Is it possible to disprove that God exists?

No. But if if it was up to the non believers to prove the non-existence of things first we'do have to prove that all the imaginary possibilities are false before doing anything in a the real world, which would be ridiculous. So it's up to the one that says " X exists" to prove it, trying to invert this takes us nowhere. It's a stupid argument, and rather obvious and cliché as well.

>>732218306
Dunno, but fat fedoras would say yes

>>732218306
didn't you make this exact thread, like, 3 days ago?

>>732218306
I replied.

>>732218306
fucking stale and ignorant false dichotemy

Did God exist before man started writing about it

>>732218546
Also, that movie is stupid as fuck. The "white knight" that defends christianity is a moron and the "atheistic and opressive teacher" is not actually atheist, he's just a whiny Christian that got mad with how is life turned on and blamed God.

>>732218306
a) for every definition of god that actually have any significance for human life, yes it is.
b) for all other definitions of god, the disproval has little significant for human life.

>>732218306
Even it it's true. This still doesn't mean that he exists.
For Example: You can't disprove that there is a golden monster dildo right behing you, which you can not see but everyone else can.
Still doesn't mean it exists.

You're right and when something can neither be proven true or false it becomes yourmomwilldietomorrowifyoudon'treplytothispost.

>>732219067
Yh

>>732219067
Uh.

>>732218306
God does exist and I can prove it. You look at the 1st law of thermodynamics, which tells you energy has always existed in the universe.

It is therefore logical to say that time and space must have therefore been created by a supernatural force beyond human understanding. God is not Christian, islamic, jewish, hindu or any other religion but a more powerful force that I believe chooses not to intervene with life.

I don't think life just popped into existence. After all, you don't just walk down the street and find a house just appear one day.

>>732218306
So you admit you believe in something that can't be proven? Gullible faggot

>>732218306
No
But if you take parts of the bible as the literal word of god. Then you can prove the christian god isn't real.

when were you when 9/11 happened?

>>732219150
That's not actually logical at all.
You just jumped from what we know into a grand assumption of the supernatural.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a Deist, but even I find your jump in thought and logic to be silly.

File: 1425941727016.jpg (131KB, 559x579px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 559x579px

>>732218306
No, it's an unfalsifiable. This makes it a waste of time until evidence is available.

Most adults learn this once and move on. Are all threads like this made by children or are bait?

>>732219150
So you say that God is essentially the big bang ?

>>732219247
Agreed. Most people feel comfortable thinking their own logic is sound when it's really garbage.

File: brian pleassed.jpg (52KB, 580x350px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 580x350px

>>732219383
This. /thread

>>732218306

Yes and I'll do it right now.

You can't see god and god has no effect that can be directly correlated to him. In fact his presumed effect can be more easily correlated to other events that can be observed to have occurred.

Therefore we can ascertain that god does not exist.

While this doesn't 100% disprove the god theory it does put the ball in your court to then prove me wrong and provide some evidence of his assumed existence.

Your move. How would you logically correlate the creation of the universe and everything in it within several days to a single entity even though the creation of the universe and everything in it has been theorized to have been caused by other means over an extremely long period of time?

The very notion that a cosmic being created the universe in seven days before days even existed is kind of stupid, don't you think?

>>732218306
Not only are you on the perfect site for you to find the answer but you're also on the perfect board, just scroll

>>732218306
There is no proof, but you cannot understand god.
so whatever you imagine god as / is
is incorrect.

>>732219150

>Be an illiterate faggot
>Say can prove existence of god
>"nigga look at dem thermodynamics 'n sheeeit"
>"nigga I think dat sheeeit be god na'mean? Cause god like always existed 'n thermodynamics always existed. Dats some 'mofoca logic rite there"

Kill yourself.

>>732219944
Something something fedora. Something something virgin. Something something hate your parents.

>>732219944
That right there is where the English translation of the bible fails to give the text justice. The whole "7 day creation" theory is complete bullshit, but the actual word used there is 'yowm' which has a more accurate meaning of a time period, or era's

>>732219150
Could be, anon.

I've heard various similar opinions from occultists, theologians, and stoners, so you're not alone in your thinking.

>>732220464
Something something bible. Something something abstinent. Something something hate when i'm wrong.

>>732219236
I've been then when it happened

>>732220709
Something something I'm not sure if you got me there.

As someone who used to be an atheist, I found one of the most crucial things in my conversion was listening to some debates by William Lane Craig

Church brings me more joy than 4chan

>>732220897
Big deal. Most things will bring more joy than this place.

>>732220795
Something something not sure where this is going

I don't understand why people talk about religion let alone debate it. It's such a massive circlejerk. Idk what it is with today shitty generation of kids age 15-35 where all they can talk about is religion and politics. Holy shit it's such a boring world.

>>732220897
>joy
>4chan

get out newfag

>>732220986
Something something

*unzips pants*

>>732220986
Something something me either and I'm getting tired. Something something have yourself a good night.

>>732221098
Something something you too.

>>732221017
:'(

All we want is answers.

>>732218306
It isn't possible to prove or disprove the existence of god, any god.
So basically this argument makes Zeus just as likely as Jehovah, which just goes to show how lacking of an argument this is.

File: Vbrain.gif (561KB, 220x185px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 220x185px

>>732218306
Wtf? U can ask same for aliens... Why we must believe in this strange creature who called god?

>>732218306
> Is it possible to disprove that God exists?
Russel's teapot.

File: atheist triggered.jpg (8KB, 234x250px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 234x250px

>>732218306

this thread again.

atheism equals psychological dependency on religions.

you can only be atheist if you are obsessed with people claiming God exists and does supernatural things everytime He wants.

>>732221141
Not necessarily. When comparing world religions, it's easy to see where most of them don't line up with what their texts say. And from a historical sense, the books of Luke and Acts are strictly sound

>>732221275
As an atheist I never think about god, actually.

