14
   

The Absurdity of Atheism

Forums: Atheism, Religious Trolling, Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:30 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

OMFA, As I stated, I have emperical evidence that an omniscient being is an impossibility. The issue is not that I'm guessing, it's that you refuse to entertain or challenge with contrary evidence what I can prove.


Bring it on, John.

People have been here "proving" that gods exist...and that gods do not exist for years.

I admire your ego.

Be careful though...hats only come in reasonable sizes.

Bring it on.

By the way...does a god have to be an omniscient being?

You ought really to tackle that first.

(I am thinking the possibility of a GOD is greater now that you have come along!)
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:55 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:
lol...I have from time to time in the heat of the moment called my brother an idot...truth be told he tested at 13 w/ a 135 IQ
So, who is the idot, then?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:57 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:
I'm not guessing...and I do believe...that god is an impossibility...and I base that on verifiable, emperical evidence.
This should be a real treat:
Proceed!
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:01 pm
@neologist,
Comon...this was when I was young...but compared to me (125 IQ) I guess I am!
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:03 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
By the way...does a god have to be an omniscient being?


Uh...ABSOLUTELY! If not....what's all the fuss about?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:11 pm
@giujohn,
Good ole Frank wrote:
By the way...does a god have to be an omniscient being?
giujohn wrote:
Uh...ABSOLUTELY! If not....what's all the fuss about?
Explain that one, Einstein. Why would God have any more obligation to peer into our future than you or I would have to read the last page of the whodunnit?
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:17 pm
@neologist,
Quote:
Proceed!


Ok it's faily simple.
The proof that no omniscient being exits is that Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle has not been violated and Thomas Youngs 2 slit experiement works. If there was an omniescient being it would have knowledge of the exact postion and velocity (and time/energy) of SAPs and HUP would be violated. If that occurs chemistry wouldnt work and molecules would break down into SAPs and electrons would collapse into the nucleus.
The interference pattern in the 2 slit experiment works (over and over again) only if there is no knowledge or information of the exact position and velocity of the SAPs. The existence of an omniscient being would cause it never to work.
The mere fact that YOU exist proves that god does not...for if he did Matter would not.
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:20 pm
@neologist,
Look...if god is not omnipotent the argument is moot. He can only exist if he is. If he isn't, he's no more than you or I.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:26 pm
@giujohn,
How much faith do you have in the veracity of the Uncertainty Principle?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:28 pm
@giujohn,
Why would an all powerful entity be limited in what he chooses to reveal to himself? He would then not be all powerful.

And humans could not have free will.
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:32 pm
@neologist,
HUP is a basic law of the universe and has been shown to be correct in thousands of experiments. If it didnt work electrons would NEVER bind with others to form matter.
If it didnt, lasers wouldnt work, and you wouldnt have had transisters and your computer wouldnt work. It CANT be violated...if it could be you and everything else would go POOF!!!
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:21 pm
@neologist,
Quote:
And humans could not have free will.


And this just proves my point...if god was omnscient we wouldnt have free will!
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:56 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Quote:
By the way...does a god have to be an omniscient being?


Uh...ABSOLUTELY! If not....what's all the fuss about?


Why does a god have to be omniscient?

And since you are the one making the fuss...you tell us what it is all about.

So...start your proof by "proving" that a god must be omniscient.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:58 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Quote:
Proceed!


Ok it's faily simple.
The proof that no omniscient being exits is that Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle has not been violated and Thomas Youngs 2 slit experiement works. If there was an omniescient being it would have knowledge of the exact postion and velocity (and time/energy) of SAPs and HUP would be violated. If that occurs chemistry wouldnt work and molecules would break down into SAPs and electrons would collapse into the nucleus.
The interference pattern in the 2 slit experiment works (over and over again) only if there is no knowledge or information of the exact position and velocity of the SAPs. The existence of an omniscient being would cause it never to work.
The mere fact that YOU exist proves that god does not...for if he did Matter would not.


John...first you must PROVE that a god must be omniscient in order to use this to prove that gods are impossible.

So...where is your proof that gods must be omniscient? Then we will get to that other stuff.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:00 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Look...if god is not omnipotent the argument is moot. He can only exist if he is. If he isn't, he's no more than you or I.


In other words...your "proof" requires that we all agree to guesses you are making about what a god must have as characteristics.

Some "proof."

If I work that way, I can "prove" that a god has to exist.

All I have to do is define what exists as a "creation"...and that would necessitate a "creator."

But that is a silly argument...and is begging the question big time.

So start over.

Prove your major premise.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:02 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Quote:
And humans could not have free will.


And this just proves my point...if god was omnscient we wouldnt have free will!


Prove your major premise...which is either "a god must be omniscient" or "a god must be omnipotent."

Prove it...don't just assert it as a given.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:09 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:
And this just proves my point...if god was omnscient we wouldnt have free will!
But God is not omniscient. At least he has the power to choose not to be omniscient.

An all powerful God can not be subject to necessity. He then would no longer be omnipotent.
giujohn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:13 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Prove your major premise.


GLADLY

The ONLY "evidence" of god is the writings in the tora,bible and quran.
In these writings it clearly states that god is omniscient, all knowing and all seeing. He knows the hairs on your head and the falling of sparrow. He knows your heart and your mind. He knows what you will do before you do it. His plan for you is already written. (so you have no free will) It also says that these writings are not man's word but god's, written by the hand of god and you may not add nor detract from the word of god; neither may you interpret it.

So... by proving that god is NOTomniscient I have proved that not only can't he exist, I have proved he does NOT exist.
Because if he is not all knowing...HE"S NOT GOD!
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:18 pm
@giujohn,
Difference between 160 IQ and 125 IQ, I suppose.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2014 08:24 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Quote:
Prove your major premise.


GLADLY

The ONLY "evidence" of god is the writings in the tora,bible and quran.
In these writings it clearly states that god is omniscient, all knowing and all seeing. He knows the hairs on your head and the falling of sparrow. He knows your heart and your mind. He knows what you will do before you do it. His plan for you is already written. (so you have no free will) It also says that these writings are not man's word but god's, written by the hand of god and you may not add nor detract from the word of god; neither may you interpret it.

So... by proving that god is NOTomniscient I have proved that not only can't he exist, I have proved he does NOT exist.
Because if he is not all knowing...HE"S NOT GOD!


At best you could claim to have proved that the god described in the Bible does not exist...or that humans are not very good at guessing about what a god must or must not be.

The god of the Bible is an abomination. The guesses made by the superstitious, relatively unsophisticated, relatively unknowledgable ancient Hebrews are absurd, and the god is hideous.

Frankly...you have not PROVED any of these things...but if that is what you are trying (unsuccessfully) to do...save your breath. The god is pitiful.

But because that god does not seem real (to put it in its kindest form)...and because it appears humans are not capable of accurately describing what a god should be...

...DOES NOT WORK AS A PROOF FOR GODS BEING IMPOSSIBLE.

We cannot describe or understand or communicate much about REALITY...but that does not mean REALITY is not.
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
The "atheism" thread locked, yet again, eh? - Discussion by layman
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
@MyFellowAtheists: How Big an Atheist Are You? - Question by Kolyo
Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity - Discussion by XXSpadeMasterXX
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
The Atheist/Theist unity thread (a Discussion) - Discussion by Smileyrius
Can atheists believe in an immortal soul? - Question by neologist
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Absurdity of Atheism
  3. » Page 17
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 11:40:29
▲ ▼