Atheists what is your proof?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by science man, Oct 20, 2010.

  1. Greatest I am Valued Senior Member

    Atheists cannot prove that God does not exist without being able to look at every spot in the universe.
    Luckily it is to those who cry wolf to show the shit or the tacks and any believer who says that there is a God is just as big a liar as the ones who definitively state that there is none.

    It is to the believer to put up or shut up, not to the one who says prove your case.

    As to --what is the harm of belief. It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists.
    They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil.

    Google Religulous to see how they hurt all believers. I would link you but the program here will not let me.

    They also do much harm to their own.

    Please Google African witches and Jesus and Jesus Camp to see the carnage.

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. SnakeLord Valued Senior Member

    Outside of mathematics and basic logical concepts, nobody can "prove" anything. But your argument has no worthwhile value here: An inability to "prove" that you're not living in the matrix does not mean therefore that you should believe it, which is seemingly exactly what your argument is attempting to say.

    We look at the evidence that is available and make conclusions based upon it. In saying that, the conclusion is that god's do not exist but instead are creations of ignorant humans as an attempt to explain the world around them, a world that was by an large very deadly and unfriendly to humans, (hence why gods are typically portrayed as being full of wrath and vengeance).

    So no, we cannot "prove" there isn't a god any more than you can "prove" there isn't an invisible leprechaun sitting on your face. That in itself doesn't mean anything.

    Neither is specifically a matter of "lying" but being wrong or right depending upon what data and evidence is being examined and what conclusions it supports.

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Don't knock it until you've tried it.

    How can something that has effect on my life be that?

    As you refuse to be diagnosed, all I have done it list the possible causes Lori. It would be unscientific of me to specify one based on the limited information.

    You do understand that none of this os very compelling don't you? A strange episode, no evidence left, no 3rd party witness, and everyone involved acting strangely?

    From what, receiving a phone call? LOL

    But how knows how many you've burned? Maybe you do this more than you remember.

    Again, conveniently no provenance, and a poem sent to person that might not have even existed, which might explain why it was returned. Still nothing compelling here.

    Now, before you invoke a supernatural explanation to explain your episode (I know it's too late, but hey) you really should make sure there isn't or wasn't, a mundane explanation. It may be too late now though, again, your actions have destroyed all provenance either way.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Lori_7 Go to church? I am the church! Registered Senior Member

    yeah "the demon seed". i've read some on that theory. there's scripture to back it up like genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." and that cain and abel found wives, in nod, where there were a race of giants, the nephilium, which was the result of "the sons of god" breeding with "the daughters of men".

    and that was directly before god destroyed the earth with a flood because people were so evil. noah however, was found to be relatively pure, so he was spared to start over. and by "pure", that could be referring to his blood as well as his heart.
  8. Lori_7 Go to church? I am the church! Registered Senior Member

    you believe there is no god, nor a spiritual realm for no good reason. seriously, that is your reason, that there is none. while you have no idea what is not, and while you ignore a lot of things that are.

    i was using the word "paranormal", and i have a dictionary. but if you want to use "supernatural", ok. you cannot define "nature" in it's entirety; not even close.

    do you think god is a planet or a star? you think you're going to look through a telescope and see a literal door out there with the sign "the spiritual realm: enter at your own risk"?

    there's nothing about science or nature that contradicts the notion of god or a spiritual realm...nothing. you arbitrarily believe that, therefore you are a woowoo.

    unless i have a damn good reason not to, unlike yourself. in the case of a theory, such as your "there is no god or spiritual realm" theory, i am able to examine someone's reasoning. but if someone testifies to me about a personal experience, i believe what they tell me. the only damn good reason not to, would be if i already knew they were a liar.

    you didn't understand it? ok...

    it must be very convenient for you to think you have understanding and to believe that all atheists are sane and theists are not.

    you're wrong, and i am not a liar.
  9. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    You know certain people quote scripture and others use to attempt to hear hidden messages while playing a record backwards, it's pretty much the same only significant to the people that observe it and see importance in it, to everybody else it's just someone screaming for attention.
  10. historicfuture Registered Member

    to the original poster:

    I believe in a pink flamingo that created the universe and he told me to murder you and all people that believe like you. He is god and if you can't disprove him then you have no right to tell me I can't believe it and you're going to choke and die in my hands.

    You can't disprove my pink flamingo doesn't exist. He even spoke to me in my dreams.

