so, listen, i was a smartass in class and one thing lead to another

>>130929358
best arguments anyone?

>>130929358
you fucked up. one thing is to believe in god. another is to force your god on others when you have zero proof

admit your mistake, and cancel the debate.

>>130929358
this is a 18+ board

>>130929358
Good luck. Maybe this humiliation will teach you to keep your gob shut in future.

>>130929380
say "how can there be a god when god hates fags but he made me a fag?

>>130929779
oh wait you have to prove there is a god? lol. oh. well im sure you will do better than everyone else in the last 1000 years

File: 1497656729801.jpg (70KB, 612x613px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 612x613px

>>130929358
>http://www.returnofkings.com/68068/philosophical-approaches-to-proving-the-existence-of-god

>>130929358
Lol. Ok start with Augustine's argument from cause, that's probably your best bet. (Google it) also this is 18+ board this thread has been reported

>>130929358
Easy; go up there and blow their minds by saying there is no God but allah. Then watch as they squirm and try to figure out if they should debate you or let you win for fear of being a raycis.

File: iyftdrxtfcyvghbn.jpg (15KB, 182x268px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 182x268px

Watch this.

>>130929971
The dude lives in Serbia. They don't give a shit about muh Islam.

>>130929358
There is literally zero scientific evidence to prove the existence of God. If that is your argument, you will lose. If you can change your position to instead prove why religion is healthy and necessary for certain low IQ populations, you stand a much better chance at winning the debate.

Again, with emphasis, you CANNOT prove the existence of God. Living by God's rules, however, is inherently good. Depending on the religion, of course. I assume you on Christianity's team.

>>130929358
Your gonna lose. There are no logical arguments to support religion.

>>130929358
Tell them they are kaffirs and that Allah will be merciless in his jihad against the non-believers

You will win I promise

File: maxtip.gif (2MB, 383x576px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 383x576px

Go for the jugular and bring up the atheist's worst nightmare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4

>>130930074
Sorry I thought the internet was made by America for America, blame the burger education

>>130930193
You're wrong. There are no logical arguments to support the existence of God. Religion has shaped mankind for the better for thousands of years.

>>130929380
look up william lane craig
plagiarise

>>130929358
>basically, now i have to prove god's existence
well good luck, you'd be the first in human history to do so

>>130930272
>support
The word you are looking for is "prove". There are no logical arguments that prove the existence of God. There are also no logical arguments that disprove it, so atheists are in the same box as anybody else. Nobody knows and nobody can know.

>>130930074
>croatia flag

they secretly love islamists

File: Screenshot-from-2017-05-04-14-45-40.png (1MB, 1921x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1921x1080px

>>130929358
There probably is no god though. No supreme being would allow this monstrosity.

>>130929358
Switch the argument to the fact that there is no such thing as a state. Throw then off with the menutia of sooks.

>>130930455
>so atheists are in the same box as anybody else.
Not really. Atheism is the rejection of the claim of gods existence. Antitheism would be straight up denial. That said, agnostic atheism is the only type of atheism you can rationally justify.

>>130930455
>There are also no logical arguments that disprove it, so atheists are in the same box as anybody else.
not how it works and you know it. i can tell you hesitated to write this. faggot

File: 1497566367928.png (201KB, 901x531px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 901x531px

Just prove that atheism is in itself a belief system the same as God. You can't prove god and you can't not prove god. No matter what 'evolution' tier argument they have.. there's no stopping a god sitting at the top.

To be athiest just replaced that belief mechanism with another and they worship it, it's values and ways if life in the same way.

Then argue how it's healthier for a population.. even built in to our minds to see and perhaps invent a good to deal with things like death and to guide our morals.. that's why God's were generated in every corner of the flat Earth

Pic related as a PowerPoint slide for good measure

>>130929358
Just explain what light is until you reach the double slit experiment to blow everyones mind, then read genesis. It is the first thing that God gave His divinal approval. Give example of physicists that believed in God and tell him that if the people that he "worship" believed in God the burden of proof lies with him.

>>130929358
Religion is based on faith. You only have to prove the existence of something that you've *claimed* exists. You can't prove the existence of God, nobody can, that's not the point. If you could prove unequivocally that God exists, then there would be no need for faith, because people would know. It would be a monumental disaster that would undermine the reason we were sent to this earth in the first place (According to Christianity, at least)

If you're claiming that God exists, you're doing it wrong. Make no claims, only express your belief. If only you believe in him, you have nothing to claim and nothing to prove to the fedora-tipping anti-theists. They can't touch you that way, they can only disagree because their hearts are so hardened. But now they have leverage on you and will crucify you in the debate. Kinda painted yourself into a corner there, m8.

All I can say is own up and admit that you can't prove anything, but also explain why it is that you can't prove it and why the point of religion is not proof but faith.

>>130930975
None of what you said actually helps him argue for gods existence.

>>130930573
There are two sides to the coin, a supernatural creator or a natural process devoid of purpose. You can color all the nuances all you want, but the debate comes down to that binary.
>>130930589
brilliant retort, socrates would be proud. I can tell you have no idea about the millennia-old discussion, so why dont you browse a little and catch up to the rest of us, kid
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

Protip: If you hypothesize that the entire cosmos is naturally occuring, you have to prove it before you can claim it as true. This is recognized to be an impossible task, and as such, modern science is understood to be as faith based as religion when it comes to the epistemological limitations of either one.

>>130929358

>Everything that exists had a cause
>The universe exists
>The universe has a cause
>I call this cause God

atheist : "Well why not just admit you don't know what caused the universe like everybody else"

you:
>shut up fedora fag!
>cry
>kys

File: i'm gonna bump you.png (301KB, 405x497px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 405x497px

>>130929358
>i have to prove god's existence

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You're fucked.

>>130929358
>lel big bang ok by catholic church
>micro vs macro evolution and time frame issues (see Darwins Black Box, the book)
>that one paradox about why aliens n sheeet arnt everywhere that psudo proves we are alone in the universe
>gods abundent punishments seen everywhere

>>130931034
Theists make the worst word salads and logical loopholes to rationalize the failure of their paradigm in face of evidence
It's obnoxious as fuck, and especially ironic coming from a country of heathens like burgerland

>>130929358
Binge watch doctor Peterson's Maps of meaning.

>>130929358

It is quite simple, talk about Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard. Basically man dismisses God when he mistakes what consciousness means.

>>130929358
Memes aside you're fucked because you logically can't prove God's existence. There's simply too many fallacies lmao

File: 1426602335287.jpg (111KB, 550x413px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 550x413px

>>130929358
Is my country turning into leddit neckbeardry? What school is this and why are your teachers pushing atheism?

File: download.jpg (8KB, 235x214px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 235x214px

>>130929987
>unironically watching this shit movie .

are you fucking stupid
it's impossible to prove that god exists, the argument for religion is based on morals and virtue

>>130929358
Get ready, I'm dropping something here that doesn't disprove or prove God but makes all belief except for Islam and Judaism possible in the platonician mathematical realm.

>>130931564
>First of, get familiar with Plato's Theory of Ideas and Parmenide's Existential Paradox
>Get familiar with the Universal Equation Theory
>Get familiar with the Universal Perfect System Theory
>Consider all of them as true for the sake of this argument
>The Universe is entirely regulated by one equation, which would make that equation a perfect system.
>That perfect mathematical/physical system is capable of being deconstructed into small parts for our use in approximate calculations and actions according to proportionnal circumstances (i.e.: basic gravitational laws for architecture, where you don't take into account cosmic rays, radiations or other natural catastrophies occuring at a 0.00000000...1 propability rate)
>Same goes for Plato's Theory, in which we nitpick virtues off of Perfection for circumstancial use (i.e.: Courage in face of danger in battle, where wisdom and kindness is not take into account, etc.)
COULD SPIRITUALITY BE CONSTITUTED THE SAME WAY AS THOSE TWO MODELS?
>Consider this equation :
1=?
>One would be one unit, implying the unit is a perfect system because there's nothing affecting it practically
>The "?" would be the physical manifestation and/or perception of that force in the physical world. Note that the result still comes as one, but because of the physical world's nature and proportions, this side of the equation can never be reduced to one.
Spirituality could be reduced to a perfect system the same way as physics and philosophical concepts are, because of its elementary attributes: it has a cause and an effect in the physical world.
In the next post: practical examples of this.
(1/5)

