Is God Real

au1929 wrote:

So what are you saying? If you can't prove there is a supreme being than obviously there is none. I would answer in the same vein. If you can't prove that a supreme being does not exist than there must be one. Which leaves us back where we started. Is god real?

An additional question that is just as important to ask is "would it make a difference in one's beliefs if someone were to prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that a supreme being does or doesn't exist?"

0 Replies

maliagar wrote:

The empirical evidence available to them supported that conclusion...

Which is of course false. The ancient Greeks and Egyptians knew that the Earth was spherical, all the evidence pointed to it. The Christians, on the other hand, demanded that the Earth was flat based on the Bible, not observation. When scientists found that the Earth wasn't flat, they were declared heretics by the church and imprisoned. When Giordano Bruno found that the Earth wasn't the center of the universe, he was burned at the stake.

Do you ever tire of looking like an idiot, maligar?

0 Replies

Cephus wrote:

Do you ever tire of looking like an idiot, maligar?

The funniest thing is how unaware you are of the BS you bring to this forum (and I won't say how you look like...)

The Church said that the Earth was flat? Laughing

Because of the Bible? Laughing

I say it never did.

Now,

(1) you can believe me (which I always recommend), or

(2) you can go and check for yourself (which I recommend more strongly).

Guess who can bring evidence to support his claims...

Laughing

0 Replies

The ancient Eqyptians performed an experiment using long poles buried in the ground over several miles and then observed the angle and length of the shadow of each stake from the sun. They concluded with empirical evidence that the Earth was not flat but curved.

0 Replies

(Oh what the world lost with the burning of the library at Alexandria -- set us back a thousand years at least).

0 Replies

I can't believe that this whole Comedy Central romp of malapropisms, misquotes and mangled metaphors is actually being filed under 'Spritituality and Religion.' There is a Jokes forum on A2k, folks, you know.

0 Replies

If you define what you mean by God, I will tell you if He She or It is a real or imaginary phenomenum.

0 Replies

Daniel 4:7-8 "I saw a tree of great height at the center of the world. It was large and strong, with its top touching the heavens, and it could be seen from the ends of the earth."
no matter how tall a tree would be, people on the other side of a spherical earth could not see it.

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

If you define what you mean by God, I will tell you if He She or It is a real or imaginary phenomenum.

God is the creator of everything.

Now tell me.

:wink:

0 Replies

The only evidence of God is based in faith; there are no substantiating facts. Because of this, there can be no meaningful dialog between atheists and the religious, since the religious will not examine science and other "Earthly" facts in good faith, and the atheist wants more than "I believe in God because my faith warrants it" from the religious. Stalemate, so far as arguing goes.

0 Replies

Duly noted that this thread is in the "Jokes" forum, and deliberately ignored. There is no joke greater than reality.

Speaking of irrational belief and obsolete faith, why do so many people here claim the Earth is spherical? HAH! What have *you* been smoking? Are you living in the middle ages? What proof or evidence do you have that it's spherical? It most certainly is not!

It is approximated by an oblate spheroid.
Centrifugal force flattens the Earth quite measurably, squishing the two poles together.

Just like my two fingers holding the image of your head, squish, squish. That's how squishy your logic is, and how squishy anyone's understanding of God is too.

0 Replies

SkisOnFire wrote:

Speaking of irrational belief and obsolete faith, why do so many people here claim the Earth is spherical?... It is approximated by an oblate spheroid. Centrifugal force flattens the Earth quite measurably, squishing the two poles together.
Just like my two fingers holding the image of your head, squish, squish. That's how squishy your logic is, and how squishy anyone's understanding of God is too.

Instead of a faulty analogy between the power of centrifugal force and the power of your fingers, can you explain:
(1) what is the logic of the theists?, and
(2) where is it at fault?

Thank you.

---------

0 Replies

This is funny, lol!

0 Replies

Cephus wrote:

Mankind used to believe the Earth was flat and the sun rotated around the Earth.

The typical objection. Already dismissed.

Quote:

It's only a matter of time before man gives up the silly God notion as well (and Europe is well on its way, the US is rapidly catching up.)

Faulty comparison. Our understanding of the physical shape, location and movement of the earth evolves with new empirical data. And these discrete pieces of observational information are placed in larger theoretical frameworks. These involve large amounts of speculation, and are always in flux. So much for the "certainty" of science. I wonder if, one day, in the 27th century, the latest scientific theory will claim that, after all, the earth was indeed in the center of the universe... Can anybody be confident that this will never happen? :wink:

In any case, even you will notice that natural theology (not to speak of the belief in God) belongs in a totally different category. Since natural theology is not empirically grounded in the way geocentrism or heliocentrism were (theories that were contingent on new physical observations), natural theology (for example, theories of intelligent design) cannot be disproved or discarded in that way either. If anything, new scientific discoveries tend to support natural theology.

In short, to claim that the notion of a creator (or actual religious faith) will be "discarded" following a process comparable to what happened in astronomy is just another piece of your BS.

:wink:

0 Replies

maliagar wrote:

Instead of a faulty analogy between the power of centrifugal force and the power of your fingers, can you explain:
(1) what is the logic of the theists?, and
(2) where is it at fault?

Thank you.

Two of the logical faults are
1) belief
2) faith

They are squishy things, that logical people cannot hold true without getting all oogie and wet. Leaping to, and holding conclusions is a slippery business. It crushes further thought -- with the force of God's own two fingers laid upon our minds to pop them like a grape.

0 Replies

---

You are just begging the question (which proves that non-believers are no better at being logical as they believe themselves to be).

So again:

Why belief is ilogical?
Why faith is ilogical?

Thanks.

SkisOnFire wrote:

maliagar wrote:
Instead of a faulty analogy between the power of centrifugal force and the power of your fingers, can you explain:
(1) what is the logic of the theists?, and
(2) where is it at fault?

Thank you.

Two of the logical faults are
1) belief
2) faith

They are squishy things, that logical people cannot hold true without getting all oogie and wet. Leaping to, and holding conclusions is a slippery business. It crushes further thought -- with the force of God's own two fingers laid upon our minds to pop them like a grape.

0 Replies

Now that this has been moved over to Jokes, it gets serious again. Or does it?

0 Replies

I'm so glad someone took my half-facetious suggestion seriously and moved this dog of a thread to its appropriate venue.

You folks are a laff riot.

I suggest that some of you dig out your old freshman Introuction to Philosophy textbooks and look up such terms as 'logical fallacies'. 'empirical evidence', 'epistemology' (with subheadings), 'ontology' etc. etc. Skip the section on Metaphysics. I'm sure you'll find it too arcane for words.

0 Replies

Poor piece of advice. I'm sure you skipped the section on Metaphysics, ended up skewed towards the epistemological, and now want everybody else to do the same...

By the way, ontology and metaphysics belong together (that's what happens when you skip things).

So you're right. You really do come across some good jokes around here.

Laughing

Merry Andrew wrote:

I'm so glad someone took my half-facetious suggestion seriously and moved this dog of a thread to its appropriate venue.

You folks are a laff riot.

I suggest that some of you dig out your old freshman Introuction to Philosophy textbooks and look up such terms as 'logical fallacies'. 'empirical evidence', 'epistemology' (with subheadings), 'ontology' etc. etc. Skip the section on Metaphysics. I'm sure you'll find it too arcane for words.

0 Replies

Point taken. Smile

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know