    If I write a book about him and call it holy written by his pink flamingo offspring and in 2000 years someone reads it and then tons of other people you'd arrive at the same madness that you currently hold true and infallible.
  11. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Pink flamingos exist....!
  12. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    I guess that just leaves you with the problem of forming a functional society or even philosophical system around your tenets
  13. Lori_7 Go to church? I am the church! Registered Senior Member

    i have tried it, and thank god i was never successful at it. typing that didn't make you feel the slightest bit pathetic?

    because it's law. the law that makes you and the law you live under.

    would it? would it be unscientific of you? :thumbsup:

    your information is a lot more limited than you think it is, and yes it would be unscientific to arbitrarily leave out a known cause.

    if you had been through everything i had up to that point, you would have been committed and doused with drugs.

    and none of those things my ex-husband had any way of knowing about, and yet he called me up while blacked out from prescription pills and alcohol, and proceeds to tell me all about it in a taunting evil voice. i felt like i had just gotten off the phone with satan himself, and yes, it freaked me the fuck out. i have never been that scared in my life. i didn't know what else to do so i went to my knees to pray (which i very very rarely kneel to pray), and as soon as my knees hit the floor, god bellowed at me, "GET UP!" which startled me enough that i wasn't so scared any more. now i was angry. what my ex said made me feel like something evil was watching me, and so i went downstairs and gathered anything that had to do with what i had been going through and burned it in the fireplace.

    are you serious? :wtf:

    first of all, i don't write...ever. i've always hated writing. hated poetry. the only time in my entire life i've ever written anything i didn't have to was during this time. i specifically bought a spiral notebook and the stationery because i felt like i had to write it down. i had an entire notebook full by then, trying to write down everything that was happening to me.

    secondly, i never use that fireplace. it's in the basement. in the '70's my home was rental property and there was an apartment down there. now, it's a basement with a random fireplace and toilet in it. the ONLY times i've ever used it are when i burnt the notebook, and one night for a halloween party. i had the entire house opened up, three fires going, and the basement was the designated pot smoking zone. i cleaned the ashes from the notebook, along with the spiral before that party, and i sat and looked at it and remembered.

    nothing about what i went through was mundane. the person that the poem was addressed to does in fact exist, and the address was correct. it was a po box for fan mail, and they receive letters and packages all the time. some letters written in blood (not mine). there was no reason why my package should have been returned unopened, but it did.
  14. Lori_7 Go to church? I am the church! Registered Senior Member

    it doesn't have to be someone screaming for attention. it could actually be meaningful (even if just to that person) and interesting.
  15. Syzygys As a mother, I am telling you Valued Senior Member

    Yes, but I already did...

  16. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Not true. I just don't believe they do exist, and my good reason, is because there is no evidence for them. There's a whole bunch of things that fall into the same category.

    They are synonyms, and oh yes we can define them, because they are words, and WE choose the definition of words.

    I don't know what to expect. But if there was a God shaped gap in a scientific observation, I should think it would stick out. So far, we haven't seen that gap.

    There's nothing is science or nature that reasonably leads us to the conclusion that God exists either. That is my point. No reason -> no belief.

    Ah, but the reasons I reject God go beyond observations of nature. They are largely due to the arbitrary claims people make about God. Contradictory and illogical claims, that have no reason to be made. That god we can reject.

    So your brains have fallen out. You believe in leprechauns, and faeries, and BigFoot, and the Och Ness Monster, and all the crap that CommonSenseSeeker posts, and astral project, and witchcraft and the list is endless. See, here you show lack of discernment. You have no aceptance criteria. That really puts a dent in your credibility.

    Well, all theists must be a little insane, you have to admit that.

    I'm wrong that I do not believe? Eh? You make no sense. And you are a liar, you are just very good at lying to yourself.
  17. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Then if you tried and failed, you never knew what it was like to feel normal. And no, I don't feel pathetic. Maybe that's how you felt before you self aggrandised to become God's contact on Earth?

    If it's the law, nobody is enforcing it around here.