>>130931506
>you cant prove something because there are too many bad arguments

jesus christ, canada. at least learn what the words mean, first

>>130931595
>Let's take it to the spiritual levels
>First off, Animist, Spiritualism, Shamanism and Fetichism theories
Let's consider the previous points as true.
Then, on a Perfect Level, every religion should be considered 1=1. However, in the material world, they all deconstruct in similar fashions, from one unit of Perfection, usually a primordial force that formed the Cosmos.
Let's take the four above religious groups, for example :
In Perfect World
1=1
In material world, senses manifestation
1=1/x
"x" meaning the numbers of potential spiritual recipients in the Physical universe
(Note : this is a wildly innaccurate formula. Most of these spiritual essences have different "weights" than some, but overall it is still an accurrate representation of the principle of it all)
See, Perfection of a spiritual essence is divided in all things more or less equally in a pattern that can be retraced approximately back to One ; usually considered the All-Maker, the Dreamland, the Void, etc. meaning that there was only ONE thing before everything else.
>Polytheistic religions theories
Same as the previous, with new variables
In the Perfect Level :
1=1
In the Material Universe :
1=a+b+c+...+z
Here, the variables are not about the amount of possible vessels, which is set, but the possible spiritual powers, over the material Universe, that these divine essences or entities possess.
Overall, it still come back to one, since they work in a system (what we call a pantheon) that WOULD be the "perceived" Perfection we get of them, but this is also false, because it is actually part of a cosmogony that also predicts the fall and rebirth of this world as well as its origins, meaning that Perfection, in most of these beliefs, would be the Cycle of Rejuvenation and Destruction experienced by most natural systems like the water cycles, life/death/digestion/reproduction/life cycle, etc.
(2/5)

>>130931626
Okay, so consider this first :
>The Physical Universe is the only perfect, closed system known to Man
>The Physical Universe is entirely evolving from a single equation that controls its every physical actions and reactions
Therefore, the Physical Universe is perfect.
Hence, we can use the unit (1) to singularize the Physical Universe.
>Now comes Plato's theory
Even if the Physical Universe is perfect, it is proportionally imperfect until you look at the ensemble
Therefore, the Physical Universe can be decomposed.
Just like Ideas in Plato's theories.
>Here comes the concrete examples
Then lets take the Physical Universe as a comparable
Let's say that one (1) is equal the the ensemble of every physical laws existing in this Physical Universe
1=a+b+c+...
In Ultimate proportion, which is the contemplation of the Whole (let's name it the "Perfect Level"), then the Universe, whatever the equations making it, is still 1=1.
Couldn't the same be said about the deconstruction of Perfection, in Plato's theory?
1 Perfection = 1 Perfection in the Perfect Level
but
1 Perfection = a+b+c+d+... in the Virtue/Abstract/Mathematical/Physical/Human/Animalistic Levels
Therefore, following natural laws, Perfection, on a whole, is undeniable, but can be deconstructed.
(3/5)

>>130929358
If the universe is infinite god is one of infinite possibilities

If the universe is finite then god exist as the absolutes that define the universe.

>>130931653
>Dualist theories
This one is simple
Perfect Level:
1=1
Material Universe's manifestation:
1=a+b
The Universe, spiritual as well as material, would be divided in two opposing entities or concepts : Good/Evil, Life/Death, Light/Darkness, etc.
This theory is mostly a more primordial approach to deistic polytheism, because it conserves the elements that trace back both of these divine essences to a Cycle of Light and Darkness.
>The question of Islam and Judaism
This is where everything falls apart.
Muslim and Jewish doctrines claim that their Gods are indivisible AND perfect, meaning that, theorically :
Perfect Level :
1=1
Material universe's manifestation :
1=1
BUT THAT ISN'T MONOTHEISM
There are two theories that could represent this formula, and you'll understand it pretty quickly.
>FIRST THEORY
There is a God, but he cannot manifest in the Physical World because he IS the physical World, and therefore obeys its laws.
>SECOND THEORY
There is a God, but it could only be the observer of this equation (meaning you, dear reader).
Do you see the discrepancy? This is not the formula for monotheism ; this is the formula for nihilism/egoism for the latest or atheism in the first case.
There is also the theory that they exist only in the Perfect World. Bu then, how could we have grasped its manifestation in the physical Universe to start with? It simply doesn't correlate.
>The question of Christianity
Wait isn't Christianity like the other Abrahamic faiths?
No, it's not. Chrisitanity (at least anything that isn't aryanism) preach that God is divided into essences, which are perfect in the ensembles, inseparable in duty, but imperfect take alone.
Strangely platonic, isn't it? Also, wouldn't that be the same as just pointing at the equation from gravitation and relativity and saying "it's aprt of the Universe, so it's perfect as a whole"?
(4/5)

>>130929358
Nobody can prove the existence of god, retard, stop believing in bullshit and admit you have an irrational belief or get laughed at for years, your chocie

>>130931691
>FORMULAS FOR CHRISTIANITY
Perfect Level :
1=1
Material Universe's manifestation
1=a+b+c
where a is the Father, b the Son and c the Holy Spirit.
all have equal values, but cannot be taken together on this scale to form Perfection.
>CONCLUSION
Islam and Judaism have no mathematical formulation in this model. I dare you to find one actually and to contradict me.
And because they have no mathematical formulations in this model, it means they don't exist.
Ergo, Islam and Judaism are frauds.
Ce qu'il fallait demontrer
(5/5)

you can't prove god's existence you underaged faggot
way to miss the entire point of the religion you claim to follow

>>130929358
no matter what your proof for god will be their proof for no god
admit that believing requires faith
and then argue the best argument for intelligent design you have faith in intelligent design
they do not you will never convince them
but where they see science you see gods guiding hand

>>130929380
read the classics faggot. Don't act like you're hot shit, everything worth saying is already been said.

>>130930589
hes right, OP just put him on the defensive, get him to make a claim and then just find one exception to his claim and keep doing that until he gets mad

File: 1490596052964.jpg (67KB, 480x608px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 480x608px

Maydole's modal perfection argument is a good one that doesn't often come up.
Universal fine tuning is my personal favourite.

Majority of the time debates will be something like the theist giving a deductive argument for god's existence and then the atheist saying but where is the evidence.
All you have to do is defend the premises of the argument as more plausible than the alternatives and you're good.

Also if you have time throw in a couple of anti-materialism arguments. Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism is a good one there.

>>130931732
>TL;DR
God (as in the Holy Trinity of God) has a mathematical possibility of existing, along with many other deities not including Allah and Yahweh.
It doesn't answer your question, but it's the closest I can give you.

>>130931304
>purpose
Purpose is a subjective term

>>130930217
this. if you still lose sue the school for discrimination

File: 1487326037822.jpg (52KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 512x512px

>>130929358
Jordan Peterson's ideas on religion are pretty interesting. Depends on how much time you want to put into preparing, but watching a couple of his videos and taking notes can help.

Looked through my Deus Vult folder for red pills to drop but most of them are just arguing against the "kike on a stick" faggots.

Say that existence either is infinity or had a starting point from nothing. The later option violates laws of thermodynamics and the first one is inconceivable unless there was once a state of timeless existence, because by definition there has to be a start.
Either way, none of this is proof god exists but i can guarantee to you that the fedora neckbeard will not have proof that he doesnt exist either. So you should focus on trying to make people think and not to find proof.

If they come with "muh cancer babies" make them understand that we are not made directly in the image of god. God is most likely a force responsible for starting existence. It does not care for the chaotic nature of its creation and all the moral evaluations we do of the matter are flawed because they come from a human mind, the same mind that doesnt even understand their own purpose and mortality, much less existence.

If your defending the jew god youre fucked. Focus on how important it is for moral values and shit, and if they say "IM SMART AND I HAVE MORALS AND IM ATHEIST" tell them good for them but that they have to understand theres always dumber people in a society that need guidance. It is a mechanism for overall betterment, not individual. but people wont agree with you so youre just fucked.

>>130929358
kek, that's what you get for sperging out in school, faggot
Also, didn't the summer holidays start here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hWE52zsOaA

>>130929358
Dont prove god exists, prove atheism is dumb.

>>130931435
>logical loopholes

Logic doesn't really work on religion. It's not meant to be something you can provide evidence for. The only concrete argument you can provide for it is demonstrating its benefits, but even that is asking for trouble.

>>130932006
>but people wont agree with you so youre just fucked.
this

>>130929358
watch a full william lane craig debate

no one beats him, he is the best debater out there today even though he is a heretic protestant

File: degeneration.gif (3MB, 382x204px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 382x204px

>>130929358
Look for Peter Hitchens videos about God

>>130929358
You can't.

Apologists have been trying since organized religions competed memetically for adherents. Anything you can use to 'prove' your deity's existence can be used to 'prove' any other deity's existence.

