Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 201 to 215 of 215

Thread: Logical proof god DOESNT exist

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Banville
    Posts
    3,914
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Quoted
    98 Post(s)

    Default

    You, sir Exilianor, are an bunny rabbit. The crusades were comical and people with blind faith who loved an kissed for their own purely asexual pleasure caused them.

    Anyhow.
    Code:
    sid@looking-glass:~$ gcc ./Desktop/god.c
    ./Desktop/god.c: In function ‘main’:
    ./Desktop/god.c:3: error: ‘god’ undeclared (first use in this function)
    Code:
    int main()
    {
    	assert(god);
    }
    You know it's bad when a purely logical machine asks you where you misplaced your god at.
    Last edited by R0b0t1; 04-10-2009 at 02:34 AM.
    The jealous temper of mankind, ever more disposed to censure than
    to praise the work of others, has constantly made the pursuit of new
    methods and systems no less perilous than the search after unknown
    lands and seas.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hellfire, FL.
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R0b0t1 View Post
    You, sir Exilianor, are an bunny rabbit. The crusades were comical and people with blind faith who loved an kissed for their own purely asexual pleasure caused them.

    Anyhow.
    Code:
    sid@looking-glass:~$ gcc ./Desktop/god.c
    ./Desktop/god.c: In function ‘main’:
    ./Desktop/god.c:3: error: ‘god’ undeclared (first use in this function)
    Code:
    int main()
    {
    	assert(god);
    }
    You know it's bad when a purely logical machine asks you where you misplaced your god at.
    Well god is better than your machine so its actually not bad.

    The machine asks where you misplaced him.

    Well hes already in the right place so you cant misplace.

    Get the picture?

    Btw its not a machine. Its a program.

    Hes a above the program soooooooooo NO U!!

    /insert god

    /Heart.

    Ass. but i still love you. <3
    Last edited by ExilianorxXx; 04-10-2009 at 02:53 AM.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    My points on this issue.

    If you've gone so far as to completely deny any existence of a deity, ask yourself, "What do I have to lose?"
    Your dignity? Pfft, Dignity is nothing.

    Faith is believing in something that you can not see. As previously stated, there is no faith if we know there is God.

    My perception of Omnipotent means the ability to do anything. This includes the ability to be illogical.
    However, if we must keep omnipotence in balance with logic, then (also, as previously stated..) there is nothing illogical about making an obstacle even God can't overcome.
    Originally Posted by YoHoJo
    I like hentai.

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hellfire, FL.
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by llamaman aka Stevee View Post
    My points on this issue.

    If you've gone so far as to completely deny any existence of a deity, ask yourself, "What do I have to lose?"
    Your dignity? Pfft, Dignity is nothing.

    Faith is believing in something that you can not see. As previously stated, there is no faith if we know there is God.

    My perception of Omnipotent means the ability to do anything. This includes the ability to be illogical.
    However, if we must keep omnipotence in balance with logic, then (also, as previously stated..) there is nothing illogical about making an obstacle even God can't overcome.
    Faith is a belief in the truth of or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing, that is characteristically held without proof.[1] [2] Informal usage of the word "faith" can be quite broad, and may be used standardly in place of "trust", "belief", or "hope". For example, the word "faith" can refer to a religion itself or to religion in general, where in this context faith would encompass not only a belief without evidence but also a belief which can oppose scientific evidence. As with "trust", faith involves a concept of future events or outcomes.

    Ever heard of keeping the faith? It means no matter what is thrown at you in life, always keep the faith and things will turn out for the best. Faith in Jesus for example.

    Trust is a biggggggg thing. Just to point that out.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,163
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    19 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grippy View Post
    Not so. The problem is that you are not clearly defining what 'omnipotent' means.

    Specifically, if the meaning of 'omnipotent' includes 'the ability to do anything', then that definition includes the creation of logically non-nonsensical situations, such as the existence of square circles, invisible pink unicorns and honest politicians (ok, I just threw that last one in for fun).

    Rationally you cannot have a square circle (without employing irrelevant syntactic trickery of the sort that would declare a toroid with a square cross section a 'square circle') because squareness and circleness are necessarily mutually exclusive.