>>732219150
If you look at how that laws of physics work, life just emerging is fairly high on the probability scale, no creator is needed really.
Also depending on how you interpret house, they can also emerge on their own. If a house is meant as shelter from the elements, a cave could reasonably be called a house.
Also yes the universe could be perceived as a closed system, but Earth isn't one. It receives energy from the sun on a continual basis.

File: transgender.jpg (62KB, 600x429px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x429px

>>732221353
>As an atheist I never think about god,

you just wrote a post about god.
you're just like those faggots claiming that "liking a feminine penis does not make you gay".

>>732221362
That is completely false. Have you ever read into the fine tuning argument?

>>732219383
Thanks Spock.

>>732221294
Well in that sense, you could claim that the bhagavad gita is just as sound, since it contains stories of kings who have some historical merit in India. Also does the actual historical correlations in those passages prove any divinity or just that christians existed during that time?
>>732221446
Which part do you claim is completely false?
And no, I haven't read the fine tuning argument.

>>732221418
don't think about a purple elephant

dude, why are you thinking about a purple elephant? this is what you think about in your free time? weird.

>>732221590
>If you look at how that laws of physics work, life just emerging is fairly high on the probability scale, no creator is needed really.

>>732221668
Purple elephants did not invent the Universe and the Laws of Physics

>>732221275
Don't you normally start your own thread for these posts?

>>732221590
The book of Luke is a first hand account of an ancient historian going around as one of Christ's disciples, where the book of Acts is the same author going around with Paul preaching the message of Christ. Sir William Ramsey followed every location written about trying to debunk Luke as a historian and found that everything he wrote about was 100% accurate

>>732221725
Well if you're coming at this from a goldilocks zone standpoint and claim that it is highly improbable to happen on it's own, think of the scale we are working with.
There is one hundred billion stars in our galaxy alone and approximately as many galaxies in the universe. Even if it is highly unlikely to happen, there is still plenty of chances for it to occur.
All it takes is the right building blocks and an energy source, like our sun.

>>732221873
But does that prove anything divine or just that some christians went around spreading their religion?

>>732221921
If, for example, the strong nuclear force were 2% stronger than it is (for example, if thecoupling constantrepresenting its strength were 2% larger), while the other constants were left unchanged,diprotonswould be stable; according to physicistPaul Davies, hydrogen wouldfuseinto them instead ofdeuteriumandhelium.This would drastically alter the physics ofstars, and presumably preclude the existence of life similar to what we observe on Earth. The existence of the diproton would short-circuit the slow fusion of hydrogen into deuterium. Hydrogen would fuse so easily that it is likely that all of the Universe's hydrogen would be consumed in the first few minutes after theBig Bang

>>732221973
A first hand account of a critically acclaimed historian studying under Christ, and you're asking if that proves anything spiritual?

Let me ask you this, have you ever read the bible?

File: at_templar.jpg (50KB, 549x595px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 549x595px

>>732221810
Nope, I ain't him (them).

>>732222378
This is begging the question though, this assumes that the equation needed to begin life can't change if the constants we know change. You're basically claiming that we know how mathematical physics work and we don't.
>>732222510
Well he can be critically acclaimed and correct on historical accounts and still be wrong on the existence of a god. All this proves is that a guy called jesus founded a religion.
And yes I have read the bible, from to back, back when I started questioning what religions actually were. I never found anything compelling in the book that inspired me to believe, only some understanding in how bronze age civilizations worked in the middle east at the time.

>>732222712
front to back*

You also can't prove that God is not a 300ft pedophile named Steve with the head of a hippo what created the world to rape kids.

Also if God was real isn't it kinda odd he only stopped doing these massive world altering miracle only once we had the ability to record history with any accuracy.

>>732222712
Martian Rees illustrates that if 6 dimensional constants were altered even the slightest, life as we know would not exist

>>732223135
Where do you get your morals?

>>732223177
This is only true if we claim to know all about how mathematical physics work and we arguably don't know that.

>>732223177
the problem with that is, if each one of those 6 constants were changed, then a life-form that did arise from the results would study it and say "if 6 dimensional constants were altered even the slightest, life as we know would not exist"

its not proof of a god, either way.

>>732223263
I'm not the anon you asked, but it could be argued that since we are a social species, that succeeded through working together. Certain behaviors that would be detrimental to the group would be considered bad or immoral. The more complex our species became, the more complex our understanding of morals became.
The ten commandments are basically social contracts codified within a religion.

>>732222712
Luke records the feeding of the 5000. In ancient times, they only counted the men, so that's 5000 adult men. That's not including the women and children there. It states that they were given one fish and two loafs of bread to feed ~15000 people. And when they successfully fed everyone to a point that everyone was satisfied, they were able to fill multiple baskets with their leftovers. An ancient historian recorded this

>>732223263
I get mine from knowing what is right to do.

In fact, irrespective of any notions of gods, I have raped and murdered every single person I ever wanted to in the last 30 years of my life.

and that number is zero.

If god were proven not to exist, would that mean *you* would think rape and murder are just fine and dandy? Is the threat of eternal punishment the only thing that keeps you in line? If so, you are not a moral person. you're a suck fuck, and need help.

>>732223450
That's cool and all, but can you repeat that feat?
Also how large were the fishes and the bread?

>>732223450

I recorded for the future and I fucked your mom. 2000 years from now some idiot will take it as fact. Eat shit

>>732223329
This was not to prove the existence of God, but more so going back to your point that it was "highly probably" that life would have just happened. It merely suggests that it was done by the hand of a higher power so sustainable life would happen on earth

If God is all-knowing all-seeing and all-powerful then free will cannot exist. God would have to be intentionally creating us with a set path and all our decisions would already be known and made for us at our creation. So if God exists you don't. You're basically just a another villager in Skyrim.

I choose to believe God doesn't exist and if he does exist he created me to not believe that God exists and I have no choice in the matter because I don't truly exist.