You cant.If you could prove the existence of God,there would be no islam,no buddhism,no hinduism,because none of them can prove it.Just like you cant.End of story.

>>130931976
It's a debate on the existance or non-existance of God, you twat.

Is the universe perfectly objective or is there a subjective force at least at the point of creation if not driving it forward continuously.

>>130929358
You cannot prove he exists. You dont have to. You have to give them good reasons why to believe God exists over believing he doesn't

File: 1495981202586.jpg (80KB, 766x960px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 766x960px

>>130929875
What a load of bullshit, how can people even consider this an actual argument? You have to be prettu fukin retarded.

>>130932454
Truth doesnt care if you believe it or not.Its still truth.

I believe people misunderstand God and Gods.
At first we were all polytheists, putting Gods responsible for things like facts of human life like war and agriculture or human emotions like hatred, love and rage.
Monotheist religions replaced the various gods by angels and demons and helped giving back free will to believers as opposed to fatalism.
God is the concept of good and evil, with a "holier than thou" morality.

File: imge.jpg (10KB, 329x153px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 329x153px

>>130932560
forgot the pic

>>130932560
>a fucking catholic

>>130929358
Dude start trolling and tell them God exists because the Earth is flat. Look up Eric Dubays 200 flat earth proofs on YouTube and Brian mullin flat earth engineer for the science. If they say NASA tell them it's only a belief and it's an appeal to authority.

>>130929380
Ignorance is a bliss. We refer to a higher being as God because we can not explain it in our language yet. Even Steven Honkins agreed to the fact that there is a higher being than us presumably called God.

good job idiot

>>130929380
Godel's incompleteness Theorem. Look it up and BTFO that smug athiest fuck.

Also make sure you define god as something provable. Make sure that faggot doesn't try to box you into proving an anthropomorphic sky man. God is the universe, he is what is far within and far without.

>>130930094
christian rules aren't better than any other, pure christianity from the bible is a lot more like judaism than the christianity we have today (or would have, if you guys even pretended to believe in your religion)

>>130929358
Here's what you do:
1. boot science out: science can't disprove or approve God's existence so science is irrelevant to the discussion i.e. science can't falsify the existence of God in a comprehensible context.

2.God is a mental reality meaning whether real or not Got will exist in a person's mind i.e. it has real mental entity verifiable by each believer who fell it and can define it. Most mental realities verified by the majority are considered/accepted as real truths in a historical time or defined as truly real meaning God is real.

& last one is a crowd pleaser and appeaser

3.God is useful and it is a tool for survival, just leach on the placebo effect and good moral practices beneficial to the health and society so you can compare God to the concept of justice or freedom, we all know justice is real so God is real the same way and since we accept something as useful as justice we should accept something as useful as God.

Boom! You won.

>>130930573
A rejection is the same as a proposition you retard. "Nothingness" is not a priori more likely than "somethingness" because it is also a human construct.

Actually OP just say that.

>>130932805
Fuck off kikestein.

>>130930455
There are logical arguments to disprove existance of gods from human written fiction like the bible though.

>>130932718
Nigga do you mean Stephen Hawking?

File: 1495819204746.jpg (37KB, 298x288px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 298x288px

>>130929358
Well, you're fucked. Should probly just kys. No girl at that school will ever touch your dick after you spaghetti infront of literally everyone there.

>>130932924
Kek
Most young people in Croatia are religious
I remember when my mate said that he doesn't believe in god, everybody in the school stopped talking to him just because of that
If anything, the atheist will get fucked

>>130932487
>expecting religious people to not be retarded with equally retarded ways of thinking

File: 1469904266324.jpg (203KB, 679x760px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 679x760px

bro just have god descend a lightning bolt which strikes down from the clouds through the gymnasium roof, you'll be fine then and your audience will be like OHLY SHIT HE WAS RIGHT FUCK and want to get baptized asap.
foolproof duh, do it pussy. 'with faith 'anything' is possible' .. the crocks of shit people believe..

>>130932113
Why wouldn't it work on religion ? Is there an international council on logic and shit that said so and doing otherwise creates a dimensional rift ?
Again, your own personal bias bears no impact on the issue. As a phenomenon in nature, religion can get as much scrutiny as art, economy or psychology

File: 1496776902934.jpg (244KB, 750x522px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 750x522px

>>130929358
OK, you are going, both of you, to look stupid.

The atheist cannot prove God doesnt exist.
The believer has no proof.

KEK

That is one of the reason i am agnostic.
That, and the fact that God is xenos scum and only the emprah deserves my loyalty

>>130929358
Sounds like the plot of this movie lol

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2528814/reference

>>130929358
You cant prove something that doesnt exist.

>>130929358
“And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.”
—Judges 1:19

>>130929358
Seeing as you will be arguing for a falsehood maybe you can get some inspiration from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

>>130931304
>cosmos is naturally occuring, you have to prove it before you can claim it as true. This is recognized to be an impossible
w r o n g
so anyone who believes something has to prove it for it, so you can't make any debatable claim?

Read Case for Christ by Lee Stroble. He by far does the best job.

>>130933182
The philosophic burden of proof lies upon the person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims, this is a basic thing you fags don't get

File: HeresyStamp.png (81KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 350x350px

>>130933182
There is no such things as gods, only the Imperial Truth.

>>130932804
>god is the universe!

How convenient, so Christcucks now
only have to prove the universe exists rather than proving their particular benevolent omnipotent god exists. Really stimulates the synapses.

>>130929358
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3w-o1X4tLI

By logic, which we all hold as true, there are two possibilities:

one of these exists: God, burma, the ether, spirituality, an all-power, wyrd, fate, souledness, etc.


or none of them exist.


Similarly: either the universe exists, or it doesn't.

Clearly the universe exists. For some reason there is stuff here instead of nothing at all, which is remarkable and a point of wonder deserving its own discussion. The physicist cannot escape this, empiricism is doomed - fated to wrestle with this fact. For how can they reach beyond, past the brink of existence itself to begin their postmosern interrogation of its majesty?

No, we are all subject to this observation: There Is.

I simply ask people to notice that this is no different from the original proposition.

>>130929358

I can help you PROVIDED you don't want to prove the "god" of the bible.

>>130929358
you don't need to know. your religion is based on faith (i.e. you believe). a theoretical physicist can THINK that there is no need for a god for a universe to come from nothing based on solid science, but a fedora student needs faith to believe in what that scientist is saying unless he does the equations himself.

>>130929358
Just agree with them that science is good but can't explain miracles like the ressurection of Christ or the healing powers of saints like Saint Joseph from Montreal. Say that we as a society have advanced so much scientifically we think we have all the answers and we forget we don't actually have scientific explanations for how these miracles occur and that's why it's important to keep an open mind. When they start trying to debunk that just shake your head while smirking condescendingly and then say uh no sweetie I think scholars would have debunked it by now but I like your enthusiasm. Firmly state there is no way to prove or disprove the existenxe of god and anyone who is staunchly atheist cannot be correct.

You're welcome

>>130929358
Tvoja drzava je jebanija nego moja

>>130929358
This is what happens when you take your christcuck larping outside of /pol/ christlarp threads. In real life, religion has been BTFO and your ass is going to torn apart I guarantee it. Go ahead and mumble "d-deus vult" and get laughed off the stage. Serves you right for worshipping a kike on a stick anyway.

File: Jaden+Smith+gEpwnr3Be5nm.jpg (22KB, 360x240px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 360x240px

>>130929358
Just say the majority of people are braindead retards and belief glues society together instead of letting the norm be created by people with bad intentions or greed. Faith and good spirit purges evil, in this day and age people believe satan to be some guy in horns but it can be used to describe ideals in sociopaths or pedophiles for instance.
Tell them to put on channel 25 on their television and see some pregnant whore being prepared to be the worst parent ever, without faith the stupid people can't judge that this being on television is bad for them, old people both smart and stupid would say it's the devils work, now people don't do that cause they have bad framework for that kind of thinking. Majority of people are followers, we now let sociopaths take the lead and not a scripture with good intentions, no matter if you believe in a man in the sky or not it's so much better to believe in the good in humanity through actual guidelines in order to purge evil and lead the weak.

>>130933220
You can prove something doesn't exist.
... you kike.

File: 1152478639524.jpg (2KB, 116x126px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 116x126px

>>130933483
>that science is good but can't explain miracles like the ressurection of Christ or the healing powers of saints like Saint Joseph from Montreal
Could it be because those things are fabricated?

File: gon sidering the following.png (5KB, 415x416px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 415x416px

>>130929358
>lol I have to do something literally no one in history has been able to do help me out /pol/ :DD
How about you grow out of sandnigger mythologies already instead?

