|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
I've decided it is futile to prove that God exists.
First off, you can't prove that you are reading this. You can't prove that this text exists, that I exist or that you exist. The mind can be easily tricked by electrical impulses and wahtnot.
Therfore, you cannot prove that we were actually created.
(Atheist BTW)
Thoughts?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:17 am
Cogito ergo sum, my friend. Because you understand that you are capable of doubting your own existence, you can reason that you, yourself, exist in a conscious state capable of doubting your own existence -- everything else, however, depends on if you pick the red pill or the blue pill.
"God," however, can of course never be proven save hell rising, a Second Coming, or rapture. While I don't necessarily disagree with the possibility of their being a higher power, the arrogant position of every proselytizer in the world that their exact Church is the correct one down to the very grains of sand Jesus Christ bled profusely onto is extremely frustrating; they often try to "prove God" by proving certain stories in the Bible happened, which is retarded, because I can easily say I wrote this paragraph and then left for work because the angel Gabriel visited me in my sleep to do so.
As a severely skeptic agnostic, I've spent years reviewing every religion I've come across thoroughly, breaking down their Gods to the last feasible brick of reason.
After much review, I believe the most agreeable view of any Godlike being would have to be one of a time-transcendent God in order to account for the ever-cynical "If God made existence, then where did God come from?" If posed with the question, a religious individual could go "lol the future, dumbass. biggrin " God is born at the end, does his s**t, travels back in time, remakes the world, then maybe hatches a pantheon, goes back to death, whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 11:33 am
I remember this one time on an atheism board I used to go to this guy was trying to prove that the flood happened and NONE of his arguments made any sense. The only one I remember is something like "Theyve found rows of dead, open oysters really high up on the shore. Oysters close up when they're dead." It was hilarious. Ive stayed away from the board since nobody is really gonna change their opinion... thanks for the input. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 12:17 pm
See, the thing with Noah and the Ark is that almost every religion imaginable has a flood myth. But you also have to figure that international communication was very much down, especially if you were in a place like Noah's, so chances are, if it did happen, it was just a local flooding on a grand scale. Like a heavy hurricane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:14 pm
There's also that thing with the number of animals in the world compared to the dimensions of the boat.
On the plus side of the flood it makes for a pretty good Cosby sketch, some good Far Sides, and a hilarious Robot Chicken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:30 pm
zargap I remember this one time on an atheism board I used to go to this guy was trying to prove that the flood happened and NONE of his arguments made any sense. The only one I remember is something like "Theyve found rows of dead, open oysters really high up on the shore. Oysters close up when they're dead." It was hilarious. Ive stayed away from the board since nobody is really gonna change their opinion... thanks for the input. biggrin also where the heck would Noah get a Beaver, Grisley Bear, Polar Bear and Penguin? xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:29 pm
durrypoo also where the heck would Noah get a Beaver, Grisley Bear, Polar Bear and Penguin? xp I heard that that was one of the dilemmas Christians were hard pressed to explain upon discovery of the New World. With all different people and different animals... it's tricky to explain how Noah would of managed to save a part of the world that wasn't even known. I don't remember what was ultimately the excuse...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 5:42 pm
Kagerou Osajima durrypoo also where the heck would Noah get a Beaver, Grisley Bear, Polar Bear and Penguin? xp I heard that that was one of the dilemmas Christians were hard pressed to explain upon discovery of the New World. With all different people and different animals... it's tricky to explain how Noah would of managed to save a part of the world that wasn't even known. I don't remember what was ultimately the excuse... If I remember right, they were torn between Noah not having enough time to record every animal he gathered or God simply creating new animals to fill in the new land masses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 7:20 pm
Yeah, I've never thought of that before... but it's a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 09, 2006 4:52 pm
No, I can't prove that you or I or anyone really exists. I'm trying to come up with a way to do that though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 09, 2006 8:20 pm
PsychoDagger No, I can't prove that you or I or anyone really exists. I'm trying to come up with a way to do that though... Do you doubt? Then you exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:28 pm
I think therefore I am. How does god Identify himself I am the I am. eek I have no idea what I mean by this. I just thought of it and have not yet had time to meditate upon this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:23 pm
To prove the identity of this GOD, we are to assume he has infinite powers and place faith and our thought and mind into the idea that there is a greater force watching over us, yet as we do not fully know what this if anything God is, it is simply X-infinity,
Because of this. We are able to assume 'God' an unknown presence to be anything. Yet, to prove the existence of God, is to allow the opinions of others to comply with your own belifes by presenting 'proof' which can be interpreted by another to be acceptable or another rant of a madman.
Thus, as it is only the mind and it's material thoughts which can prove the existence of God, as God could be standing infront of us with visual proof. If we deny that God is infront of us and believe that thought, it is and instantly becomes the new truth until the majority support a diffrent view.
Because of this, there is no true way to proof the existence of any matter. As every single 'reality' is decided upon the majority idea and thoughts of others.
The current arguement regarding God, is quite simple.
One person picks a number between -Infinity and infinity, The next person agrees or disagrees with that number and so on and so forth. In terms of simple explanation via numbers.
Thus, the closest proven thing that is here as far as the topic of 'God' goes, God is simply our thoughts and opinions. As we as humans can potentially deny or accept anything presented to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:30 pm
luftwafe I think therefore I am. How does god Identify himself I am the I am. eek I have no idea what I mean by this. I just thought of it and have not yet had time to meditate upon this.
You think you are human.
Therefore you are, as you believe so.
You never knew the meaning of 'human' nor could you compare yourself to any other living creature,
Therefore you think you are not human, as the expression doesnt exist.
Therefore you are not human, that is. If everybody in the world complied with that opinion >.> It's a basic philosophyical understanding. Come on, im only 14.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:10 pm
I don't beleive in much of the bible, but in the same argument, prove NOT god.
Can't be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