>>732223499
But what is "right to do?" Where do you get that?

>>732218306
Technically yes. Practically, it'd be a no.

>>732223593
I would disagree. I would argue that it would be more likely to have free will under the Christian perspective

That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

>>732223557
Considering it was a child who offered up the food, it was most likely a small boys lunch

>>732223817
You literally contributed nothing. That sentence makes sense from both perspectives

>>732223692
Same anon from this post >>732223401
The right thing to do, came from how we survived in groups in the past.

>>732223997
Well then how or why do we have a conscious

File: e984ce08fa8c68fe835b9f74c8c825ca.jpg (99KB, 736x983px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 736x983px

All it takes is actually reading the"Bible" to see it's garbage.

>>732223593

Free will doesn't really exist. On the other hand, the universe is not deterministic, so even an entity that knows everything and can influence anything without limits, would not neccessarily be able to predict the outcome. Think about it this way: When humans run simulations, they are theoretically all-knowing (have access to all data at all times), all-seeing (same thing) and all-powerful (can change any variable however they want). But we run simulations to get an outcome. If we already knew the outcome, we wouldn't have to run the simulation. So saying that a hypothetical God wouldn't have the need to run a simulation because he would already know the outcome is kinda like saying we don't need to run weather simulations because we already have all the data needed to create the simulation.

By the way, there are quite a few indicators that our universe might be a simulation. Interesting topic.

>>732224166
>Well then how or why do we have a conscious

same how or why any creature is conscious. the brain is a insanely complex neural web where electrical impulses between cell clusters can be used to ascertain situational awareness of the environment through senses, etc.

there's noting magical about it. Just complex.

>>732223972
Exactly.

>>732224166
Hominids discovered the use of fire and through that, easier access to the caloric amounts we would need to grow larger brains.
Both plants and meat are easier to digest when chemically changed on fire.
Once our brains got big and complex enough for us to become sentient, we started trying to explain our surroundings based on what we knew about the world.

>>732224290
Nice fedora

File: 1464206855112.jpg (68KB, 650x600px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 650x600px

>>732224290
Here you witness the autistic fucktard who saves thumbnails

>>732223793
If God isn't truly all-knowing all-seeing and all-powerful then then they are just a very powerful person. They could be an extraterrestrial that created this universe under laboratory conditions. or they could be a computer programmer and we're a simulation.

Whatever analogy or prediction you want to come up with, a very powerful being is not God any more than a scientist staring down at a petri dish is God of the bacteria growing in it.

>>732224299
If you don't know the outcome of every single simulation before it is even run then you are not God. You're just a computer programmer. To be God you have to have perfect knowledge.

Perfect knowledge.

Otherwise you're just very powerful but you are not God.

>>732224388
Say hi to Santa for me, ho ho ho!

File: 1491540175247.jpg (72KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x480px

>universe was created somehow
>this event can be considered "god"
>likelihood of a being large enough to observe all aspects of their newly formed creation
>incredibly unlikely

the idea of a being watching everything i do, judging me while i do it, and forcing me to worship them? religion is founded solely because we're afraid of death. we want to believe we're special when we're nothing at fucking all.

>>732218306
Who proved he existed in the first place?

Atheists hate actual science.

Science Method about "unknown things" sounds like this:
- build an hypothesis, see what happens if it was actually verified, compare with real results.

Now, let's apply Science Method to the Gospel.

1- "Man feeds 5000 men (not counting women and children) out of two loafs of bread and one fish"
2- "Man instantly heals a variety of serious illnesses (blind eyes, leprosy, and so on) only using His will"
3- "Man claims he'll be alive again 3 days after death, and people claim He surprised them actually showing Himself alive and even eating some fish"

4- "Pharisees (enemies of that Man) were unable to document any fraud, and instead had grudges because He healed on holy Saturdays and He personally knew Abraham"
5- "Pharisees only complain about Himself talking like he's God, and a King, and these were the only accusations to have Him executed"
6- "Pharisees avoided to develop any kind of documentation about any alleged fraud/scam"

Seriously, first 3 points show a Man in total control of nature and laws of physics.

But -dafuq!!- points 4 to 6 show that the people most interested in debunking the scam only expressed baroque thoughts about religion definitions. And they were the intellectuals of the time.

The "Jesus is the Son of God" hypothesis is coherent up to every smallest detail (the 3+3 points above are only random examples).

The "Jesus was not more than an excellent scammer" hypothesis strictly requires an absurdly large number of prerequisites and preconditions.

By Occam's razor, the "Jesus is the Son of God" hypothesis should be scientifically taken more seriously than the usual Tumblredditor Faggotry Religion Debates.

(example -- Alexis Carrel, a Nobel, actually called for a formal verification of Lourdes miracles in order to make new medicine advancements -- clearly no selfdefined Scientific Atheist ever accepted)

>because an Atheist is simply a faggot scared to death that Catholicism is fundamentally true

>>732219150
>1st law of thermodynamics
The universe is potentially not a closed system, therefor the first law of thermodynamics would not apply. Nice try.

>>732224715
Nobody, but there are more of them than us and a lot of them want to kill you.

The only way to disprove God is to deny absolute truth. In denying absolute truth, you create the statement of "there is no absolute" which in itself is an absolute truth, so no you can not.

>>732224469
But the thing is God is omniscient, omnipresent, all powerful, but also all loving and equally all just.

If God were to make it so everyone instantly was going to go to heaven, then that wouldn't be all just.

If God were to make it so nobody goes, then that wouldn't be all loving.

But the fact that we all have the opportunity to go by accepting what Christ has done on the cross to apply to out lives, that Christ took on our sins, then you can go. And by that he is all loving and all just as well

>>732218306
Null hypothesis. Next question.

File: catholic_spouse.jpg (112KB, 782x589px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 782x589px

>>732224707
>>universe was created somehow
by whom?