>>130929358
You're fucked anon, God is a matter of faith.
Also, underage b&.

>>130930223
But the banana shown has been selectively bred by humans, and is actually easier to peel by pinching the the bottom end than pulling the stem.

>>130933460
my point is, your debate strategy should be to show how ignorant the atheist guy also is.
science was shown time and time again to be skewed to powerful people's agendas. i don't trust science the way i used to.

>>130930223
It fits in your ass as well, you should try.

>>130929380
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

Teleological and ontological argument too

AHAHAHAH HE BELIEVES IN AN IMAGINARY FRIEND THAT MADE ALL BEINGS AND KNOWS ALL HAAHHA

You're a grown man with an imaginary friend OP KYS

>>130933322
I totally know how it works.
But if the something cannot be seen, touched etc, it is impossible to prove it exists or not.
That's why you cannot mix logic and faith . At all. smartass.

>>130929358
Did you specify which god? If not, I can probably help you bullshit your way out of it. If it's just "prove the existence of a god/gods" it'll be fine. Otherwise, you're fucked. Nobody can prove the existence of a god. But, here you go. Best I can do to weasel you out of it.

>What do you imagine when you think of God? The ability to create life, light, create and destroy worlds?
>Humans have created new forms of life, a great example being genetically modified food and domestic canines. Altering the genetic code of plants and animals to suit our needs.
>The advent of electricity and the lightbulb means we can create, and extinguish light at our will
>We took our hostile world and shaped it as we saw fit, transforming it from a jungle into a concrete jungle
>By this definition, we are god.

Good luck op, you fucked up.

Your ancestors are ashamed.
When we have nothing we have faith.
What do you have?

>>130929358
A bunch of "DUS VELT" larpers on /pol/ won't help you: there is no God nor any proofs of its existence. Cancel the debate asap unless you want to look like a dumbass and be laughed at by the entire school.

>>130932804
Godel's incompleteness theorem doesn't even remotely prove the existence of God, it's not even relevant to the debate

OP is fucked, because there is no evidence for the existence of a god

>>130929358
You're probably fucked. But your best bet is to read Prometheus Rising and formulate an argument based on the nature of consciousness and our lack of understanding of it.
OR you can recreate the argument from its always sunny in Philadelphia and become a legend amongst your peers.

>>130929358
Here's one of the strongest arguments I've ever heard. There's really no refutation if you don't let him weasel out and shift the subject. You need to just autistically insist that he justify how an infinite chain of contingent beings makes any sense or provides an explanation for existence. And he sure as FUCK won't have the sophistication of Bertrand Russel to raise objections.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hXPdpEJk78E

Spinoza's proof of God seemed pretty damned solid, look that up.

>>130929358
You can't prove God. You can, however, get enough doubt to make people question themselves. Try something like.
>define "god" as someone or something that can create a universe
>explain how in the future we'll run computer simulations of increasing complexity until we're eventually simulating a "universe"
>if we can create a simulated universe it stands to reason that through happenstance eventually life will develop in it, and develop computers that run simulations of universes
>if the universe we made made a universe, logically there's a better chance our universe is a simulation running in another simulated universe than the "top-level" universe
>also because we created a universe like ours we could be called "gods"
>because our universe is a simulation a "god" made it
>therefore god
Try to get into the philosophical arguments of "what is a universe?" or "what is god?". If all else fails fall back on the 4chan debate technique of choice and call him a faggot.

>>130929358
Focus on the difference between evolution and darwinism, you may also wish to look at the similarity between structures in the universe and neurons. Holographic universe would be good to touch on.

Be scientific and avoid discussing scripture as the topic is not the validity of scripture.

OP abandoned the thread this is officially dead and belongs in /bant// any way
MODS
O
D
S

>>130929358
I you can't ratinalize an opinion you shouldn't have it.

If you need someone else to argue for you it just means that you've accepted an opinion without knowin why, in other words you've been jewed.

File: 1395424695704.jpg (24KB, 506x513px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 506x513px

Check out Christopher Hitchens. He's a pretty devout Christian and one of the best debaters I've ever seen. He should be able to help you if you watch some of his videos, anon

Argue about how gnosticism was the true religion and how romans first, then christians persecuted them until the light was extinguised, then show the evils of the church as proof that it has a dark power behind it.

Drop a few red pills about the jews while mentioned that they made a pact with darkness.

>>130933939
>atheists cant tell me the meaning of life therefore they are wrong xDdddd

Love how Christfags have to move the goalposts this far to even stand up in a debate.

>>130933182
Smug agnostics are the worst, are you also agnostic about the existence of pink unicorns? Fuck no

Until evidence is presented there is no reason to believe in a God, which makes you an Atheist. You don't have to disprove god to be an Atheist.

>>130933829
I actually communicate with Hitler's ghost at nights. Only I can see and hear him though. My claim is as plausible as Christianity. So do you think I'm lying or do you apply the same philosophy to my claim and say "Gee I don't know it's possible that Hitler speaks to some greek faggot at night since I can't prove otherwise"

>>130929380
>>130929358
>convinced of his existence
>need to poach arguments from other people
lel

>>130934118
yeah but the belief that the universe comes from nothing is also smug.

>>130934117
Try watching the video, retard.

>>130934279
this.

OP is retarded.

>>130934320
But no scientist ever said that, nice try though

>>130933829
Then what is the fucking point ?
We have observed gravitational waves for a third time recently, using the best scientific knowledge and equipment we have
So far, after all the major breakthrough we still haven't correlated anything close to divinity, through either calculations or observations, and we keep pushing the boundaries
If it can't been proven to exist, then it doesn't affect reality

>>130929358
Anselm's ontological argument. Thank me later.

File: 1383873451543.gif (2MB, 480x271px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x271px

>>130929358
follow this guys train of thought

>>130929358
You could always scream "DEUS VULT!" before drawing your longsword and charging your opponent. Then explain that you were possessed by the Holy Spirit to attempt slaying the heretic?

>>130932830
>boot science out: science can't disprove or approve God's existence so science is irrelevant to the discussion i.e. science can't falsify the existence of God in a comprehensible context.

They're gonna crucify him for that because the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If the fedora tipper had claimed that god does *not* exist then it would immediately put OP in the advantage because that's one logical fallacy they can't use against him. But if that were the case, this thread wouldn't exist because OP would ideally have just ignored the challenger. "I believe. You don't. Why are you challenging my belief by forcing your unverifiable opinions on me?" the tables would be flipped.

File: lk.jpg (95KB, 710x1080px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 710x1080px

>>130934441

Tell them that the creator god is a dark power that hides in the shadow and that's why there's no evidence.

>>130929358
are you retarded?
just make fun of his fedora hat and you win

>>130934572
>Physicist David Albert said the book failed to live up to its title; he claimed Krauss dismissed concerns about what Albert calls his "misuse" of the term nothing

It's just a catchy title, the book isn't actually about nothingness

File: 1492879290003.jpg (40KB, 800x651px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 800x651px

Watch memri TV for a master class in debating infidels.

Tell them you know God is real because he spoke to you in your dreams. He told you his real name is Allah and if anyone speaks against him you must cut their head off. Yell Allah Akbar and it should all be good

>>130929358
Ur fucked

>>130929358
izazovi malog pedera da se ubije jer ako nema Boga ni zivota poslije smrti trebalo bi mu bit svejedno kad po tom misljenju svi umremo i nakon toga nema niceg pitaj ga koja je onda svrha zivota uopce, naravno nece se ubit jer ga je strah a strah ga je zato jer je to ugradeno u nas mozak a ugradeno je kako bi imali savijest koja nas navodi na ispravno ponasanje i samim tim spasenje odnosno ka Bogu

>>130934572
So fucking what? You can try to maybe say that's a religious belief that scientists hold, but the science itself only talk about a few moments after the singularity, the scientific model works just fine. If they try to extrapolate what happened before so what they're being retarded, a lot of them are marxists too.

>>130929358
How did the universe start?
>big bang
So something came from nothing
>yep
But energy can't be created or destroyed merely transmuted, right?
>r-right
Ergo the universe couldn't have come from nothing.
>your move atheists

Define God as all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful.
Now consider solipcism.
Option 1: things cannot exist without proof
__Then given the principle of "cogito ergo sum" we arrive at the conclusion that only the observer, yourself, exists.
__Since you are all that exists, provided you know yourself, love yourself and have power over yourself,
__Then you know all, love all, and have power over all, thus you are yourself God.
Option 2: things can exist without proof
__Then of all the things that can exist without proof; an all-powerful being would have the power to do this.

>>130934800
in most of his debates Krauss says exactly that (that a universe can come from nothing).
in hawking latest book he claims the same on his last chapter.

