "god" worshiping religion is an omnipotent god, I suppose the worshipers would.

>>579002553
>you
no it fucking isnt.


But you can be an agnostic atheist

>>579002618

You are confusing the arguments again, by talking about what "some" religious people believe.

THIS THREAD is NOT about religion. Your bias continues to be shown.

Are you always so fucking stupid that you cannot get back on topic?

>>579003019
But I'm a Christian, I think I understand Christianity fairly well

If god existed or didn't exist; would anything change in the world?

So why does everybody try to define God? Also I'm kinda offended that my auto correct automatically capitalizes God...

>>579002883
which was the point I was making.

Just because you where concentrating on one(very simple) part of the system...does not meen everyone else has to concentrate on it...though I guess I could of read the whole of this thread...but why would I do that just to satisfy your ego?

>>579002689

So your definition of God is that He is an intelligent creator?

That has not been discussed as yet.

Perhaps you should explain what you are trying to disprove?

Arise chickun

>>579003227
Probably not

I like to hope Muslims wouldn't be such shits

>>579003117
But my question is why do they care? Unlessvtheyre American and have to stick their noses in everyone else's business...

>>579002819

Why are you using a book of the Bible to explain anything in the thread?

I NEVER mentioned Christianity as a basis for God.

Why are you assuming it? Because of YOUR bias?

Maybe you should consider Buddhism and Hinduism?

Don't be dense.

You don't REALLY even understand the Book of Genesis, do you?

>>579002883
I would say the keywords embryonic and animals; make your statement look really reaaly stupid don't you?

>>579003241
it literally has nothing to do with my ego. instead, it has everything to do with the definition of the word organic as you used it in your own sentence. and you weren't making any point. i'm almost certain you're just saying things to read your own text on the screen by now. and, you literally just needed to read your own, original post and our replies to one another to understand. nothing else.

>>579002982

Please stop referring to things you have no firm grasp of. Please.

Smoke another bowl and relax.

File: 1403978927093.jpg (48KB, 480x330px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x330px

>>579003115
Then fuck off and stop using all the technology that science has gifted if you disbelieve several of the most fundamental scientific principles.

>>579003178
Even calling a supposedly superior being/deity "GOD" is mysticism. So fuck off.

Both sides are retarded and agnostic is the way to be. Live life as legitimate as one can and should there be an afterlife, you will be judged for your true actions.

>>579003207

What have I written that contradicted you?

>>579003381
Well by definition they don't exist or cant exist, why does religion as we know exist in the first place?

>>579003475
actually, i just searched using those additional keywords and turned up identical results. so, no.

>>579003614
Fuck if I know
>tl;dr

>>578999080
You still have to prove that everything has been created.

You have 10 seconds to disprove the possibility of our universe simply being an alien child's science experiment, with our universe sitting in a jar, on a very large shelf.

>>579003649
Why do you say we? I'm a Nihilist I dont even believe I exist.

>>579003590

I defined my terms.

Where are YOUR terms.

You define God as "mysticism" now? Please define your terms. Where did my definition or anyone else's approach any meaning that could remotely be confused as mysticism?

You are simply biased.

Immature.

Stop debating, as you have no skills.

Atheists don't believe god exists.
Theists believe a god does exist.
Neither of them have a way of knowing for 100% certainty
ergo
both of them are agnostic

>>579003543
wow, please oh great enlightened one, tell me what your point has been through this entire thread. Make one firm conclusion that lesser beings can 'get a grip' on...your statements have been slapdash and your conclusions 'fuzzy', change that and then folks will know what your saying.

>>579003754
A time loop that when the universe ends and collapses in on itself it then explodes with enough force that it is propelled back in time

>>579003886
no, agnostics believ there isnt enuff proof either way, therefore they will not confirm nor deny

>>579003754

Why do I have to prove it?

Are you saying that nothing has been created?

Then you are not here.

Go away.