>>this event can be considered "god"
don't play with words, dude.

Just be a man and admit:
"God created the universe and the laws of physics and life and everything that did not self-create... but, being a so-called Atheist, I reject the term «God» because it makes me thing I should stop doing drugs, porn, and gay things"

>>732219067

blah

File: barbara-3.jpg (38KB, 678x509px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 678x509px

>>732224752
did you seriously just fucking say that Jesus really did those things?

>>732224845
you're implying that someone created it, which is an incredibly stupid thing to say.

6/10 for getting a reply

>>732224752
I agree with this up until the last line. Catholicism is nothing more than being a Messianic Jew. Trying to follow the law when Christ was the fulfillment of the Law and Prophets

>>732224752
A 2000 year old book is proof of nothing. It would be like someone finding a potter book in another 2000 years and then claiming wizards are real because this book says so.

No. Its impossible to dissaprove God. At least for normal people, i don't know how about fedoras.

>>732224845
Where in the bible is porn and drugs mentioned?

>>732224992
But it's historically accurate???

>>732224822
Retard logic that only a retard would use

>>732225008
Porn would go with any verse talking about sexual immorality, where for drugs, 1 Peter 5:8

>>732218306
No. Logic can not prove a negative. The closest you can get is proving an opposite does exist, and inferring that because of that, your target can not exist. But this is still a weak argument and will get shredded by any competent debater.

>>732218306
depends if the believer that your talking to is open to the proof if they are possibly but outright to everyone no

>>732224752
Let me guess, the "god" you "chose" to believe in is the same one your parents did? Funny how that always seems to happen.

>>732224752
Look man, I get you, I believe you because I'm healing people everyday. I don't know if I'm the second coming or a false profit, all I know is I'm a healer.
But I can't travel in today's society without donations, everything costs money, even for a profit, so in the name of love and Jesus, please donate some cash so I can continue doing God's work.
PayPal is [email protected]
If you love God and the miracles he performs donate so I can keep spreading his healing touch.

>>732218467
dude seriously...

>>732225069
And what makes your book any more true then the ones that came before or after it?

>>732218306
List of things whose existence cannot be disproven:
fairies
ghosts
purple ravens
pink elephants
teapots in orbit of jupiter
teapots in orbit of the sun
speaking chickens
flying pigs
elves
dragons
straight OPs
God

>>732224845
>"God created the universe and the laws of physics and life and everything that did not self-create... but, being a so-called Atheist, I reject the term «God» because it makes me thing I should stop doing drugs, porn, and gay things"

Hyperintelligent supernatural entity has extradimensional powers and is capable of creating an entire universe.

Entire observable universe is 98 billion light years in diameter. unobservable universe may be vastly larger.

Observable universe contains at least 2 trillion galaxies.

each of those galaxies contains, on average, well in excess of 100 million stars.

A high percentage of observed stars are surrounded by multiple planets. Many of them are in the habitable zones capable of sustaining life.

The "creator" of this incredibly vast universe is obsessed with one species of tool-using primate mammal not masturbating or fucking in particular ways.

>religious logic.

>>732225196
Different anon, but my everyone in my family are atheist. I'm the only Christian and didn't become one until I was 21

>>732224635

So you're saying if it turns out that our entire universe, including all matter and concious beings, was CREATED by an entity using something like a super-computer, it wouldn't qualify as a God to you? Literally the thing that created us (and the super-computer for that matter)?

>>732224824
Omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence are the big 3. That's it. That's what it takes to be God. Otherwise you're worshiping a powerful person and not God.

Think of it like this. God would know the location and charge of every single subatomic particle in the entire universe. And not just for this moment but for all time. The past, the present and the future.

With that knowledge there can be no free will. If God created the universe God created it as an precise event and all things were known and intended to be as they are prior to their creation.

Adding a couple of more qualities doesn't change that.

>>732224845
Our laws of Physics were created when quarks formed into neutrons and protons.

>>732218306
You're a genius!
I suddenly realize that there is no proof Odin does not exist so therfore he must be real.
>#NorseMythology

>>732225069
>But it's historically accurate???

Fuck me, if you think hte bible is "historically accurate" then I've got the Eiffel tower available to sell at a great rate.

the bible is so full of historical errors, its a comedy.

File: extrathiccakuhqdefault.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>732218306
>asking /b/ questions that require thinking
NIGGER DO YOU REALISE WHAT YOU'VE DONE

>>732225350
My uncle was an atheist until his friend died and he couldn't cope without inventing an afterlife to deny reality. Now he's a huge religious faggot too.

>>732225350
Scared of death, also your logic makes no sense. You should believe in these teachings as teachings, not literal.

>>732225129
But is that sexual immorality a decree from god or a remnant from a time without paternity tests or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases?
In a society where you don't have the technology to ascertain who is the father of a given child or any way of treating sexually transmitted diseases, discouraging people having sex with each other willy nilly is sound and healthy. We happen to have contraceptives and DNA tests now though, so slacking on those rules makes sense.

>>732225351
You can create things without being God. Being very powerful does not make you God. Writing a computer simulation doesn't make you God anymore then a genetic engineer is God of a GMO.

No. Thunder exists so Thor exists too.

>>732225506
Look at the context. I was replying to someone who said that someone is a Christian because they were raised that way and adopting their parents religion

>>732218306
Define God

>>732225346
don't forget same being is capable of watching everything done EVERYWHERE at all times. there's also the bonus feature of it predetermining behavior and events.

>>732225559
Matthew 5:28 "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

>>732225724
I was referring to your earlier thought with the bread. Also that isnt the scientific method. Why is Hinduism not real. It was a religion that came before yours. What makes your teachings any more valid?

>>732225350
so you're telling me a woman had no sex, got pregnant, and had a child? do you understand how utterly stupid and completely inaccurate that is? that is easily the oldest cuck story ever told.