>>130929358
Talk about Buddhism, Hinduism or zoroastrianism. The fedorafag won't expect it, all his arguments will be for Christianity and islam.

>>130929380
Saint Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

>all changes are initiated by some outside force
>this chain of cause and effect cannot be infinite
>their must be a first mover

It's pretty straightforward.

>>130929987
>athiests say you can't prove the existence of god
>but athiests can't disprove the existence of god
You literally cannot do this in an argument. It's like saying "why is national socialism bad"
"why is national socialism good?"
See it just doesn't work...

>>130932891
No, there are logical arguments to disprove human works of fiction as "the true word of God".

You can prove the Bible is imperfect. This does not disprove the Christian concept of God and/or Jesus itself, it simply disproves the idea that the Bible can be trusted as a perfect source of knowledge. And if the bible can not be trusted as such, then it follows that anything it says about God cannot be trusted.

But God can still exist.

Nothing proves or disproves the existence of God. Nothing proves or disproves the natural creation of the cosmos, either. Its an interesting problem.

Now I am a physicist and am pretty hard core into science, but I don't skimp on the philosophical side concerning the pursuit of knowledge, either. I have to be honest when asked, and respond that no, we cannot prove anything about the moment of creation.

If anything, it raises some very interesting questions, as it appears that the tenets of modern science are violated concerning the creation of the universe: If everything is causal in a purely objective universe, then what caused the universe itself? You cannot escape this problem with an infinite universe (either cyclical or linear), as this itself is without cause. At best, you can claim a "natural" foundation that transcends causality, but this is, by definition, super-natural (not in the mystical sense but in the pure physics sense) as the natural laws do not and can not in any way describe such a mechanism.

As beings who are firmly trapped within a causal reality, made up in fact by the very same stuff that our box is by definition of reality, can we even pretend to say that we could understand such a phenomenon as non-causal relationships? Time is at the very core of our being. It defines reality and everything we know about reality.

This is the epistemological hard-limit for science. I have yet to hear the faintest argument for how to breach it, just as I have yet to hear a proof of God.

>>130935093
Most common response to that would be the multiverse theory and from there you go to play the infinity games beyond

>>130935125
You're just misunderstanding his usage of the word nothing, which takes a different context in cosmological arguments.

Regardless it's philosophy at that point and not science, so it's not particularly relevant.

>>130933276
what part of
>if you want to claim it as true
do you fail to grasp?

this entire debate is lost on you.

>>130930354
William Lane Craig is a clown.

>>130929380
Take the Peterson vs Harris approach, OP.

>>130929358
>>130929358
>dude, havent you even smoke DMT?

>>130929358
Go on the defensive and try to get someone to prove there is no god. Then say your belief in god is no less valid then their belief in no god. It's the only thing crazy religious people have been able to do for thousands of years.

>>130935384
>multiverse, infinity
thats a bad argument as it doesn't escape the problem of causality, see
>>130935308

>>130935538
>uneducated retard thinks this is a valid argument
Disprove Russel's Teapot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

>>130935384
>but the multiverse
So that's where there is an infinite numbers of universes right?
>yeah literally anything that can happen will or has happened
So like the existence of God?
>gulp
>your move atheists

File: 1436310541124-christian.jpg (67KB, 720x705px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 720x705px

You've already lost so just go full retard for a laugh

>>130929358
>gymnasium
B&

File: voodoo.jpg (34KB, 256x308px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 256x308px

>>130933009
my bad, didn't realize OP was from a 3rd world shit hole.

>>130929358
Yeah, OP, just change the rules every time he's verbally beating your ass. That's how you win this kind of debate.

>naw, man. God isn't a dude in the sky, he's like the universe n' shit!
>naw, that's not how god works. It works like this!
>naw, that's not how god works. It works like this!
>naw, man. God isn't the universe, he's a feeling in all of us n' shit!
>naw, that's not how god works. It works like this!
>naw, that's not how god works. It works like this!
>naw, that's not how god works. It works like this!
>naw, man. God isn't a feeling. He's an invisible monkey that lives in my ass on another dimensional plane and cannot be detected ever by mortal means so you can't ever prove me wrong therefor I win check mate.

Bitches will eat that shit up. You'll be king of the school. Teachers will suck your dick after class.

Unless, he starts the whole thing off by having you define god, and stick to one definition of god for the debate. Then you're fucked and should kys.

>>130929358
Occam's Razor should work in your middleschool environment, Anonski.

>>130929358

Use this opportunity to Redpill normies about the Jew instead

File: 2977b60703755162d08c713f96f30253.jpg (74KB, 495x650px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 495x650px

>>130929358
Wow, you are so cool. I wish we were friends.

I didn't even understand the last part of what you said. You sound like a fucking loser.

>>130929380
>best arguments anyone?

god defines the complete laws of the physical universe

>tfw nobody will acknowledge your arguments

why argue?

>>130929358
you can't prove god exists, you pleb
that's why it's called faith

>>130930354
/Thread

>>130929358
I'm an Atheist as well, but if I do have to recommend you this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjGPHF5A6Po

>>130929852
>lol. oh. well im sure you will do better than everyone else in the last 1000 years

he should just go right to plato on this

>>130935751
>Everyone not believing in god has the same idea of creation

Thanks for the warning, now noone has to argue with your stupidity.

Good job jackass, you can neither prove or disprove it but since you've started the argument you have the burden of proof, you've fucked yourself.

>>130929358

don't talk about god's existence

talk about the western morals of christianity and how even if you don't believe in god, don't be an autistic atheist who doesn't go to christmas because "HURR DURR GOD IS DEAD LOOK AT ME IN AN ATHEIST I DESERVE RESPECT"

anyone who actually loves western civilization if a christian, by moral or by belief

File: I'm retarded.gif (1024KB, 218x228px) Image search: [Google]

1024KB, 218x228px

>>130935751
Kek
>There have been billions of gods all with their own way of explaining how the world came to be
>But this is my god and it is the correct one
>My interpretation/religious sect of the book is the correct one, Christianity/Catholicism (take your pick) is incorrect and you will go to hell
>A book which literally says there was a talking snake, a boat that could hold two of every animal and the world flooded without the world cooking, that the dead rose, that somebody killed thousands of people with the jawbone of a donkey etc.
>Muh there was nuffin but god and god has always existed n nobody ever created god (even though you suggest that something cannot come from nothing).

Faggot.

>>130935308
Books like the bible make certain claims and discribe their gods and that can be disporven. So you can say that the god that the bible talks about doesn't make sense. You can't really disporove the general idea of a god though, but its not like you can prove it either.

>>130929358
you will lose

>>130936180
ban assault donkeys

>>130929358
Being needs to preceed nothing.
Nothing can't preceed being, because if it does, it had the possibility to "be", then it wasn't "nothing".

File: 0416a03d.png (92KB, 320x273px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 320x273px

>>130929380
Get and read The Last Superstition by Edward Feser. Should be adequate considering he'll most likely be using Dawkins arguments etc.

Go metaphysical on their ass, full thomist. Or philosophical theology.

Also for the future, don't start shit you're not already prepared to finish.

>>130929380
What format is the debate?

The goal of the debate is to crush your opponent, not to be right.

So I was thinking if it's a 15min you, 15min him type of deal

just open with 5-6 different argument that he won't be able to disprove in 15 mins

Use Kalam, Pascal's Wager etc.

here's some to get you started, make sure you pick to most convoluted and difficult ones.

http://strangenotions.com/god-exists/

Your best bet is probably to define god in the sense of the Mysteries, not the judeo-christian god.

>>130936247
you can say some of the specific claims about the god are bullshit. but more importantly, you can btfo anybody who attempts to use "there is a book" as an argument with any kind of actual merit.

>>130929358
What fucking school is this?

File: 1492050475431.jpg (106KB, 908x634px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 908x634px

>>130929358
Good luck proving something exists that doesn't exist

>>130936472
this

proving "any" god is easier than proving your specific one

>>130932113
Red Aquinas and the rest of the greats of the medieval world

File: images.jpg (12KB, 310x163px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 310x163px

Watch jordan peterson, and andrew klavan. If there is no god what stops you from just killing him, is it only for the good of the world, if so how come he has morals, they cannot be only be based on a scientific need for the species to thrive, or else eugenics is completily okay. The fact is, every civilization ever has been founded in some form of religion, because without god, there is no us. Your best bet is to rabbit hole him, you want to say " how is it then that the world is as it is, just by chance, weve had countless opportunities to destroy this earth, but are still here." After he says his endless possibilities nonsense, say "if I won 100 straight hands of poker with royal flushes and royal straights against the world champion and he pulled out a gun and said your cheating, any last words to change my mind, and you said... Well due to infinite possibilities... "BOOM" yer ded m8

You cant have a proper debate with him if you don't define what you both mean by god or you guys will just talk through eachother

Bonus points if you manage to successfully argue that denying the existence of god is equivalent to denying solipsism.