>>579002828
i've neglected to comment on all your misspellings, grammatical errors and discontinuities of syntax out of respect for our argument. but to imply that i am young, or not a native english speaker, based on how i've composed my points is actually laughable when you misspelled the word "really" as "reaaly" when you had it correctly spelled, as reference, a single space away. engaging in ad hominem is something more disrespectful and juvenile than anything you could've gleamed from my manner of speaking.

>>579003738
haha, not a clue you have. Even though your own search backs up what I said...you still have the brass balls to deny it, well done anon, well done.

>>579004018
> cares about misspellings, grammatical errors, and syntax on 4chan.

Lol why do u even

>>579003886

My definition of God proves his existence.

If someone wants to say that Nothing created all which is, the I guess I would have to believe in Nothing.

But I call Nothing "God".

>>579003280
That wasn't my point at all.
My point was that if laboratory tests prove that living cells can be synthesised from chemical compounds then that does not prove that life requires an "intelligent creator" to form from those compounds.
It only proves that the process is possible.
Until the process is shown to be impossible or if the process is shown to be possible and the conditions for it to occur cannot naturally occur then you cannot make conclusions about whether there is or is not an "intelligent creator" from those tests.

Why do I get the feeling agnostic is Nihilism for pussies?

File: 1406862192808.jpg (378KB, 1000x1001px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1000x1001px

>>579003772
>be me
>get bored
>go check on universe experiment
>nothing much happening
>notice a bunch of neckbeards discussing their existence and the existence of a "god"
>mfw I'm their god

File: c14.jpg (16KB, 488x305px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 488x305px

>>578997635
can't disprove the tooth fairy either, doesn't mean i entertain the possibility of a tiny winged woman with a creepy fetish lifting my pillow and giving me money every time a part of my body falls off

>inb4 you can't say for CERTAIN that doesn't happen, yes i fucking can

>>579004080
>>579004081
i'm actually just arguing with an idiot, aren't i?

>>579003754
Creation is just a concept, things are created every day, existence isn't binary here or not here, it's always been here but like a seed it grew.

>>579003964

There is NOTHING that proves that.

You cannot use untested theory as proof of anything.

The newest thoughts are that there are multiple realities that exist together. So while some may or may not "die" the overall reality would not.

But still, these are only theories.

After thousands of years, if we, as mere men, were meant to know and understand the truths, we would already know.

We will never really know.

I also feel like I need to remind everybody not to feed the trolls.

>>579004018
very small virtual keyboard I have.

syntax and spelling, not my strong suit they be.

logical falacy once more you use...concentrating on. irrelevence you be.

>>579004018

I have to concur that spelling, grammar, and other abilities of self expression are important in determining the maturity and education of those making comments.

>>578997635
Do you believe in fairies? No? Prove it!
Do you believe there's a perfect little china tea cup orbiting mars that's too small to detect and we have no evidence for? No? Prove it!

If you're gonna be agnostic, you have to be the same for every conceivable thing that cannot be disproven. Feel free, but it's totally impracticle. It seems more reasonable to say that belief does not require proof or absolute certainty

>>579004102

WHO REFERRED TO AN INTELLIGENT CREATOR?

>>579003590
I never said I didn't believe in science.
Why can't someone believe in both?

In any scientific sense of the word I am, but that means being agnostic about all possible gods/creator beings/ non-deity creation potentials not better explained by natural law. Seeing as the probabiity of any one of those things as being true is extremely low as well as the natural laws holding far more stalwart in the face of falsification I tend to proclaim myself as quite thoroughly atheist to any deity belief systems.

I keep my mind open to the possibility but don't bother contemplating it long, low probability events are best left for thought experiments and rarely for scientific inquiry, especially events as low probability as a deity.

>>579004191
no , you're arguing with a 4chan.

>>578997635
well its true, you cant prove or disprove it.

>>579004210

Creation is just a concept?

Do you mean "Creationism" as a concept?

Creation is real. Or else nothing is created.

My mommy and daddy were paramount in my creation.

Were you just banked into existence without parents?

>>579004191
just read
>>579004102

Now I understand where your points are coming from.