    You might declare that the God you believe in can create situations in which such logical impossibilities are in fact possible, and you would absolutely be within the realm of real religion to do so, but you also exit the realm where rational discussion can be held.

    If in the idea of 'omnipotent' you include a constraint thusly: 'able to do anything that is not a logical impossibility', you exclude such nonsense as square circles but apparently leave open questions like 'can God create a bowl of Jello so big that even He cannot eat it all?' After all, there is nothing inherently illogical about a universe-sized bowl of Jello, is there?

    Beyond the flip answer that 'there is always room for Jello', you still find that such a question is excluded by your constraint on what is possible for an omnipotent being. The mere existence of a quantity of Jello in excess of what God Himself could consume constitutes an illogical situation, by virtue of God's omnipotence and this definition of omnipotence, no such quantity can exist. This is not a limit on the power of God, but on the meaning of omnipotence.

    In a larger context, the idea that any statement about the universe at large can be show to be true exclusively through logical means is absurdly foolhardy. To do so implies that the one doing the reasoning has absolutely excluded the possibility of there being information that would invalidate any of the foundations of his reasoning. This is clearly not the case now, and is likely to always remain so.

    Further, proof in God's existence would eliminate much of the need for faith which is itself considered by many to be a defining characteristic of many religions. Why this is so can be left open to debate, but it is very clear that religion most certainly does not suffer from the general inability of rational discourse to pin down the nature or even reality of God. Quite the opposite in fact, it celebrates the fact and uses it to great effect.

    My personal opinion on the matter is that anyone who claims the positive belief that gods do not or can not exist is making a worse mistake than those who claim faith that God does exist.

    Worse in what way? The faithful do not generally employ the artifice of reason or knowledge to found their claim. They know and generally acknowledge that proof is unavailable (it would not be faith if there was proof). An atheist making a positive claim that gods can be shown not to exist generally does not claim faith as the reason. He applies all manner of rational and logical argument, and then, in complete denial of the limitations of those tools, makes a leap of faith to an absolute claim of knowledge.

    In truth no one who understands the philosophy of science would claim that gods are absolutely not possible. They may present a very solid case with multiple lines of reasoning showing that evidence for the existence of gods is insufficient to justify rational belief, but this can in no way be construed, within the bounds of scientific principles of knowledge, as actual factual knowledge that gods cannot exist.

    No scientific reasoning can ever reach that level of absolute certainty because it is explicit within the philosophy of science that there exist facts we do not yet know that may effect what we think we know now. Until such time as we can show that we know without flaw absolutely every bit of information in existence, we cannot claim that gods do not exist.

    Thus, to claim under the authority of science that gods do not exist is to, in fact, simply expose one's own ignorance of what science can and cannot do.

    Congratulations if you made it this far and actually read all of that with a critical and open mind. Please graduate to talk.origins.
    I agree that it's impossible to prove that a god doesn't exist, but it's illogical to think that one does. While absence of evidence doensn't prove absense, it gives no reason to believe in a specific god.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExilianorxXx View Post
    I have to highly disagree with you.

    God does exist. Trust me. You will regret it later...

    Pray and see what happens Take a chance DD

    If you do i hope it isnt Uriel thats your Gaurdian rofl for reasons i cant explain.

    Just saying man from a 'Paranormal experience'. Hes there.

    I just hope i dont get banned but w.e Im right your wrong.

    End of story.

    <3

    http://www.jesus2020.com/?gclid=CJbT...FQubnAod1nx7Qg

    say the prayer at the bottom tonight then say he doesnt exist.

    you will crap yourself lol
    A paranormal experience such as something like a large dose of nutmeg, a few tablespoons of cough medicine or maybe sleep deprivation?

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakman View Post
    well excuse me for not wanting to make it too complicated
    Simplification is ok. Over-simplification, past the point of being wrong, is not.

    Or, to quote a very smart dead guy: "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."

    also i did mean ideal capitalism, not the regulated version we get today.
    You mean the version that never has and never will be used in a meaningful way? The version that is too simple to be worth trying to make a point with? The one that if you try to make a point with, some asshole will come along and poke holes in you reasoning because you over-simplified?