>>130929358
Pull a Hitchens on them. Watch this, it's mandatory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnIH4gomOqc


tl;dw
>[1] I can't prove that God does exist
>[2] My opponent can't prove that God doesn't exist
>therefore our belief is a matter of choice
>let's examine the world where theoretical God DOES exist, vs the one that DOESN'T
>in my option, in the end all good is rewarded, and evil is punished
>in my opponent's option, everything is the same and there will be no consequence other than social (if that one comes into being at all)
>his option is not a worthwhile one in constructing universal ethics, mine is
>He's still on about how God DOESN'T exist and above is irrelevant? See [1] and [2]

File: pretentious lit meme.jpg (44KB, 521x225px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 521x225px

Do you have time to read Roger Penrose's books? He doesn't "prove" god's existence, but does a great job at questioning simpleminded XIX century positivism.

>>130929358
Literally just copypaste some shit from Aquinas and the ontological argument.

>>130929358
The people challenging you to this have already made up their minds and they're using it as an opportunity to gratify themselves by beating on you. Don't take the bait. Admit that you were wrong for claiming anything and leave it at that.

No.130931304▶>>130931976 >>130933276
>>130930573
There are two sides to the coin, a supernatural creator or a natural process devoid of purpose. You can color all the nuances all you want, but the debate comes down to that binary.
>>130930589
>brilliant retort, socrates would be proud. I can tell you have no idea about the millennia-old discussion, so why dont you browse a little and catch up to the rest of us, kid
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God
>
>Protip: If you hypothesize that the entire cosmos is naturally occuring, you have to prove it before you can claim it as true. This is recognized to be an impossible task, and as such, modern science is understood to be as faith based as religion when it comes to the epistemological limitations of either one.

Douchebag, but a well spoken and irrefutably sensical douchebag.

>>130933276
>w r o n g
>so anyone who believes something has to prove it for it, so you can't make any debatable claim?

Uh, that's his point. You can believe anything you want, but you're either operating out of PROOF or out of FAITH. That's his exact claim.

>>130929358
I see what you did there, fedoralord.
In the remote chance that this is not trolling, you obviously fucked up, and your best chance is to go full Jordan Peterson about your ""religiosity"".

File: 8fcdbe7f1e61d9619a335d91704a55c3.jpg (34KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 413x395px

>>130936296
Apparently God gave Sampson (I think it was his name) the ability to kill thousands with this jawbone. That sounds objectively believable, true and non-fabricated along with the rest of the book for sure.

OP is a fucking retard.

Read and get it.

https://home.cern/topics/antimatter/matter-antimatter-asymmetry-problem

>>130936754
This is a terrible, terrible argument.

>>130929358
write "7777" on blackboard and claim "i got quads praise kek"

>>130929358

Have everyone take psychedelics.

File: Areyouamagnet.jpg (77KB, 531x513px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 531x513px

>>130936822
Motherfuckin' Miracles.

>>130929380
ok, you don't necessarily have to prove God, but a creator or someone who ordered the universe. If atheists come with chaos, bring order. Mathematical arguments, like the golden ratio. Also you can get into this new research saying that we are in a computer simulation. I wouldn't saying proving would be possible, but reasonable doubt is a very definite. Basically, is chaos so chaotic it brings order?

>>130936754
Holy shit what the fuck are you even saying

>>130935122

>0 counterarguments
did I win?

>>130937076
Sampson is surely just a repackaging of Ancient Roman mythos involving Hercules, himself a repackaging of Greek mythos.

The bible is full of cultural appropriation like this. Its theological history is one of the more interesting aspects of the book, I would argue.

I mean, it's literally one of the world's oldest collections of memes and meme-magic. We have so much to learn.

>>130929358

The double slit experiment suggested matter changes behaviour when we are observing it. This in turn leads us to believe that our reality is some kind of program/projection. If we consider someone has to be running the program then we have to ask whether whatever intelligence is running the program also has the same chance that they are a simulation too. This can go on for infinity until you consider that the simulation is running not on a computer but is running in the mind of God.

>>130929358
I am probably the one person on earth who could do such a thing, and help you, however the effort exceeds my rewards

>>130937728
very good anon,

>>130937472
Yeah you won. Now OP SIMPLY has to rationally defend that he's the only human being who exists, pretty easy if you ask me.

>>130937656
>Surely
Therein lies the problem DenmarkBro, it's subjective. One person's interpretation can be vastly different to another's whilst they both scream at each other that theirs is the right one and that the other person is going to hell for having their differing opinion/interpretation. Very strange.

This isn't to say that it's bad, I get that Catholicism has set the base framework for the western world and has made sure it doesn't become the shit pit everywhere else is, but nonetheless it can be retarded.

>>130937153
This is a matter of what happened immediately after the creation of the universe, and has little to nothing to say on the actual matter at hand, regarding how or why that creation occurred in the first place. This is because the Standard Model only describes the Universe as it exists. Deviations from theory are still fantastic opportunities to learn more, however.

>>130929358
He's going to take the le epic science route and try to paint you as "anti rational" or "anti science". Youll have to disable that argument by making the case that the concept of a "god" necessarily exists outside what we think of as the natural world. Faith isn't science because its a sense of knowing something greater exists. You're going to get pummeled but glhf

>>130937153
READ SOMETHING ELSE THAN SHITPOSTS!
cern scientists :
Some unknown entity intervening in this process in the early universe could have caused these "oscillating" particles to decay as matter more often than they decayed as antimatter.

>>130929380
start with Hamlet's soliloquy.

consider some of the arguments laid out by Lee Strobel in "The Case for Christ".

>>130937729
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
literally irl hahahahahahahahahaha
you fucking faggot

>>130937890
well I mean... prove that YOU exist.

>>130937728
along with the
- Double Slit experiment,

he could also touch on
- Fine Tuned vs Multiverse theory
(which are both baseless conclusions drawn from the same data)

he could use
- Masaru Emoto's Rice & Water experiments,

He could also take it into abstraction, stating that the nature of god itself is "Energy", and the nature of that energy is consciousness as observed in th double slit experiment, he could say

"the fundamental principles of matter themselves, change by mere human observation,"

he could also add

"the claim that the nature of matter changes when it comes in contact with the tool of observation is baseless, and supported by no theory or evidence"

File: 1490865657212.jpg (3MB, 2000x1754px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2000x1754px

>>130929358
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

There is good evidence for the historicity of the new testament. The Case for Christ is a good starting point. Many have come to faith by taking an honest look at the evidence and indeed say that not believing takes more 'faith'.

If theres no god why do we have compassion for criminals, and not have a universal death penalty, go for the morality argument, really if a belief were to spring purly from the ideas of the good of the world/ the human kind, then slavery would be great, and democracy is trash, because a lot of the voters shouldn't have the right, the contribute nothing, or if there is no morality then why cant we just bomb the entire middle east of korea, it would be a net gain, no more oil war or human trafficking on such a mass scale. Atheism without christian influence is purly a greater good kind of thing, thats where ideas like abortion genocide euthenasia, etc come from, because they are for the greater good supposedly. If we wanted to just follow the greater good philosophy, we should eliminate humans, because we have the potential to destroy our beautiful world.

>>130938132
Walk up and slap you
>you tell me
End of argument

>>130938372
Also if it wasn't obvious make sure you know the common gaytheist arguments and know how to counter them.

>>130938132
If I don't exist who's replying to you?
>inb4 it's all in my mind bro

You're gonna get up there and make yourself look like an ass.

>>130938086
Its not a proof, its a hypothesis and it is the same hypothesis that is being debated in this thread.

All you did is include a third party to the discussion, you haven't actually lent any weight to the argument one way or the other, other than pointing out that even Cern scientists admit that a God Hypothesis is a realistic possibility.

Now some of the pleb-tier athiests will have to chew on that for a while, but in reality its an argument from authority fallacy as nobody has any authority on this subject, not the pope, not the high-priest of CERN.

>>130929380
http://www76.zippyshare.com/v/TsQ8A98V/file.html

File: f5b45511bd9677f25cd1a7bb72370cb3.png (243KB, 575x385px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 575x385px

>>130929358
>>130929380
>2 posts by this ID

I feel like OP is just memeing and is not actually going to debate anyone. However if you are serious I demand you to provide proof of this incident and keep us posted whether you win or lose. I want to know the aftermath.