In that context your dealing with 'the wizard of oz', seeing behind the curtain of certain parts of the creation myth...your applying 21stC analasis to genesis in relation to proof that God created life and therefore if we can then there is no god...thats jibberish...

>>579004587
I like this guy...

>>579003864
Nihilisim is another valid theory, non-belief the anti-concept of belief is just another way to say you don't know.

>>579004593
congrats, your an agnostic

>>579004523

There is NO NATURAL LAW that explains how everything came into being.

NOTHING.

A "concept" called the big bang?

I say GOD created the BIG BANG.

Boom.

Set and Match.

>>579004478
THE GUY WHO'S POINT I WAS REFUTING.

His argument was proving that life can be synthesised from chemical compounds in a lab shows that an intelligent creator is required for life.
His statements implied a creator, by which he was referring to humanity.
My points were that demonstrating the possibility of a process means absolutely nothing past whether it is or isn't possible and under which conditions.

Take up your argument with him.

>>579004639
i like you to /b/ro

>>579004642
Well at least someone gets it. But everyone just has to be right don't they?

>>579004684
hi deist how are you

Conscience.

ok hai so,
every1 in this thread
1/3 of you an hero
2/3 of you partake in 1 of you trying to kill somebody and the other standing in the way of the person trying to be killed thus sacrificing yourself and granting you access to heaven (if one exists)

Then if heaven exists, go on interwebs and post back results on /b/ your ID will show if your up there or not.

Do it faggots this will prove everything

>>579004628

Why do you keep making reference to Genesis?

You are stupidly adding a religious explanation that I never brought into the discussion, so why do you think it has any merit?

You call the fact that everything IS a myth?

What is everything, then? What is its existence? Not real?

Really?

You are clearly getting confused.

>>578997635
Which one is the option where you honesly DGAF? that's mine

>>579004841
Nihilism

>>579001193
such classifications are not perfect they are there to make it easyer. its no science its shit

>>578997635
im not anything because i formulate my own ideas about that sort of thing

I said it above. Life gives birth to life.

If we determine a set of variables that require intervention by man to perform in order for a photocell to become "organic" then it is still life giving birth to life. If it happens spontaneously without our help then I'll change my view. As it stands life gives birth to life and that must be disproved.

>>579004649
Except agnostics also have the view that god could exist, whilst many atheists know you can't disprove god but still decide that he doesn't exist

>I define God as that which created all this exists.

>Therefore, God is real.

>You cannot disprove God, unless you say that things do not exist.

Nothing has been said to define the contrary to what I have proposed.

Sometimes I wish the world would end and everyone would die so these arguments would end and everyone would have their answer.

>>579004995
Unitarian Universalism

File: 1521290_734014263314482_7257873393760188793_n.jpg (68KB, 612x612px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 612x612px

>>579004995
which means you are something, duh

>>579005016
First thing in math we learned you cannot use prove by existence. Discrete math 101.

>>579004613
I mean the idea that the universe was nothing and began at some point or was created, both are just different ways of saying the same thing, they don't know yet and should continue searching for answers.

>>579005016
I say nothing exists.

Because I'm decisive, you worthless piece of shit

Agnostic-Atheist: Does not know for sure that god exists, but doesn't believe in it
Agnostic-Theist: Does not know for sure that god exists, but believe in it
Agnostic: Dumb cunt who thinks he's superior because he's indecisive about his own beliefs.

>>579005010
uh uh, not true, he could be an agnostic atheist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

>>579004628
That is not what I said at all.
Let's go back to the part where I was pointing out errors in someone else's way of thinking.

He was discussing laboratory tests on the validity of a natural process (living things coming from non-living chemical compounds).

My point boils down to this:
If we can show that A turns into B in a lab it doesn't mean that our involvement was required for A to turn into B.
This means that the fact that A can turn into B, which we just demonstrated, has absolutely nothing to do with whether there is an intelligent creator.

I literally said that the success or failure of one particular type of test means absolutely nothing to the debate.
Stop misinterpreting things and trying to decide other peoples positions for them.
I am correcting poor thought processes not providing you which my own.

>>579005016

Firstly you change the definiton of god.

Then you assume that things can't exist without being created by something, which is bullshit because you then have to explain what created god

>>579004835
That would make perfect sense unless others ITT have made those claims...not everything I post is about you sunshine...

Everything is a myth...interesting.

I guess you could argue that no human mind is able to remember anything without clouding it with imperfect understanding.

Therefore there is but a kernel of truth wrapped in conceit.

It's a stretch but I can see how you could call it mythology.

"nature herself has imprinted on the minds of all the idea of god" Cicero" narrated by Leonard Nimoy Civ 4
suck it spock

>>579005146

OK.

So we all agree?

Leave the religious concepts out of it.

There is no scientific basis that can be proved for the existence of the universe other than "something caused it to happen". [Or however you want to express it.]

Therefore, by my definition, that is God.

God and Science are not mutually exclusive.

>>579004791
Everyone wanting to be right is just overconfidence in a specific theory.

>>579005282
brb finding a scientist to explain the conditions before the big bang and then the ones before that

enjoy your faith-based science, anonymous

>>579005117
i dont identify as part of any religious or non religious sect. why does everything have to have a label?
>inb4 hipster

>>579005016
God is the BEING who created and controls the universe. Keyword: BEING

If there is no being that does/did such a thing, than there is no god.
We will never know for sure, because if he's up there, he's a huge fucking cunt for not giving us concrete evidence.

>>579005298

Sure, it is conceit, cutie pie. You can call others names if it makes your dick hard.

No one made the arguments you have tried to use to refute my premise. I read the posts, you are pulling them out of your own head.

Sweetheart.

>>579005420
It's not always how you identify yourself but sometimes how other people identify you.

>>579005420
if you dont believe in religion, then that is your religion /b/tard.

A religion is a collection of beliefs.

Being religious is a stupid word anyway, its like saying "I'm human"

BIG COCK FREE
http://chjp.amlaz.ru/246598/2640236/

>>579005298

I did not call everything a myth.

You implied that. Keep up.

>>579005269
ok, now that was far more clear, thank you.

For an answer...a man using paints and brushes to paint a scene from nature does not meen that he has recreated what he is seeing.

Just because man can recreate what he sees in nature has no bearing on how what he has observed came into being.

Better?

>>579005395
But why do they have to be so arrogant is my question

File: Hello.jpg (131KB, 481x361px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 481x361px

Because this.

>>579005548
meh i guess youre right

>>579005552
is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.
nah usually my ideas arent based on shit other than random thoughts

>>579005658
>new to 4chan

>>579005407
one must ask though how long the time period before the big bang was if there is in fact a possibility of god it almost guarantees he exists due to the fact probability isnt a matter of chance rather a matter of time given enough time its possible that god exists

>>579005763
What I meant was in general not just here. Fuck been here since 2005

>>579004930
It's not a classification. It's a definition.
"Organic Chemistry" is the branch of chemistry dealing with Carbon. An "Organic Molecule" has carbon in it.
When you wish to discuss molecules you are in the realm of chemistry. In the realm of chemistry that is what the word organic means and there is no grey area.

If you attempt to apply the word to both molecules and things on a macroscale at the same time then you are using it incorrectly and your argument needs to be reworded.

That is your misunderstanding of chemistry, not a semantic debate.

>>579005407
No, I'm not making any scientific statements, I'm making a logical one.

If things need to be created
And god is a thing
Then god needs to have been created

So his assumption that things existing proves they were created is illogical

>>579005282

When did I change the definition of God?

Did you have a preconceived notion of what God is?

You never made that clear, in order for it to be considered.

You see, I DEFINED my terms, quite succinctly.

You want to say I contradict myself?

Show me where.

That is the problem with people like you.

You bring your own meanings without making sure they have been properly communicated.

And I do not have to explain what created God. Because everything that exists is due to God.

Why are you adding another level of confusion?

Not one person has proposed an alternative definition.

>>579005756
For example I came to all my conclusions about the universe on my own but I call myself a Nihilist for the simple reason of other people understanding.

>>579005517

Where did you find the definition you are now using?

I do not agree with it, so I cannot agree with it.

Who said God controls anything? Is that your preconceived notion?

>>578997635
I don't believe there is a God, or a God like in
the bible/kuran/whatever. But I can't prove it.
In that aspect my atheism could also be
called agnostic. But for that matter,
theists could also be called agnostics.
Whatever, I just don't care about
gods or things like that.

>>579005517
>ever know for sure, because if he's up there, he's a huge fucking cunt for not giving us concrete evidence.

We do have concrete evidence.

Look around you.

Did YOU create all that is?

Do you know who did?

I do.

God.

It was my premise. And you have done nothing to disprove it.

>>578997635
I am APATHEIST until someone shows hard proof for either side, as should all who have even shade of intelligence in them,

>>579005656
Well in the specific example of living matter rising from chemical compounds we are attempting to determine the "how" of the process.

It's more that if we know how something happens it doesn't mean there needs to be a why or a who for it to happen. It just does.

>>579005383
My idea or understanding of the universe is that it has always existed and will continue to exist until it ceases to exist, like matter and molecules that eventually decay back into energy only to be consumed by something else, or a seed growing to a tree and making more seeds that grow into more trees infinity until something stops the process.

>>579006268
I did create everything. Everything my senses tell me my brain created. Prove me otherwise.

>>579006030
"And I do not have to explain what created God. Because everything that exists is due to God".

so what you are suggesting that god created himself? just cuz your here dosnt give you the right to just dodge the question of "were did god come from?"

>>579006209
you do realise what a theist is right?

a thiest is nowhere near like an agnostic

>>579006373

That is your concept. But there is no proof of your concept.

In your theory, where did everything come from? Where will it all go back to?

>>579006127
i believe everyone literally live in their own universe. basically anyone i havent physically met doesnt exist. the internet, wireless communication, etc. basically connect other universes without having to actually be infront yhe person. its hard to explain when im so tired...

>>579006446

Are you giving me an alternative definition to work with?

Under my definition, it is a fact that all which exists is due to God.

What exactly are you arguing now?

Burden of proof rests upon person making the positive claim, bro.

You cannot disprove the existence of anything. Example: Disprove the existence of the easter bunny.

Pro tip: My penis

>>579006450
Of course not, that's what they will say, yeah. But
what I mean is that although they are not likely
to admit it, they can't ever prove their god and
they will forever live in ''doubt'' (even though they
''believe'') that their god exists/is real, thus my
conclusion that everyone is an agnost.

>>579006379

OK. If you want to think you created me, that is your prerogative. I am not here to debate whether you are bat shit crazy or not.

>>579006583
So the internet or electronics is like a limited wormhole.

This thread is confusing.

Some are argueing about the existance of god

Some are argueing about if chemistry of any kind is relevent to this thread

Some are arguing about what this thread is about

Aa in a few shitposters and you have humans being humans.

No one has a clue, but your all damn sure your right.

shitbirds, shitbirds everywhere.

>>579006030
You make a big fat assumption that something created all that exists
You should note such things

>>579006690
Me either I know I am.

>>579006583

Another person who might benefit from counseling?

Ignostic here.

All you niggas are silly, and this thread is worthless.

>>579001431
How are they not the same thing? Smiley face

>>579006818
No they just have their own way of explaining things.

File: 1415333033961.jpg (8KB, 211x239px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 211x239px

>>579006768

I did not make an assumption.

I defined my terms.

Big difference.

BUT:

You do realize that arguing with someone on the Internet is like running a race in the Special Olympics?

Even if you win...

You are still fucking retarded.

>>579006379
Even this guy has a valid theory or understanding of existence, though by your logic I could say I created everything and you couldn't prove me wrong either, sounds like a paradox to me. Isn't there already a existence theory based on paradoxical concepts.

>>579006994

Nice meme

>>579006708
yea and like whenever you see people irl their universe is just briefly crossing paths with yours. or potentially running into each other causing your two universe to travel similar paths i guess. like i said, hard to explain.

realistically though no one knows for sure and no one should really care. should be something people talk about and further ideas instead of debate about. like i could be a fracking Cylon for all i know

>>579006994
Like I said don't feed the trolls. And everyone on the Internet is a troll.

File: MikZUCb.jpg (28KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x375px

>>579006818
why because i dont follow the norm and have a brain?

>>578999080
Cthulu created all that exists. Is Cthulu real now?

Seriously, god is basically the worst explanation for "the existence of things", say the big bang. You accomplish nothing by saying that.

>>579006321
i have one example

1. definition of god (must have one in order to prove/disprove it exists) all powerful all knowing all loving creator of the universe(this is typical definition)

2.the world is inherently full of suffering and pain (go to feels thread) yet god does not do anything why? he is powerful enough to stop it (all powerful) he knows how to stop it (all knowing) he loves us enough to stop it (all loving)

3. the fact that the world is still full of suffering proves he dose not exists cuz if he did exists he would be compelled (by his own definition) to stop the suffering

the only other way to get around this is to change this definition of god and very few are willing

>>579007063
Nihilism. And you could but I could also say I created you in order to say you created me.

>>579006708
el psy congru!

>>579007259
No idea wtf I just said...

>>579006608
see >>579007237

>>579006994
>>I define God as that which created all that exists.

Right, but
">I define God as that which created all this exists."

This line assumes the existence of "that which created all that exists"

>>579007208

If you want to call God Cthulu, OK.

I don't know what that is.

But you can define your terms your way and then I would have to agree.

But if there are other meanings of who this Cthulu is, then maybe you are just trolling.

>>578997635
Cogito ergo sum deus.
I think therefore I am god.

>>579007417
i think youre either retarded or trolling

>>579007475
Oh wait, I didn't say anything. I typed it. What I meant was I don't understand.

>>579006508
Now your starting to understand. In my theory I said it has always existed and will continue to exist forever, just not as we know it.

>>578997635
because i dont join groups so i can identify with people. i dont believe there is a god but i also dont call myself and aheist. i dont about anyone on this planet or any planet. i dont care about any of it.

>>579007480
Descartes did most of his best work stoned, sitting in an oven while in Amsterdam...pretty sure that's where the Meening of baked comes from.

You sir are no Descartes.

>>579007208
you still accomplish nothing by mentioning the big bang. it depends on interpretation of words which are just human filters to the correct translation of ideas(all we have not knocking them). if i take the word 'god' to mean the force that began space/time/matter etc. how can anyone fault that? this is all pointless shit anyway but dont criticize word use when its meaning is so undefined.

>>579007084
I could understand that but no. I believe I created everything including the people. Some people might call me conceited but that's what I believe.

>>579007738
wait really? i knew he locked himself away in order to try to prove god without any outside proof but he was a stoner too? learn something every day even from /b/

File: 1364818871945.jpg (31KB, 500x317px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 500x317px

I'm a theist because my personal experience doesn't resonate with the ideas of materialist reductionism.

philosophy was one of my favorite classes in college. that being said, agnostics are the master race.

everyone with religious beleif, please take a minute to think about how you have been introduced to religion. then tell me that if you excluded that person of group of person of your life you would have/ COULD have came up with the exact same faith by urself.

>>578997635
I'm not a religious person, i'm a believer, a pantheist.
Because Science say, if you are a believer, than you live longer, have a better health, be more satisfied with life, have better relationsships. We have areas in our brain, that work only when you have thoughts of believing. This area come with the evolution, it must have some benefit to believe in something.

>>579007990
thats not nihilism

>>579008084
What in the unholy name of Jesus Christ is materialist reductionism?

None of us can prove our existence. Well maybe this a cry for help. I swear man I am one of your thoughts. Please don't dismiss me.

>>579007417
A definition does not influence properties of a thing. It's the other way around. Children know that.

And again, replacing the question mark"why does something exist" with the even bigger question mark"god" does not accomplish anything. In face, you know even less after that assumption.

>>579008219
I should be more clear. If I was to believe in anything, that's what it'd be.

>>579007245
I say you're lying, you say I'm lying, again paradox.

>>578997635
we live in a secular nation, so there's no need to justify my belief or lack thereof.

I am an atheist because I don't believe in a diety. I know that I can't know whether or not there is a god, thus I stand by the idea that i won't believe in something that can't be proven and i won't believe something just because it can't be disproven.

Atheism isn't "I know that there is no god"
Atheism is "I don't believe in a god"

get it right you fuck nut.

>>579008351
Yea it happens. Fucks given? None on my part

I should also mention that everyone is atheist by default. None of you had personal contact with deities or some quantum consciousness. Someone convinced you to believe in something you feel never see or even worse such as tell yourself that you are agnostic and you can never known answers to simple questions.

>>579008248

We know exactly the same.

Now you are just trolling.

We know that stuff exists.

I defined why stuff exists.

You want to deny it, but offer that stuff exists just because?

OK. You can live with that.

>>579008148
>I love sophism, but I hate to intellectually argue about my beliefs

>>579008221
It's a combination of two ideas:
>anything we can't observe right now doesn't exist
>everything can be reduced to to atomic events

>>579007738
Descrates had religeon behind him

>>579008221

Dude likes to toss out big words to sound like he knows shit.

He won't define his terms, however.

Troll.

File: tmp_index(2)2123196829.jpg (6KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x200px

>>579008248
Better?

>>579008425
so you admit that you hold a belief based on a lack of evidence for its disproval?

>>579008541
We don't know if stuff exists or not. For all we know everything is a hallucination. I repeat, FOR ALL WE KNOW.

>>579008610
I have it ahead of me, one day I'll be worshipped

>>579008530

I have never seen God, other then his creations.

I have seen the devil, personified. For real.

>>579008721

If you want to believe that.

I know I exist. I know I am not my own hallucination.

The more I read the crap in this thread, the more I am thinking I am hallucinating right now.

>>579008590
Second half I could see, first half not so much.

So did Hitler, Staling, and me when I was forced to gang rape a Christian girl in Pakistan. None of that shit defines your character. You can be a Muslim, Christian, or a nigger and still be a bad person with even greater ideas. Even Einstein believed in God and that was his main reason for doubting the fundamentals of modern day quantum mechanics.

P.S. only cool physics nerds will get this joke. Why did Einstein fear quantum teleportation ? It was spooky. lol

>>579008483
Well why should you give a fuck existence will continue to exist anyway.

>>579008541
A definition isn't something you can deny.

If you make the assumption that god created everything, that still isn't something worth denying. Two reasons:
-It's impossible to deny. (which is by all means no reason for it's truth)
-The assumption is based on nothing.

>>579008854
But how do you know your not a figment of my imagination?

>>579008656
No.
Atheism is LACK of belief.

I think you also got it twisted.
I won't believe without evidence, And lack of evidence to there not being a god will not spark any belief.

how do i explain this?
I won't believe without proof.
And the fact that the idea of a god can't be disproven, isn't proof that there IS a god.

>>579008930
>can't imagine rejecting any force unseen by modern science by default
Do you even modern science?

>>579008740
So have many others in the psych wards. In fact youll find quite a few saviors and prophets.

>>579008654
Forgot my thumbnail magnifier, sorry.

>>579008974
Pure boredom. Just cause I'm not here doesn't mean I can't have fun.

>>579009046
Define modern...

>>579009308
This nigga took a midnight express train to retardationville. Not cognitive dissonance country but straight to the capital of Down Syndrome Republic.

>>579009308
>nit-picking
You're not here to discuss, you're here to be spastic.

>>579009024
Atheism is the belief in the nonexistence of deities or the rejection of the belief of deity's existence. one way or the other.

>>579009519
Dude you need to be a better troll. People here have access to google bro.

>>579009435
>>579009478
I use the most basic of sciences. My senses. Wheter they're modern or not I can't define.