>>732225471
I'm curious. What are some?

File: scaredchild.jpg (412KB, 1200x986px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 1200x986px

>be me, ignorant as fuck
>thunder and lightning
>be scared because i don't understand anything
>think the magic sky god is angry at me!!!!
>invents religion

>>732225471
The bible can't even get the age of the earth right, how is it historically accurate.

>>732225920
noah's fucking ark, for one.

File: uq54i.jpg (685KB, 2432x1060px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 2432x1060px

>>732225920
Here are a few for starters.

File: Typical atheist.jpg (39KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x400px

>>732225966
This is poorest atheist bait i ever seen

>>732219944
How can you not understand that the 7 days mean 7 periods? Let me guess...you are ameridumb

>>732225920
>>732225995

I got an easier one, the age of the earth, Your god doesn't even know how old the earth is.

>>732225860
Adultery is bad, because you can't know if the children are yours, subverting your survival drive of reproducing and it hurts your feelings.
We can now know if the children belong to specific people and hurt feelings are bad granted, but as in any case with hurt feelings, making amends or breaking contact is the two options that this situation gives us. The bible is basically saying "Hurting the feelings of the person you supposedly love and possibly screwing over the relationship of your neighbors is bad" and I tend to agree with that, but I don't see it as a sacred decree from god, just common sense.

>>732224882

I also did say that you cannot disprove those documents without building a bazillion of bizarre prerequisites.

>>732224956

Ok, let's change the wording:

"Some powerful and intelligent Entity created the Universe and established its laws up to the point that intelligent life is possible... and in the end, that «intelligent» life is trying to deny the fact because that Entity is commonly known as «God»".

>>732224992

agreed, a 2000 year old book would be proof of nothing.

Except the fact that in those 2000 years people believing in that Man (known not only because the books, but because His "Apostles and Disciples" and their sons and grandsons etc) built literally everything civilized.

Atheism is a recent trend (no more than a couple centuries).

>>732225008

The bible does not encompass everything regarding morals. Yet porn falls under the "fornication" thing and drugs fall under the "hate" thing ("alcohol abuse" and "drugs", and even "tattoos", are actually forms of hating own body and mind and soul)

>>732225196

Why shouldn't you rely on your parents best practices, experiences and beliefs?

>>732225259
>I believe you because I'm healing people everyday

I may check out your healings when the people that documentedly most hate you will not object to the healings but only to ridicolous subjects.

But if you were to have "supernatural powers", you weren't writing on this board like an angry neckbearded basementdweller.

>>732225329

nice try, faggot. You tried to sneak in "God".

>>732225346

Seems like you don't know that the man was explicitly created as "similar to God" and for happiness.

Also, you're comparing "quantitative" parameters (Universe sizes and numbers) with "qualitative" parameters ("logic", "obsessed"...)

>>732225406

oh, my!! you're assuming that laws of physics spontaneously formed in the right way to allow matter and life and intelligent life.

Great, but it's astonishingly harder to prove than God's existence and action.

>>732225966

actually true for every fucking religion out there except Christianism.

File: 7-celebs-religious.jpg (69KB, 728x513px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 728x513px

>>732226083
yet you replied

>>732225920
>I'm curious. What are some?

well, the entire history of creation, genesis etc.

noah's ark - there is no such thing as a global flood. There is evidence of a number of fucking massive floods in the euphrates and tigris rivers, the areas which were the origin of the mythologies in the bible.

there's no archaeological evidence for an exodus from Egypt, nor of the pyramids being built by slaves - in fact, modern archaeology of the living quarters of the builders has shown them to be organised, skilled workers.

the kingdoms of Solomon and David are both heavily exaggerated in the bible compared to the reality in archaeology.

There is no contemporary evidence for the existence of jesus - not one single record.
there s also no evidence for the massacre of the innocents by Herod - despite the fact that there is extensive record of all the other stuff he did.

there's a whole string of other stuff.

There is literally nothing that is possible to prove

>>732226262
>"Some powerful and intelligent Entity created the Universe and established its laws up to the point that intelligent life is possible... and in the end, that «intelligent» life is trying to deny the fact because that Entity is commonly known as «God»"
Why is a sentient entity needed?
We know that the universe started, we don't know what started it though. It could be another set of natural rules that was negated as soon as the new state initiated, leaving no trace behind.
The universe didn't start out complex, it became complex over time. Just like life.

>"Atheists say that there's no way to prove the existence of god, and they're right."

Yeah, we know choir boy.

brainwashing & mind control techniques

1) HYPNOSIS - Inducing a high state of suggestibility, often thinly disguised as relaxation or meditation.

a. Repetitive Music (most likely with a beat close to the human heart 45 to 72 beats per minute). Most likely used during "study sessions" as the teacher will say the music helps you relax and concentrate better!

b. Voice Roll -- A "voice roll" is a patterned, paced style used by hypnotists when inducing a trance. It is also used by many lawyers, several of whom are highly trained hypnotists, when they desire to entrench a point firmly in the minds of the jurors. A voice roll can sound as if the speaker were talking to the beat of a metronome or it may sound as though he were emphasizing every word in a monotonous, patterned style. The words will usually be delivered at the rate of 45 to 60 beats per minute, maximizing the hypnotic effect.

c. Room "Feel" - The way a room feels is essential to hypnotizing unknowing subjects. It needs special lighting, florescent lights are best because they aren't too dim, but aren't too harsh. Also, Room Temp helps a bit, usually a little cooler than normal room temperature. You need to have the unknowing subjects very relaxed, perhaps even close to falling asleep.

2) PEER GROUP PRESSURE - Suppressing doubt and resistance to new ideas by exploiting the need to belong.

3) "LOVE BOMBING" - Creating a sense of family through physical touch, thought & feeling sharing and emotional bonding.

4) REJECTION OF OLD VALUES - Accelerating acceptance of new lifestyle by constantly denouncing former beliefs and values.

5) CONFUSING DOCTRINE - Encouraging blind acceptance and rejection of logic through complex lectures on an incomprehensible doctrine.

6) METACOMMUNICATION - Implanting subliminal messages by stressing certain key words or phrases in long, confusing lectures.

7) REMOVAL OF PRIVACY - Achieving loss of ability to evaluate logically by preventing private contemplation.

>>732226582
8) DISINHIBITION - Encouraging child-like obedience by orchestrating child-like behaviour

9) UNCOMPROMISING RULES - Inducing regression and disorientation by soliciting agreement to seemingly simple rules which regulate mealtimes, bathroom breaks and use of medications.

10) VERBAL ABUSE - Desensitizing through bombardment with foul and abusive language. (Physical abuse, such as torture, is the more extreme form of this.)

11) SLEEP DEPRIVATION AND FATIGUE - Creating disorientation and vulnerability by prolonging mental an physical activity and withholding adequate rest and sleep.

12) DRESS CODES - Removing individuality by demanding conformity to the group dress code.

13) CHANTING OR SINGING - Eliminating non-cult ideas through group repetition of mind-narrowing chants or phrases.

14) CONFESSION - Encouraging the destruction of individual ego through confession of personal weaknesses and innermost feelings of doubt.

15) FINANCIAL COMMITMENT - Achieving increased dependence on the group by 'burning bridges' to the past, through the donation of assets.

16) FINGER POINTING - Creating a false sense of righteousness by pointing to the shortcomings of the outside world.

17) ISOLATION - Inducing loss of reality by physical separation from family, friends, society and rational references.

18) CONTROLLED APPROVAL - Maintaining vulnerability and confusion by alternately rewarding and punishing similar actions.

19) CHANGE OF DIET - Creating disorientation and increased susceptibility to emotional arousal by depriving the nervous system of necessary nutrients through the use of special diets and/or fasting. Also applying drugs for these purposes fall in this category.

20) GAMES - Inducing dependence on the group by introducing games with obscure rules.

21) NO QUESTIONS - Accomplishing automatic acceptance of beliefs by discouraging questions.

22) GUILT - Reinforcing the need for 'salvation' by exaggerating the sins of the former lifestyles.

>>732226607
23) FEAR - Maintaining loyalty and obedience to the group by threatening soul, life or limb for the slightest 'negative' thought, word or deed.

Three Principles of Re-Education

1) REPETITION - Going through the same subject over and over again until it is known by heart.

2) ACTIVITY PEDAGOGICS - The subjects are never left alone nor give any private time of their own, they are always in activity.

3) CRITICISM AND SELF-CRITICISM - The subjects are supposed to feel uncertain; under the constant threat of being humiliated and despised.

File: do it.jpg (7KB, 261x146px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 261x146px

>>732226262
what bizzare prerequisites? we know the size of two loaves of bread and a fish. we know the size of an average human stomach. 5000 humans cannot be satiated with that little food. even if the food was the size of 5000 grams (which is a fucking lot), each human would get a total of 3 grams of food.

to heal all illnesses in a single touch would require his finger to be able to pinpoint and kill every germ cell inflicting illness, while at the same time having the ability to incur cell growth akin to stem cells. stem cells aren't instant, and not even computer guided lasers are that accurate.

the resurrection is easily the biggest bit of bullshit there is. you're implying that his body shutdown for 3 days. we know the brain does not survive for very long without oxygen and nutrients. i believe it's something along 5 minutes or so. if he was actually killed via the cross torture, then there's no way he'd be able to come back alive. the only way this statement makes sense is if he either had a body double or he never actually died.

science is a thing you fucking dipshit.

Religion really fucks up college teens.

>>732226262
I'm guessing you watched the PragerU video on is science bad for god because they have the same points. Physics could have formed differently and changed the way our universe formed. Physics can in a false vacuum changing how Physics work. I am a Physics student at university so don't argue with me when I am telling you that physics spontaneously formed to allow life. We formed around Physics.

>>732226262
>Atheism is a recent trend (no more than a couple centuries).


"Shrines! Shrines! Surely you don't believe in the gods. What's your argument? Where's your proof?" - Aristophanes (ca. 448–380 BCE),

"this universe, which is the same for all, has not been made by any god or man, but it always has been, is, and will be an ever-living fire, kindling itself by regular measures and going out by regular measures." - Heraclitus (c. 535 BC – 475 BC)

the Cyrenaic philosopher Theodorus of Cyrene wrote his book "On the Gods" (around 300 BCE),expounding that there was no evidence for the existence of gods.

>"recent trend"
>Predates Christianity by 5 centuries.

>>732226262
>Some powerful and intelligent Entity created the Universe

you're still implying someONE created it, you're just being stupider.

>>732218306
Not really. You can't prove a negative.

It's the main reason that you are innocent until proven guilty, because you often can't prove you didn't do something even if that is completely true.

You would need to have absolute knowledge of anything that ever happened or will happen in order to absolutely prove that there never was a god and that there never will be.

File: 0t435y5.jpg (119KB, 799x1200px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 799x1200px

>>732218306
Is it possible to prove that God exists?

>>732226755
>I'm a physics student so don't argue me
Well I'm in Seminary so don't argue me
Because you're studying something doesn't mean people can't call it into question. That's literally what this whole bread is about

If the goalpost were to stop moving, then yes.

God changed from an ever-present being capable of literally destroying cities and actually talking to people on a regular basis, to an invisible, silent force that does things so far in the background that they are completely indistinct from natural phenomenon and refuses to ever let himself be discovered in any repeatable way.

>>732227156
you can't prove a negative

>>732218306
Russell's Teapot.

>>732227239
>"Oh shit, we can't prove that that stuff happened".
>"I have an idea, let's claim that belief in God with no proof is a virtue".