>>130937728
perhaps god is some kind of recursion

>>130933601
No you cant.
If you prove it,then it exists..

>>130938443
that doesn't prove anything.
>>130938544
literally not an argument

File: 1409104827316.jpg (134KB, 887x1097px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 887x1097px

>>130929358

OP, there is no way to prove God's existence.
That only something someone with no understanding of religion, especially Christianity, would do. In other words, you done goofed. Concede this right away and offer to discuss a closely related topic to occupy what time you're given. Your best argument is to admit that belief in God is formed on the basis of faith. Faith is the driving force. (Faith = you hold something to be true, but have no good reason for doing so.)

You need to get him to counter that statement by saying "well, we shouldn't hold things as true on the basis of faith". You can counter that by pointing out that literally everyone, no matter how intelligent, takes _something_ as true on the basis of faith. It doesn't necessarily have to be religious. Humans are flawed and tend to try to fill in the gaps of their understanding of reality with things they simply have faith are true. Accuse him of resorting to special pleading against religion on those grounds. Maintain that you think it's okay for people to hold things as true on the basis of faith provided those beliefs do no demonstrable harm. At this point, he might want to discuss what harm is and what is harmful, etc. Learn some philosophy on this topic.

Overall, I don't think you have a chance in hell at convincing anyone of anything since you opened this discussion by making such a novice mistake, so I'm not sure you would do a very good job following my advice. The easier path is to just find a way to get out of making a jackass of yourself in front of your school.

>>130938397
>If theres no god why do we have compassion for criminals
Because there's various degrees of criminality and they should be punished accordingly?
>>130938738
So do you actually believe in solipsism or did you bring it up as a meme?

File: bama.jpg (55KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x360px

>>130929358
>high school
Literally just meme through the debate and make him look like If-man

File: Buddy_christ.jpg (31KB, 370x284px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 370x284px

ITT "If you can't Dazzle them with Brilliance, Baffle them with Bullshit."

>>130936452
>Also for the future, don't start shit you're not already prepared to finish.
Good advice.
Also don't get trapped in the god is an old white dude in the sky argument. One thing that worked well for me was explaining god as more of a place holder for the unknown.

>>130935297

How can there be a first mover if all changes are initiated by an outside force?

>>130929358
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8

use college level debate skills on them

>>130929358
Just claim they are Islamophobic bigots if they don't believe in Allah and that fedoraism is part of the cishetero patriarchy. Claim that it is racist not except that the existence of God is a central truth of non-white existence that atheist rationalist is white colonialism.

File: 800pxtouched-by-his-noodly-appendage.jpg (94KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x480px

god can only be believed to not explain.

>>130934077
how is he a devout christian, when he is debating against all religion. in some videos even particularly
against christianity?

>>130938907
nah, I believe things can exist without proof, ie that they can self-prove.
so naturally God exists because of all things that could self improve, an omnipotent being would be one.

OP, there's no way you are going to beat some teenage fedora who jacks off to Hitchens and Dawkins at proving God exists, but if you shit all over atheism and actually show >>130930975 in a classroom, you will be a legend.

http://www.deism.com/deism_vs.htm

>>130937923
I would argue that the problem lies in the fact that people incorrectly claim their subjectivity is objectivity. But I imagine we are saying the same thing (Im just terribly pedantic when it comes to this kind of debate, as a matter of professional habit).

>>130929358
Just whip your dick out on stage and start jerking off, and keep saying "OH GOD, OH GOD, OH GOD..."
Debate will be over really quick and you'll be the victor. Nothing but win.

If the universe is an isolated system, (no outside influence) what caused all the matter in the universe to suddenly expand? If the Universe isn't isolated, how can you disprove a God that is outside of the universe?

t. Atheist (but I hate smug fucking assholes who try to disprove religion because it gives people hope, and I lost that, and I wish I could take it back, but I can't force myself to believe in something I don't believe in)

>>130938729
Actually, it is a common fallacy that you cannot prove a negative. While this is often the case, it comes down to a matter of boundary conditions on the problem and the manner of measurement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

>>130929971
>Easy; go up there and blow their minds by saying there is no God but allah
THIS.
Then blow their bodies with a suicide belt.

>>130929358
Atheists think that the burden of proof lies on you. They don't realize that the burden of proof ALSO lies on them. Only an agnostic has no burden.

The proof that atheists have to supply is this: Prove that God, or gods, is IMPOSSIBLE. Or at the very least, prove exactly how the universe and matter/energy was created.

If they resort to the common answer: "the universe always existed", then just replace God with "universe" in that sentence.

Having had this argument too many times to count, I'll save you some trouble. Atheists are in the SAME BOAT as theists when it comes to "looking like a silly religious cultist". Atheism is a religion. Atheism is a faith-based belief system. Just like theists, atheists can't prove their beliefs, they just have a "gut feeling".

File: Perry stumps himself.jpg (44KB, 634x632px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 634x632px

>>130929358
Why aren't you praying to God for inspiration in your hour of need, instead of asking a bunch of degenerates on a Mongolian Shadow Puppet board?

These guys can't successfully debate a gril into giving free pussy. Their best advice so far has you reading the works of asshats who lived in a time when Bleeding was the apex of medicine.

>>130937310
/thread

>>130940245
YEEAARRRRGHHH MATEY

File: 1471037246833.jpg (372KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 800x1000px

>>130929358
>>130929380
Just do what Christians do when you ask them - hold up the Bible and say "Says so here", then scurry off before they can ask any questions. If they manage to get something in, like the infamous "If God created the universe, what created God?" either pretend to have a coughing attack and excuse yourself, OR mutter "God was always there, read the Bible" before taking a fake phonecall and walking off at a brisk pace.

If they really, really pin you down and you have to prove it, you can tell them that they will see when they believe. Act as if belief isn't based on evidence made for that belief, but instead that belief in something is a thing you can just conjure up even when your subconcious can't even justify it as a plausible fantasy.

If I had to label myself (I prefer to just ignore the whole thing) I'd say that I'm an agnostic atheist. Maybe there's something, but who knows.

>>130930455
Whoever makes the positive claim is required to make the proof. If you say you have a unicorn, you have to prove it. It's impossible to prove something doesn't exist, since you can always just claim its one step outside of the scope of where we looked.

>>130937728

>double slit experiment suggests matter changes when it's observed

Holy shit we will never be rid of this misconception

"Observed" here just means that a measurement was taken by a device. It has absolutely fuck all to do with human consciousness, you can have a robot carry out a double slit experiment without any human seeing or knowing the outcome and the "observer effect" will still occur

>>130940112
Just throw open your jacket to reveal pretend dynamite and a clock-boy clock trigger while screaming allahu ackbar.

After they all shit themselves, ask them why they were afraid, as clearly Islam is a religion of peace. Accuse them of islamophobia. You will redpill a certain percentage. Unfortunately, quite a few more will miss the subtle point of the exercise and come away with the belief that they are indeed racist. This happens because they are naturally retarded.

This is how liberals are born.

>>130929358

say that you don't believe in god

>>130940206
literally this

>>130931691
interesting read. one slight and minor correction, though: in regards to Christianity, it's "arianism", not "aryanism". Just didn't want other people reading it to confuse the two.

>>130931877
So don't actually argue for truth, just act like a child. Sounds like most christians I know

>>130940315
Exactly. So if you make the positive claim that the Universe is naturally occurring, you must also prove the position before you can state it as a matter of truth. This is as impossible as proving the existence of God. See: the rest of the thread.

>>130940344
itt: Niggas who don't know about Quantum physics or even Box Cat

>>130929358
When it comes down to it, the easiest ways to defend God is by attacking the idiocy that is atheism and by demonstrating that most people are idiots and have never considered what God could be, or could be representative of.
Atheism is one of the stupidest intellectual positions out there, because they just try to explain everything away with "it doesn't matter, I have science, logic, etc", meanwhile they neglect the very inquisitive nature and desire to understand that which then seems unknowable simply because they want to outright deny their opposition.
Chances are most of the people you know have never tried to conceptualize God beyond the skyfairy trope. It would behoove you to present multiple notions of what God can be. So, the Buddhist notion that we are all of the same higher essence and can achieve what is basically Godhood (nirvana), the Indian notion which is quite similar to that but introduces psychological 'Gods' which here in the west we often mock for them using animals or figures to represent, and blah blah all that stuff.
I would say your best route is not to really try to win the argument, but to make them all feel like idiots for trying to be so goddamned fedora, because they are.

>>130940344
Niggas don't know about inertial frames and shit, niggas don't know about perspective, niggas don't know about relativity

>>130933702

thanks for stealing my memes, NIGGER.