    The known cause is human nature. Flawed perception. Less than 100% cognitive capability. You had an episode. Deal with it. Here are some examples of how your brain interprets what you experience. You have two eyes, but you only see one version of an object in front of you. You have two ears, and we use this to locate sounds, but we don't hear the separate sounds, ... our brains processes both inputs and gives us one result. Our brain is also comprised of two hemispheres. Did you know that dolphins can let one side sleep, while the other takes control? Do you think all of your brain is awake, all of the time you experience consciousness? Do you not think it possible, for an unconscious mind to implant it's dreams into the conscious one? Well, it does work like that. It has been shown that sleep deprivation causes parts of the brain to fall asleep, and then dreams appear to be reality. This may have happened to you. You may have part of your brain permanently asleep if you regularly experience these feelings. Either way, you need a professional diagnosis.
    I somehow think it's the drugs you admit to taking that might be the cause of your problems.

    Assuming that wasn't just part of your dream.

    How do you know this wasn't your first episode?
  18. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    You are welcome to provide objective evidence for your subjective claim.
  19. SolusCado Registered Senior Member

    That's just it. I have proposed an alternative (to the mainstream) interpretation of scriptures that is consistent with known science. You seem to dismiss it because you choose to make your own interpretations - and you use the English language as your 'evidence'. Since none of these scriptures were originally written in English, I don't see how you have any evidence whatsoever. That your only response is to continually ignore my suppositions, and cling to your own - for no reason other than you can dispute your own - well, as I said before... it has rendered your perspective irrelevant. Do you have a reason to refuse my suppositions beyond the fact that you can't show them to be false? Because if not, that is a pretty flimsy position to take.
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2010
  20. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    There is no interpretation of scripture that is consistent with known science.
  21. SolusCado Registered Senior Member

    If you're going to make such a statement, kindly note the flaws in the interpretations I have provided.
  22. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Your interpretation ignores the English words actually being used (at least in English translations). If you want to go the path of Hebrew, that's fine; however, you are going to have to learn Hebrew first before you can "interpret" it.

    Essentially you are claiming that all translations are incorrect. Again, I am fine with going directly to Hebrew. It's just as invalidate-able.

    Do you remember when I asked which Bible to use? You said any. If you really meant to use Hebrew manuscripts then you should have said so. That is why we have language. To communicate. Regardless, I would be willing to bet that the Hebrew manuscripts do not support your "suppositions" either.

    Well, your suppositions are supposedly based on the Bible. I asked which one to use to demonstrate you incorrect. You said any. I then used a random Bible to fulfill what I claimed I would do. Next you are saying that all translations of the bible are incorrect; therefore, my argument doesn't matter. Of course, your suppositions are not based on Hebrew manuscripts as you do not know Hebrew.

    So basically, if you are going to claim your "god" is the biblical god, then please provide explicit biblical documents that you are basing your "suppositions" off of and I will demonstrate them incorrect.
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2010
  23. SolusCado Registered Senior Member

    And in some cases I have. But even current translations of Hebrew aren't infallible. As I said before, languages change and evolve over time. To apply modern-day meanings to ancient texts is just plain stupid. And that is precisely what you are doing, which is why your perspective is irrelevant.

    Not the translations (necessarily) but the interpretations. Day as an example, even in today's language can mean an epoch, and yet you refuse to accept that as a meaning for Genesis 1's use of the word. Upon what grounds? You have yet to provide any, which is why your position is barely worth my time to respond.

    I said any because my proposal is such that ANY text must be looked at through the lens of the time in which it was written, but translations are invariably provided in the lens of the time in which it was translated, and that gap is prone to error. SO, ANY translation is going to be subject to generous interpretation.

    Do you honestly not understand the difference between the words interpret and translate? You applied your interpretation to a translation you selected, and ignored my interpretation. As long as that is your approach, you aren't worth talking to.

    I find it hard to believe that you can truly be this obtuse. My claim is that to understand the Biblical God we must think about things in the context of the authors (not the translators) of the Bible. Furthermore, we must recognize that these people didn't even have a language that was adequate to fully convey the meanings of things that were revealed to them by God. So, to apply their vision of God to our modern-day knowledge, we must apply our modern-day knowledge to what they did write down. Noah's environment is a prime example. Regardless of the word they used, his knowledge of "the world" would have been restricted to the areas travelled by him and those he knew (and those that they knew). Thus, a depiction of a flood of the world he knew would have simply used words that apply to "the world". Just because we have since learned that the world is much bigger doesn't magically increase the scope of the flood, as you would attempt to make people believe. And the worst part about your position is that you don't even believe it. You are painting a picture that you can show to be false just so you can show it to be false. You are resistant to a picture that you cannot show to be false because you don't want to be wrong. To that, I say grow up.

Share This Page