If it could be proved no god exists

Desert Snake · Oct 13, 2019

IndigoChild5559 said:
You quoted John 3:16, which is evangelization.

Theoretically, you could be wrong. It could be that if someone believes in Jesus that it won't bring them eternal life. And so yes, you would be handing out false information, which is what you were warning people about.

Think about it.

Not quite. If a jew reads John 3:36, and they don't want to believe in Jesus in a traditional Christian manner, then they could read it, as, believe what Jesus said, as a Rabbi. Or use whatever discretion in that context, makes sense. If I were 'evangelizing' to a Jew, which I don't, however if I were, I would tell them things related to Biblical belief, as a whole.

Usually arguments on the forums aren't of that nature, ie usually, they are 'textually literalism' context. Which isn't how I approach things anyways.

QuestioningMind · Oct 13, 2019

Katzpur said:
That's not what you meant, though, is it?

It's exactly what I meant. At least with the Book of Mormon and Dianetics we know who it is that claims the words they wrote were inspired by god. When it comes to other religious texts its simply a matter of 'some guy' wrote it down.

QuestioningMind · Oct 13, 2019

MJFlores said:
@QuestioningMind
@ecco
@Etritonakin
@A Vestigial Mote

Way to avoid answering simply questions yet AGAIN! Clearly you have no answer. You just want to spew your unfounded claims without having to ever defend your silly nonsense. Rather sad and pathetic, in my opinion.

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

JJ50 said:
There is no evidence there is any god out there.

There is evidence but there is no forensic evidence.

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

night912 said:
No, that is why morality without religion is necessary. That humanity can still act morally whether religion is there or not. To be moral even when someone no longer have religion and/or faith is a lot better. That also goes for the fearing of god.

I think it can work either way, depending upon the religion and its teachings. All religions are not the same.

Yes, some people can and do act morally without religion...
Conversely, some people act immorally even though they have a religion.
But also some religious people act morally not just because of their religion, but because they have a conscience.

I do not think people should act morally just out of fear of God because that indicates they would not otherwise act morally. But that does not mean I think people should not fear God. I think we should fear God; because God has all power it only makes sense to fear God because God can and will do whatever He chooses to do.

night912 said:
Knowing why something is moral or immoral is far better than simply doing what one was told.

I do not think it is an either/or. I need to understand why I do whatever I do, it has to make sense to me, but still I will try to do what I am told by God. I might not *like* certain of God's Laws but I do not disagree with them because to me that would be like saying I know more than God, which is logically impossible as well as arrogant.

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

ecco said:
Your argument was that one cannot prove a negative. Have you already forgotten that you posted that assertion?

That was not an argument, it was a statement of fact. Some negatives can be proven but universal negatives such as "god does not exist" cannot be proven.

ecco said:
Why did you link to the article? Why did you quote from the article?

Because you asked me what I was referring to. You said:

Give me an example of a negative, and we'll see if it can be proven.
Are you referring to the fact that, since gods cannot be proven, they are negatives?

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

ecco said:
Because you posted two contradictory comments.

What I did in the past does not matter to me.... I live in the present moment.
I make a mistake, I see the error, I correct it, and then I move on.
Is there any reason to ruminate over the past?

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

ecco said:
OK. Feel free to quote me and/or change the word "excrement" to any word of your choosing.

He loves using that word so I plan to use it back at him, when the time comes. I am waiting for just the right time, so I am keeping it in my back pocket. I already hit him with what you said before:

You deduced using your puny human logic. Did you ever take the time to reflect that your human logic is completely worthless in trying to deduce what God does and does not want? No. You didn't. That's arrogant.

And then I admitted I do not know what God wants, but that cuts both ways because he cannot know that either.
You would have to actually SEE the things he says in order to believe me. He thinks he *knows* what God would do and what god should do if god exists.... INcredible.

He thinks he is the king of logic, but he does not understand that since God has not done those things he thinks god would/should do, that means the god he *imagines* would do those things cannot exist.

But he is the worst of the deflectors. He only responds to what *he thinks* will bolster his position...

ecco said:
You might want to mention that I am not one of those atheists who just don't believe god(s) exist. I am one of those atheists who assert that all gods are nothing more than the creation of man's imaginings.

OK, I just added that to my back pocket.....
Isn't that saying about the same thing, gods don't exist, man just imagines that they exist?

shunyadragon · Oct 13, 2019

JJ50 said:
I wonder what would be the reaction of theists if evidence was discovered which proved beyond any shadow of doubt that no god has ever existed, and all faiths are created by humans?

This would be very very unlikely, because we discover only physical things, and to boot science does not prove anything, Beyond the nature of our physical existence science is mute.

PruePhillip · Oct 13, 2019

ecco said:
I notice that, once again, you did not address my comments.

Thought I did. The confusion over the statement that the seas brought forth life.

Earlier you said: "... the heavens (meaning everything we see, feel, hear etc..)"

Sorry, I thought cosmology WAS the entirety of the universe and everything in it.

Using your definitions: The ~~heavens~~ everything we see, feel, hear etc. created the world.
Really?!? An Elton John song created the world? The alligator I see in my back yard created the world? The sting from the mosquito bite created the world?

Yes, the heavens created your world - because the "heavens" is everything, ie gravity, light,
physical laws, space, energy etc - planets were created by the heavens by the formation
of the "metals" which coalesced under gravity to form stars which......

PruePhillip · Oct 13, 2019

ecco said:
By whom?

One and two cannot both be correct.
Birds did not emerge from the seas.

Science has not reached a definitive conclusion on the processes or the locations that went from molecules to cells.

Biochemistry found objection by those in the church who saw it as an attempt
to downgrade life from something spiritual in nature to something mere physical.

Genesis speaks of life emerging on land, and then gives examples of land life.
Same for the sea.

Birds are dinosaurs, which come from reptiles, which come from amphibians
which come from lobe fins which which come from fish which come from the
sea. So yes, God commanded the seas to bring forth life and out of it came
birds - eventually.

night912 · Oct 13, 2019

Trailblazer said:
I think it can work either way, depending upon the religion and its teachings. All religions are not the same.

You've just shown why morality without religion is better. Yes, not all religions are the same, and some, if not all, has some teachings that are immoral.

Trailblazer said:
Yes, some people can and do act morally without religion...
Conversely, some people act immorally even though they have a religion.
But also some religious people act morally not just because of their religion, but because they have a conscience.

That's why religion is not needed for morality.

Trailblazer said:
I do not think people should act morally just out of fear of God because that indicates they would not otherwise act morally. But that does not mean I think people should not fear God. I think we should fear God; because God has all power it only makes sense to fear God because God can and will do whatever He chooses to do.

That's not what you said.
"Most people need the fear of God to keep them in line because most people are materialistic and selfish..."

Trailblazer said:
I do not think it is an either/or. I need to understand why I do whatever I do, it has to make sense to me, but still I will try to do what I am told by God. I might not *like* certain of God's Laws but I do not disagree with them because to me that would be like saying I know more than God, which is logically impossible as well as arrogant.

Nope. That's two separate things. The knowledge of and understanding of god's laws (if he exist) is logically possible and not arrogant. There's nothing arrogant about understanding why something you do is moral or immoral, but there's ignorance in doing something without understanding why it's moral or immoral. It's better because it's actually more logical and rational to understand it.

night912 · Oct 13, 2019

shunyadragon said:
This would be very very unlikely, because we discover only physical things, and to boot science does not prove anything, Beyond the nature of our physical existence science is mute.

But what would be your reaction?

shunyadragon · Oct 13, 2019

PruePhillip said:
Thought I did. The confusion over the statement that the seas brought forth life.

I do not think the statement 'the seas brought forth life' is meaningful in the context of the whole Genesis account as far as science is concerned,

Sorry, I thought cosmology WAS the entirety of the universe and everything in it.

Cosmology is the entire physical existence, our universe and all possible universes.

shunyadragon · Oct 13, 2019

night912 said:
But what would be your reaction?

There is no reaction concerning what is not possible.

Trailblazer · Oct 13, 2019

night912 said:
You've just shown why morality without religion is better. Yes, not all religions are the same, and some, if not all, has some teachings that are immoral.

The way I see it, if one is moral it does not matter if it is because of a religion or not.
If a religion has teachings one considers immoral then they should not follow that religion, because they would be going against their conscience. But then one has to define what moral is. What is moral to one person is not moral to another, so who sets the standard?

night912 said:
That's why religion is not needed for morality.

I think it is needed for some but not for all people.

night912 said:
That's not what you said.
"Most people need the fear of God to keep them in line because most people are materialistic and selfish..."

I think that is true Most but not all people need a fear of God to act morally.
Then again, what is moral and immoral? That has to be defined. What one person considers moral another person might consider immoral.

night912 said:
Nope. That's two separate things. The knowledge of and understanding of god's laws (if he exist) is logically possible and not arrogant. There's nothing arrogant about understanding why something you do is moral or immoral, but there's ignorance in doing something without understanding why it's moral or immoral. It's better because it's actually more logical and rational to understand it.

I fully agree. But what if you understand a law of God but disagree with it? I guess if you are not a member of that religion you can just blow it off.

night912 · Oct 13, 2019

shunyadragon said:
There is no reaction concerning what is not possible.

So denial it is.

MJFlores · Oct 13, 2019

@QuestioningMind
@ecco
@Etritonakin
@A Vestigial Mote

I find it strange that people should be so emotional in showing their disbelief in God.
If these disbelieving people could really prove that God does not exist then they shouldn't
be emotional but lay down their assertions with confidence without showing a hint of any feeling
whatsoever

I believe that we exist because God Almighty allowed us to exist
And the world exists to be habitable for all living things, including man
That makes the earth unique, rare and one of a kind in the universe
This universe was created in God's understanding

I believe we should be grateful
That is why I know that is our duty to find the true God and give him thanks
Further being a true worshiper has its advantage
Every time I call to the Father, the Father listens and gives me strenght

But people who do not know God, are alone
helpless and angry
Doomed to suffer on Judgement Day when all people are to be judged
now that is pathetic

shunyadragon · Oct 13, 2019

MJFlores said:
@QuestioningMind
@ecco
@Etritonakin
@A Vestigial Mote

I find it strange that people should be so emotional in showing their disbelief in God.
If these disbelieving people could really prove that God does not exist then they shouldn't
be emotional but lay down their assertions with confidence without showing a hint of any feeling
whatsoever

I believe that we exist because God Almighty allowed us to exist
And the world exists to be habitable for all living things, including man
That makes the earth unique, rare and one of a kind in the universe
This universe was created in God's understanding

I believe we should be grateful
That is why I know that is our duty to find the true God and give him thanks
Further being a true worshiper has its advantage
Every time I call to the Father, the Father listens and gives me strenght

But people who do not know God, are alone
helpless and angry
Doomed to suffer on Judgement Day when all people are to be judged
now that is pathetic

Among the possibility of trillions and more planets, at least a few million could be earth like planets.

PruePhillip · Oct 13, 2019

shunyadragon said:
I do not think the statement 'the seas brought forth life' is meaningful in the context of the whole Genesis account as far as science is concerned,

I think it is.
I recall as a first year school student looking at a book which dealt with Genesis vs science.
The Genesis picture showed a huge arm reaching down from the clouds and planting a little
plant into the soil. This was the bible's account of how life formed on earth.
Only it wasn't.
In the 1970's I began looking at these verses. Spoke to a senior Rabbi in Melbourne. He was
amazed that his Torah said "God COMMANDED the seas to bring forth life."
Now both religious people and science people will cut you off if you mention this. I call these
verses the "orphan verses" of the bible. I felt I was onto the right thing.
Other things still weren't right
Back then we didn't know the early earth was oceanic with no continents.
We thought life came from the sea FIRST and then the land - opposite to Genesis.

So when you read Genesis 1 give credit where its due.

Cosmology is the entire physical existence, our universe and all possible universes.

Thought that is what I said. To me cosmology isn't just the heavens, it goes down to the very atoms
because all this formed from cosmology.

If it could be proved no god exists

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

shunyadragon

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

shunyadragon

shunyadragon

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

shunyadragon

Well-Known Member