>>130934800
Its fucking logically impossible that something comes from nothing.

If the universe came from nothing, then this "nothing" had the possibility to become the universe, therefore it was something rather than nothing.

File: Bloomberg Run.png (230KB, 500x389px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 500x389px

>>130940633
>Something is too complicated for us to have a well-mapped out and conclusive scientific theory

>So I've got this sky-wizard fantasy cooked up a few thousand years ago by a bunch of resentful, Roman-hating foreskin abusers, seems legit.

>>130929380
>best arguments anyone?

1) its impossible to prove a negative, so if the other side is right, and there is no god, none of their arguments will stand up under logical debate, in fact most of their arguments should be based on what they suspect you will say, as the only thing they can do is counterpoint your arguments

2) proving god is about establishing what you think he can do
-omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.
when you start an argument from this point anything they say that proves a "logical" falacy about god's existence is already disproved. God can do anything, anticipate anything and knows everything. he's everywhere, the beginning and end.

3) focus on the mystery behind science's baby, the big bang (where did it come from?) Use their lack of answer as proof of god's hand

4) keep your argument away from specific scriptural proof. that will complicate your task if you have to argue doctrine on top of everything else. IT CAN BE DONE but its not simple. So if they go after Jonah and the whale, 7 day creation, Noah and the great flood, set it aside and point out the topic of the debate is "is god real" not "what religious doctrine is true". Two totally separate conversations. Mind you it CAN be done, but it will be difficult and confuse the point of the debate.

5) Creationism - you're going to have to address this in the context of something. The easiest way is to point to the big bang and say "something made it", a harder but equally possible argument is to point out god's 7 days might just be billions of years, or you could again go back to what was stated prior that the purpose of the debate isn't to argue specific doctrine but to argue about god's existence. If you can keep the debate on their weakest argument you'll win (that's not to say you can't beat their arguments against 7 day creation, just you might be better off to avoid the fight all together)

File: christ.jpg (282KB, 1200x409px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1200x409px

>>130929358
>>130929380

>>130938132
Cogito ergo sum

>>130940752
Also, be sure to throw in some jabs about how the teachers are so incompetent that they are unable to properly teach this subject and expect the entire school to become educated on the topic by two students debating.

>>130941103
These aren't arguments, this is the "reasoning" of a child who believes in Magic.

File: religion-in-one-image.gif (2MB, 1576x9930px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1576x9930px

>>130929358
>>130929380
.

>>130941174
great, now prove that to someone else.

or have someone prove themselves to you.
I wish you the best of luck, because unfortunately, you can't read minds.

>>130941286
Prove how something can come from a philosophical nothingness.

File: THE ARGUMENT.jpg (402KB, 1104x927px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1104x927px

>>130931732
>>130931691
>>130931653
>>130931626
>>130931595
kys

Just say you were talking about Allah. If they try to disprove Allah act extremely offended and say Islam is a religion of peace and you're shocked and hurt by their intolerance of other cultures.

File: god1.jpg (81KB, 733x1024px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 733x1024px

>>130929358
>>130929380
..

>>130941350
If you want to go full sollipsism then sure, nothing is provable. You have to take certain things as given though, that there is an underlying regularity in this world you inhabit, whether or not you are completely sure of its existence.

>>130941397

>philosophical nothingness

What is that? Sounds like nihilism

>>130941350
>Implying solipsism is real

The universe exists independently of human interaction.

Basically- if a tree falls in a forest, it makes a sound whether or not anyone is there to hear it.

>>130941647
He's referencing the first mover argument.

>>130929358
God's Not Dead

File: god cucks.jpg (82KB, 718x480px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 718x480px

>>130929358
>>130929380
>>130931595
>>130931626
>>130931653
>>130931691
>>130931732

>>130941647
It's literally nothing, and it doesn't exist nor has ever existed

>>130929358
It's a trap, you're obviously expected to prove the Dawkins edgy 13 year old atheist version of God as a bearded authoritarian man in the sky as Hitchens put it. Don't do that, don't even try you're fucked, probably too dumb at gymnasium age to debate this philosophically but i'll give you too fast source materials that may help you at least understand the matter:
>Hitchens brothers debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPovB3AQjo
>Jordan Peterson -Biblical God:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_GPAl_q2QQ

>>130941647
"Before" the big bang there wasn't anything. A true philosophical nothing, meaning not anything.

The big bang forged the fabric of space itself. "Before" it there wasn't time, or matter, or space, or anything at all.

>>130941888
Before was God.

Big Bang didn't come from philosophical nothingness, because if this nothingness had the possibility to become the Universe, it was something, therefore wasn't "nothing"

>>130941886

>Dawkins edgy 13 yr old atheist version of God as a bearded authoritarian man in the sky

Have you read the bible? I don't get this /pol/ meme that atheists somehow made that idea of God up out of nowhere

>>130941888
>"Before" the big bang there wasn't anything. A true philosophical nothing, meaning not anything.
Why? How do you know?
What if what was there was the previous universe?

>>130941888

If there wasn't time space or matter then we wouldn't be able to recognize or understand whatever there was

There's a difference between that and "philosophical nothingness". I don't see what reason we have to assume it was "philosophical nothingness", unless you want to strawman atheism

>>130929380
Thomas Aquinas '5 ways'

>>130929358
Got you covered senpai.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghtoPiAE1sA

>>130941103
can god make something heavier than he can lift?

>>130939621
Things can exist without proof but unless proof is found you believing in them doesn't mean anything.

>>130942660
Even as an atheist, this doesn't seem like a solid argument.
If there is an all-powerful God, then the concept of "heavy" is also made up by this God.

>>130942862

Typical atheist dumb dumb making non sequiturs

File: 1496798886660.jpg (180KB, 800x1001px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 800x1001px

>>130929358
Step 1: Realize Christianity is a Jewish means of control
Step 2: Realize the christcuck threads on /pol/ are created by shills
Step 3: Realize "gods word" is the hearsay of man and nothing but conjecture
Step 4: Be spritual, not religious. Focus on self betterment and self meditation. The spirit in the sky is bullshit and is not going to help you.

Spiritual: Being open minded about our consciousness and its connection to the wider universe; are we insignificant or just the universe experiencing itself. Do we really die? Are we really alive?

Religion: Believing a book written by a couple of lunatics 2 thousand years ago about the adventures of a schizophrenic and his stories of an invisible sky wizard who created everything

Spiritual: Being a human, wondering, building, dreaming

Religion: Cancer, war, money, mind control, pedophilia, death

Christianity is a jewish scourge upon the western world, and the root of hyper-empathetic liberal ideology. It glorifies weakness and submission while vilifying strength and self determination.

Christians have been duped by the unholiest hoax in all history, by so-called Jews. This is considered their most effective weapon.

This 'big lie' technique is brainwashing United States Christians into believing that Jesus Christ was "King of the Jews", in the sense that so-called 'Jews' today call themselves 'Jews'. This reference was first made in English translations of the Old and New Testaments, centuries before the so-called Jews highjacked the word 'Jew' in the 18th century A.D. to palm themselves off on the Christian world as having a kinship with Jesus Christ. This alleged kinship comes from the myth of their common ancestry with the so-called 'Jews' of the Holy Land in the Old Testament history, a fiction based on fable

>>130929358
You need to use Peterson's line of reasoning. Good luck.

>>130929358
>>130929380
Its stupid but it may work. It goes like this:
>first tell them that god exists, but in a different way that they imagine
>explain softly that god is just a linguistic meme, like a collective thought pattern which acts as a collective conscience, and thus it must exist, at least as this concept itself.
>the best part of this explanation is that even atheists are unwittingly propagating this meme around by trying to deny god, thus spreading the meme even further.
>you can't say something doesn't exist without first creating a construct of the concept
>amuse yourself while audience goes into syntax error

>>130942188
Since our universe is a one shot, meaning that due to red shift we can tell our universe will die of heat death rather than a crunch, an infinite cyclical universe is impossible. Our universe will blow apart forever expanding till there isn't a photon per parsec- how could this become the fuel for another universe?

Throws a wrench in the cyclical universe model when the only one we can see had a beginning and no possibility of end. If it can happen, it would've already happened on an infinite scale.

Since the inflation period created energy, matter, time, and space, and everything in between, what could exist without those? Something timeless, immaterial, not even as a speck of a photon?

Less philosophically:
We can't prove it 100% of the way yet. Get a PhD in cosmology if you want to know more.

>"Any arguments to prove God?!"
>Theists rehash the same tired shit that constantly gets BTFO on an anime forum.