    It isn't enough to be right, you also have to communicate effectively.

    also id like to add that most athiests dont assert god doesnt exist,
    That may or may not be, and has no relevance. Asserting it does not strengthen your position because regardless of whether it is true it has no bearing on whether either position has merit. If the matter were to be settled by popular vote the theists would carry the day.

    It would perhaps be relevant in the context of a demographic analysis of religious beliefs.

    i would say I'm an a-fairy-ist in the same way I'm an athiest.
    That can technically be called 'weak atheism' and is also the position I hold.

    'Strong atheism' is the positive claim that gods do not exist. Agnosticism refers to the position that there is insufficient knowledge available to make a determination and may also express the idea that it is not possible to have sufficient knowledge.

    Weak atheism can also be referred to as agnostic atheism, meaning one who does not have a belief in gods (without theistic belief) mainly due to a lack of knowledge and who may also believe that it is impossible to have such knowledge.

    Both terms 'weak atheism' and 'agnostic atheism' can be confusing, as it is natural to infer that 'weak' is in reference to the level of conviction one holds rather than the technical nature of the belief, or the combination of two terms 'agnostic' and 'atheism' that in lay discussions may have conflicting meanings.

    In non-technical usage the term 'skeptical atheist' might be preferable, as it expresses the lack of theistic belief in combination with the general doubt of knowledge associated with the skeptics rather than the 'strong' position generally inferred by the 'atheist' moniker. This label tends to be both succinct and mostly accurate in both technical and lay discussions.
    Grippy has approximately 30,000 hours of Delphi coding experience. srsly.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Claw View Post
    I agree that it's impossible to prove that a god doesn't exist, but it's illogical to think that one does.
    I'll presume that by 'think' you mean 'believe'.

    Correct, it is illogical, though not necessarily irrational, to hold a deep conviction in something extraordinary in the absence of evidence.

    However, human thinking is rarely dominated by logic and sometimes lacks even rationality. Logical thinking absolutely has it's utility in many areas, but it's quite valid and common to live a fulfilling existence with many illogical beliefs and behaviors.

    It is valid to knowingly hold an illogical belief in that such can serve a purpose in one's life. For some the simple social conformance and fellowship is sufficient, for others religious belief provides a solid foundation during trying times. That the foundation is illogical and unprovable does not matter because for a great many it has no bearing upon the function that the belief serves.

    There are a few who reject many forms of religious belief and cite various logical or rational justifications. In some cases these justifications do in fact cause the lack of belief, in others the lack of belief is simply rationalized through various means, but the lack, or skepticism in the face of a culture of belief, may have existed prior to any formalized reasoning. Often the reasoning is in response to questions about the lack of belief.

    There are schools of thought that seek to provide rationality and logic to all aspects of human existence. These have their merits, but are by no means generally superior to other less mathematically rigorous philosophies. That is, not all people seek the cold purity of logical thought, and it is their right to seek and find therein whatever they value, provided they also respect the rights of others.

    While absence of evidence doensn't prove absense,
    The 'absence of evidence' line is overplayed and misunderstood. Nearly any proposition that can be stated in the negative can be restated in the positive.

    Absence of evidence can be used to justify absence. The absence of radioactivity and general devastation in my immediate vicinity is strong evidence of the absence of the detonation of a Trinity-style device in the immediate past.

    Conversely, the presence of the wildlife in the manner that is to be expected in this area is also evidence of the absence of such an event.

    You might also strive to avoid using 'proof' as beyond the language of formal mathematics it is largely colloquial. There is never 'proof' in a technical sense, only conclusions that are supported by the currently available evidence (or lack of evidence, same thing).

    it gives no reason to believe in a specific god.
    Quite true. The Unitarian church is interesting in this respect as it welcomes and encourages nearly any belief system, including polytheism and atheism. If you are interested in finding people in RL that are very open minded and who often enjoy discussions about various aspects of religion a visit to the local Unitarian church may be in order. You may be surprised by the number of atheists you find there.
    Grippy has approximately 30,000 hours of Delphi coding experience. srsly.

