Athiests are soo BLIND, IGNORANT, DUMB AND STUPID

[Syf]

Now this statement is simply redefining the word "god" to refer to something that is hard to argue against. Sort of like this:

Does infinity exist?

Yes.

Well infinity is another word for God therefore you believe in God!

WTF!?

If you're going to simply redefine words to suit your argument then god is a delicious slice of cheesecake that contains no calories and as god is everywhere I WANT MY FUCKING CHEESECAKE!

The existence or nonexistence of god is a question of great importance. Far too much importance to be resolved using rhetorical trickery and word games. Must try harder.

I wasn't really trying all that hard. Converting people is not exactly my calling.

But saying infinity carries the same relation to God, that cheescake does, is missing the point entirely.

While someone could go on and on about how God is everything, and nothing, and get abstractionist and hopelessly vague, this is not what I'm trying to do.

You say I redefined the word God... I SAY, science did. So we will forever be at odds about that little nuance, won't we?.

Perhaps best not to think about it

[BOLLOCKS]

It's the other way around, twat.

[squealpiggy]

I wasn't really trying all that hard. Converting people is not exactly my calling.

But saying infinity carries the same relation to God, that cheescake does, is missing the point entirely.

While someone could go on and on about how God is everything, and nothing, and get abstractionist and hopelessly vague, this is not what I'm trying to do.

You say I redefined the word God... I SAY, science did. So we will forever be at odds about that little nuance, won't we?.

Perhaps best not to think about it

Science has nothing to say about god because god by any meaningful definition has absolutely no bearing on the natural world which thus far is the only world we are able to observe. So science did not redefine god to some impersonal avatar and rename it "infinity". In making this poor rhetorical argument YOU have redefeined god, matched it up to a scientific (actually mathematica, but who's counting?) concept you insufficiently understand and then rested your case.

[Syf]

Science has nothing to say about god because god by any meaningful definition has absolutely no bearing on the natural world which thus far is the only world we are able to observe. So science did not redefine god to some impersonal avatar and rename it "infinity". In making this poor rhetorical argument YOU have redefeined god, matched it up to a scientific (actually mathematica, but who's counting?) concept you insufficiently understand and then rested your case.

Yes resting my case is fun. Much more agreeable than tireless arguing echoing forever...

But lets define what one of the most important purposes of a God is. Its to explain point of origin.

I was talking to a professor a while ago, according to the Big Bang theory the universe exploded into being from, not nothing, but a little particle, infinitely small, that was a universe in and of itself, just more condensed. Inter-dimensional hyperbole? I do not know.

So.. I asked him, well where did the "particle" come from? and he says, It had always been there.

This introduces your concept of infinity quite nicely.

Now lets define another aspect of God: the unfathomable. Man cannot wrap his mind around what God's awareness would even be like, much the same as man cannot wrap their mind around the concept of infinity. You cannot possibly imagine how time never had a beginning.. how its just always been. If you even tried to imagine all the possibilities derived from such a scenario, your primitive brain (not an insult, all of our brains are too primitive too comprehend the greater mysteries) would overload from too much input.

So.. you just put it all in one word: Infinity. Much the same as religious types put theirs in all one word: God.

[MindBat]

This discussion has gone on for millenia with no evidence that a god exists or doesn't exist.

I stick to the evidence we can see, feel and hear.

Forces of nature which can be both destructive and constructive to human, animal, plant, and insect life.

Maybe there was/were God(s) in existence in the past. Who really knows?

Going by what is currently evident and irrefutable to everyone -- No one escapes sickness, tragedy, or death regardless of anyone's religious or atheist belief. That's what should be understood by all.

Life just is. We win some, we lose some. There's no perfection. There's no chosen group of individuals who live the best life on Earth.

On second thought, the wealthy and opulent live much better lives than most. Just not perfect lives.

So, the ruler of humanity may be considered to be Money and the system controlled by money which the majority of humanity must live by. That is the undeniable proof.

It is money which must be controlled or it will control you.

People are happy-ER when there is sufficient money to do the things they enjoy the most. When there is less money, most pray there were more of it.

That's just one example.

[Syf]

This discussion has gone on for millenia with no evidence that a god exists or doesn't exist.

I stick to the evidence we can see, feel and hear.

Forces of nature which can be both destructive and constructive to human, animal, plant, and insect life.

Maybe there was/were God(s) in existence in the past. Who really knows?

Going by what is currently evident and irrefutable to everyone -- No one escapes sickness, tragedy, or death regardless of anyone's religious or atheist belief. That's what should be understood by all.

Life just is. We win some, we lose some. There's no perfection. There's no chosen group of individuals who live the best life on Earth.

On second thought, the wealthy and opulent live much better lives than most. Just not perfect lives.

So, the ruler of humanity may be considered to be Money and the system controlled by money which the majority of humanity must live by. That is the undeniable proof.

It is money which must be controlled or it will control you.

People are happy-ER when there is sufficient money to do the things they enjoy the most. When there is less money, most pray there were more of it.

That's just one example.

Interesting points..

To me, science basically depersonalized God, but all the awesome and infinite power is still there, if you go back far enough, or just pause to look around for once, or look up at the night sky.

I've heard a couple of arguments about why God lets people suffer. One is that he's left, that we broke his heart or whatever, and so has left us to our own devices. The other is that life is merely an eyeblink compared to the eternity our souls will endure. That all our suffering is basically meaningless in the grand scheme.

I tend to believe the second one, though it is of course oversimplified.. Who can really know why, anyway? Eventually you just gotta choose a belief and stick with it. Nothing is certain if you seek only what you can touch and see, because you will always be second guessing it. Whereas, if you just choose to believe, that is stronger.

[Fighting Marine]

WOW...so far in this thread, athiests have claimed there is such a thing as a 'Perfect Vacuum' and that Virtual Particles are evidence that this universe can come from nothing....WOW, just WOW......keep your head in the sand athiests

[squealpiggy]

But lets define what one of the most important purposes of a God is. Its to explain point of origin.

The entire god hypothesis is essentially "he did it by magic". So as an explanation of origins god actually explains nothing. It's an intellectual dead end. It teaches us nothing. I've given numerous other examples of things that god and god's magic has been used to explain, for example lightning, sunrise, rains, earthquakes, disease... In not a single one of these cases was our understanding enhanced in any way by invoking the supernatural. Indeed it was only after we overcame the supernatural explanations with naturalistic explanations using science that we were able to broaden our understanding nof these phenomena.

This is known as the "god of the gaps" fallacy. God is apparently the ineffable explanation for anything we don' understand. The gaps are getting smaller and therefore the domain of the gods is becoming more and more metaphorical and much less influential.

I was talking to a professor a while ago, according to the Big Bang theory the universe exploded into being from, not nothing, but a little particle, infinitely small, that was a universe in and of itself, just more condensed. Inter-dimensional hyperbole? I do not know.

So.. I asked him, well where did the "particle" come from? and he says, It had always been there.

This introduces your concept of infinity quite nicely.

Who, what and where are the immediate questions. Who was he, what was he a professor of, and where does he hold such an appointment? The old chestnut of "I was discussing matters with a professor who told me a strawman version of events and I jolly well had him stumped" is a mouldy old canard used by creationsists mainly as an argument from authority.

Hypotheses abound about the origins of the singularity that preceeded the big bang. The somewhat banal explanation by your "professor" leads me to doubt the veracity of your story. I don't think you spoke to a professor on this subject, I think nyou were told this story by somebody else. I don't think they spoke to a professor either. I don't think that this professor exists, I'll be perfectly honest with you.

Now lets define another aspect of God: the unfathomable. Man cannot wrap his mind around what God's awareness would even be like, much the same as man cannot wrap their mind around the concept of infinity. You cannot possibly imagine how time never had a beginning.. how its just always been. If you even tried to imagine all the possibilities derived from such a scenario, your primitive brain (not an insult, all of our brains are too primitive too comprehend the greater mysteries) would overload from too much input.

So.. you just put it all in one word: Infinity. Much the same as religious types put theirs in all one word: God.

So you're saying that god is a metaphor. Well that's something we agree on. Metaphors are not real. I am happy to make the distinction between god as a metaphor and god as an actual agent which acts upon the universe in some manny, any manner at all.

But if god is a metaphor for things that are hard to understand then my cheesecake metaphor is every bit as valid as your infinity metaphor as I am simply asserting that god represents unattainable desires, perhaps as well as representing incomprehensible concepts.

[Fighting Marine]

it feels good making athiests look like ignorant fools

[Mares]

everything that religious nut don't understand is an aspect of god to them, like people back in the day say the sun is god because they don't understand what the sun really is. But now do people still think the sun is a god?
If so why, bother figuring out what the heck something is when u can easily say ah it is made by god, it is god don't bother with it.
The governments and institutions should not really be spending all those billions for figuring out all these theories because after it can all be summed up into one aspect which is god.
Well the truth is the reality is so much greater than god! **** god; god is an imbecile on a stupid book he is a creation of stone age peoples imagination, the way nature works is so much greater than god will ever be.