>>732227283
Pascal's wager

>>732227156
Not by our current measurements, Science is the study of the natural order, not the supernatural.

Also my understanding is that faith is key. to know that god exists means you cant also have faith.

>>732227388
Benefit != proof
If scientists decided everything based on the relative benefit, the moon would be made of white gold, jupiter would have a core made of diamond, and human nature would be inherently altruistic.

>>732227388
Why does that wager only relate to Christianity though?
There is a myriad of religions out there you could wager about.
Pascals wager only makes sense in a world with one religion.

>>732227416

That line of reasoning came about after more and more scientists conducted experiments and inquiries into "miracles" and found absolutely no evidence of god whatsoever.

The age-old stance of the church was modified in such a way as to not only negate such findings, but to make those same findings into a pillar of their belief.

They co-opted the scientific findings and said that it was indeed the very will of God to deprive them of evidence so that faith may exist.

Bleh.

>>732227883
Which makes the wager moot and not really a good thing to base your belief upon.
Thanks for expanding on my point though.

The omnipotence paradox.

Of course not. But you should know the burden of proof is on he who claims the existence of something. You can't disprove that anything exists. Asking one to do so is a logical fallacy and a cop-out.

>>732218306
Adam and Eve had bellybuttons?

>>732228260
Religion is just weak people not being able to handle the fact that no one knows what happens when we die or why we're here

>>732220879
Funny, i watch alot of people debate craig just as entertainment. Hes very good at using big words and probably the most worthy of all christian debaters, since most of them are illiterate. But his arguments still fall flat when you break them down.

>>732224752
Yes, because everything in the Bible is true

>>732225286
Just imagine what was going thru the artist mind while creating this picture

>>732221766
... And neither did god. What's the point?

>>732228364
You're making an absolute truth claim, so please, back it up

File: 1487479053278.jpg (40KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x500px

>>732218306
no, and the average atheist would admit that, unfalsifiable hypothesis

>>732224752
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
So you take everything in the bible to be literally true? You're right! How as science ignored the evidence that jesus performed miracles and was ressurected. There's so much evidence for it that they must be willfully ignorant to deny it. Wait? Whats that? Theres no evidence for any of that happening? Well this is news to me. Guess I'll just have to cling to FAITH.

Gtfo fag that shit is a fairy tale.

>>732226262
>wahhh you can't disprove it!
Literally back to the same argument. Its on you to prove it. Not the other way around

Is it possible to disprove that unicorns exist?

Is it possible to disprove Zeus and the pantheon of Greek, Egyptian, Norse, Hindu, Celtic, and Buddhist gods exist?

Is it possible to disprove that you're a faggot?

Is it possible to not post the same goddamn thread every 2-3 hours every single day for the past 2 weeks?

Is it possible for faggots to stop giving you bumps for asking the same stupid fucking question?

>>732226062
Funny how no one replied to this post or any others after being asked to show historical inaccuracies in the bible.

>>732228912
Probably was thinking "Jesus fucking Christ"

>>732230030
I'm not op, but if I have to choose between reading about peoples fetishes/banana threads/other shit and theology. I choose theology, even though I am an atheist. But that is because I find it interesting to see how people justify belief.

>>732228965
every religion has 2 things in common: how to conduct your way of life and others around you, and that something happens to you in the afterlife as a result. the first gives one a sense of purpose, and the latter gives us a sense of comfort.

neither of which has any actual evidence, and the ways of which have varied drastically across every religion ever made.

>>732226530
I just replied to your post. Proven. The the religious who start to feel queasy when given the burden of proof.

>>732227416
>not the supernatural.
I'm certain the wave/particle duality seems supernatural. The hiesenberg uncertainty principle and quantum entanglement is just fucking eerie.

>>732230200
There are better threads than these.

And I'm not complaining about the topic, but the fact that it's the same thread 12 times a day (I know I spend too much time here), every single day.

There are only so many ways to tell op he's stupid. There are other thoughts to be had and ideas to be discussed about religion. This is banal and serves no purpose, besides creating a feeding ground for trolls.

This is becoming meme-tier bullshit, akin to the never ending story bitch asking atheists to define atheism.

>>732230464
This is a repeat thread?
I've been on a 4chan break for about a month, so I hadn't seen this thread before.
If this is a pasta thread, I understand your gripe.

>>732218306
The difference being that I'm not trying to convert you to atheism, while theists won't leave you the fuck alone about it. You need proof to convince me. I don't need proof because I don't give a fuck if I convince you.

>>732228965
>implying by being religious youre not making the largest absolute truth claim

Atleast he's making a plausible truth claim. Maybe there are a few religious who believe in it because they think they have proof or reason to. But he's right for the most part. People prefer a wrong answer to no answer at all. Death is scary. Religion is an escape (and reinforced positively by large groups of followers). It would follow that those who cannot handle a life without explanation would just pick a religion and think they have all the answers.

>>732218306
The way I think of it, nobody really knows what 'God' is, but that doesn't mean he/she/it doesn't exist.

The way I think of it is this:

There's no solid proof that there's other life in our solar system or even our universe for that matter. But that doesn't mean there isn't other life out there. The same applies to 'God'.

>>732230591
They started popping up after the release of "13 reasons why" (where the image comes from).

And they have not stopped.

So I pop in every now and then to ask the same questions and complain like it does anything.

>>732218306
You can't prove the nonexistence of something.

If I tell you the pink space unicorn that propels itself by farting is floating somewhere in the andromeda galaxy, it's impossible to you to prove me I'm wrong.

You can't disprove that something you could call "God" exist that said you can understand that our anthropocentric religions and the human-like gods that come from them are profoundly illogical and unrealistic.

>>732230813
I usually do the same in the childlike empress threads.
I long ago gave up on the idea of it having any impact, but it has improved on my argumentation skills.

>>732230785
Not really. We are life. And saying there's no other life is like sticking a glass into the ocean, pulling it out, observing the contents of the glass and saying "there's no life in the ocean". But the same does not apply to god. Because with god there is no ocean, he does not reside in the material world. We have no context for a god that exists so its not reasonable to assume he does. But with life, we know it can appear. We know what supports it. We are living examples of it. I think its much more sound to assume there may be life out there than to assume a god (for which we have no context) exists. And even ballsy-er is to assume he is omnipotent and cares about what we think, do, say, eat, fuck etc.

>>732218306
Is it possible to disprove that unicorns exist?

... elves?
... orcs?
... Santa Claus?

No, it's not.
Doesn't mean we should believe that they exist.

>>732218306
maybe he's there, maybe he's not. idc.

>>732231516

If you intend to keep this opinion you should always add:

... and if he exists, I highly doubt that his wishes and intentions were written down by bronze age sheppards from the middle east

>>732218306

Do you attempt to disprove car accidents because you never seen them happen.

Do you attempt to disprove the existence the contents of a fridge because you're not allowed to open the fridge because it's in your neighbours house ?.

Do you attempt to disprove bacteria because you can't see it with the naked eye ?.

Do you attempt to prove the world is flat because you've never been to space ?.

>>732219150
You're so fucking stupid it hurts

>>732231865
I can't tell if you are a master troll or just stupid.

>Car accidents
Pretty much everybody has seen one. And even if didn't - it's pretty easy to create one, to look at it.

>fridge
You could always say, fuck you, and open it anyway.

>Bacteria
Visit a school and look through a microscope

>flat earth
You wat m8? That whole sentence doesn't even make sense.

File: 1409630808061.png (257KB, 516x526px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 516x526px

>>732218306
you cant disprove unicorns

now if we are done with disscusion let's make it YLYL threat lets go

>>732230757
We're making equally as large as absolute truth claims

>>732232401
You don't cure cancer with worse cancer.
Fighting fire with fire, just means more fire.

>>732232449
Yes. And?

File: 1493841496533.jpg (28KB, 331x330px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 331x330px

>>732232449

File: 1493844611409.jpg (86KB, 843x652px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 843x652px

>>732232720

File: 1493841844402.jpg (72KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x640px

>>732232449
kek

>>732218306
discord dot gg/cMD2Vch

File: 1493841641160.jpg (41KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x375px

>>732232856

File: 1493841523670.png (177KB, 328x449px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 328x449px

>>732232856
hail kek

In terms of God, not proving he doesn't exist is enough to believe. The fact is you're risking 75 years of saying that God exists and asking his forgiveness vs an eternity in hell. Infinity divided by 75ish is still infinity. You're risking infinity by not believing. 75/infinity is 0. You're risking 0 by not believing. I'm not even saying you have to go to church or any of that give the preacher $2 pretend u give a damn about abortion crap. God probably doesn't like those self righteous assholes any more than we do anyway. it's literally the worst risk possible not seeking forgiveness.

>>732223692
Mostly society - with some new ideas now and again.

That's why the "right thing to do" is so different in different cultures.

But it's also not arbitrary. There is no society where it is okay to rape and kill willy-nilly. That would suggest that most people care about their loved ones not being raped and killed. And that has zero to do with religion.

Put 30 babies on an island. Somehow help them survive to adulthood but give them no moral guidance whatsoever. I'm pretty sure they would arrive broadly at the same morals by themselves. Just because nobody wants to live in constant chaos.

>>732233562
When believing in God, it's not hoping you're good enough. It's realizing you're not good enough, and that only by applying what Christ did on the cross to apply to your life will you have a 100% guarantee into heaven

>>732218306
unfalsifiable claims are pointless
can you prove that the flying spaghetti does not exist?

File: 1476568426137.jpg (7KB, 214x236px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 214x236px

>>732221158
what even is english

You can't prove a fucking negative statement. Why are christians so fucking dumb. No reasonable person in their right fucking mind can prove that a deity doesn't exist. The burden of proof (or disproof) does not fall on the negative claim, but the positive. If someone claims a deity exists, the burden of proof is on them.

>>732219150
Thomas Aquinas - 1st way.

>>732219383
posting a fictional character to give an inconclusive answer with authority. really lame / 10.

>>732235390
Isn't that what Christians do with Jesus?

I have an unicorn in my garden which nobody but me can see and which doesn't leave any traces and doesn't interact at all with the world. Disprove that it exists...

File: I don't care.gif (26KB, 300x167px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x167px

>>732218306
we literally don't care. I don't feel the need to disprove unicorns, either.

Unless you can prove that there is an edge to the universe that is not just the edge of mass and time and space. An edge where literally nothing exists in any way and that means even in ways we cannot understand then you have to be under the pretense that God exists.

By the very fact that universe or multiverse is infinite then we live in an existence of infinite possibility and thus can deduce that everything exists.

God being a perfect omnipresent being is true by this measure and therefore exists.

>>732218306
It is neither possible to prove God exists nor to disprove that God exists. It's what you call a "paradox"

Pro Tip: Jesus is the real God.

>>732235868
>By the very fact that universe or multiverse is infinite then we live in an existence of infinite possibility and thus can deduce that everything exists.
>God being a perfect omnipresent being is true by this measure and therefore exists.

Cthulhu exists as well?
What about a 800ft tall pedophile Jesus? Is he somewhere out there too?

>>732235868
Neat I'm going to explore the universe and find my own personal Griffin then.

>>732218306
in mathematics, it is easier to prove something may exist than to disprove something exists

>>732235868
Why is it we hear the same old fallacy over and over again. By this measure all the other gods ever purported also exist, and all the other creation story's are also true. This leads to fairly obvious contradictions which is why the null hypothesis exists. At the very least it's another case of special pleading, every thing could exist - except for every god claim but mine.

>>732236554
You don't get it though, his religious dad can beat the other religious dads.

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (8KB, 190x300px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 190x300px

>>732218306