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corn77 View Post
    Let us consider a defined Judeo-Christian God that exists defined by the bible. If this Judeo Christian did exist as stated in the bible, then he did create the universe and everything in it
    That is a rather large leap, I think. After all, if it is God who reveals himself to us, and if he is so much greater than us, then could he not simply lie in order to gain status? I mean, if He is doing all the revealing then He is the source of all that jazz about perfection and responsibility for the creation of everything.

    When some nutball in the airport tells you he's the Next Coming you don't believe him, why would you believe, on the authority of a dodgy text of unverified origin, that some entity nobody ever met is telling the truth when he says he created not only people, but the entire danged universe?

    if this God does exists, he created us for his glory and that the ultimate purpose for our life is to glorify God. When I say glorify, I wanted to define it for you if there was an miscommunication. glorify is to extol, praise, or worship.
    Well, I suppose when you are infinite you can be excused for having infinite ego and a desperately co-dependent nature.

    For me, I say if He gave me free will, then He can go take a flying at a rolling donut with all that 'your exclusive purpose is to tell me how great I am' BS and I'll take the implicit option that comes with 'free will' to determine my own purpose, thankyouverymuch.

    That said, if he really needs something all he has to do is show me his bush (no, the burning one, you sicko). If it's worth His effort to make a showing I'd be happy to hook Him up with whatever I can provide (except the worship thing, he can take the donut on that).
    Grippy has approximately 30,000 hours of Delphi coding experience. srsly.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hellfire, FL.
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Claw View Post
    I agree that it's impossible to prove that a god doesn't exist, but it's illogical to think that one does. While absence of evidence doensn't prove absense, it gives no reason to believe in a specific god.



    A paranormal experience such as something like a large dose of nutmeg, a few tablespoons of cough medicine or maybe sleep deprivation?
    Actually hearing them. Talking to them.

    Feeling them.

    seeing them.

    healed by them.

    Learned from them.

    Argued with them. Id lose everytime. I think i won once.

    Annoyed them and vice versa.

    Lost weight because of them. around 50 pounds

    They're the family i never thought i had. And i love them to death. <3

    Oh and i dont do drugs btw.
    Last edited by ExilianorxXx; 04-10-2009 at 05:34 AM.

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    896
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Id just like to put this out there

    The world is far from perfect. Many people die each day of starvation and genocide. I know some believe "God" does not want this world to be perfect because it is for judgment.

    I dont know how familiar some of you are with Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs, but basically it states that one must fulfill all their own needs before the needs of others. While this may not be completely true, it does place wealthy people at the advantage for good deeds (they have money to give away etc.). Crime is mainly a result of poverty, most of the criminals are no different than us. The only difference is they have to fight for survival.

    If there is a "God," and all men are equal in his eyes, then why are some given such better situations for salvation than others?

    Macrosoft

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    http://www.newspring.cc/webcampus/ Check that out Sunday at 11:15am and 6:00pm EST and 11:00am Pacific

  12. #212
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    http://ushort.us/oqmd65
    Posts
    2,605
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    god is illogical. Therefore you cannot put logic as proof to whether or not god exists.
    I do visit every 2-6 months

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    god is illogical, he might as well not exist...
    Join the Official SRL IRC channel. Learn how to Here.

  14. #214
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    410
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    16 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yakman View Post
    god is illogical, he might as well not exist...
    You only say that because your a communist and communist are atheist so gtfo or chuck will kill you!

  15. #215
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,021
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism

    not all communists are athiests, not all athiests are communists
    Join the Official SRL IRC channel. Learn how to Here.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Logical Proof of God's Existence
    By Esteban in forum Discussions & Debates
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 01-24-2009, 11:41 PM
  2. The Logical Next Player Process
    By Pyro in forum OSR Intermediate Scripting Tutorials
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-10-2009, 02:12 AM
  3. Idea on SCAR? logical?
    By jumbosped in forum News and General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-10-2008, 01:56 AM
  4. Logical operators in Scar/Pascal
    By tojoh in forum OSR Help
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 02:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •