A Disproof of Your God.

[Reaper8281]

you guys are all idiots... if god were real, would he allow this thread?
fuckin idiots
*trying so hard not to laugh in class*

[Empire]

Imagine that you are looking at timelessness, what is "outside" our universe - God's territory.
God cannot be seen because he is not physical (he is a nonphysical being, spirit or consciousness) and he can't be heard, touched, felt etc because of that reason.
The only thing that makes God what he is, is his consciousness. Now imagine that his consciousness is completely immutable. If we are to use the analogy of the movie again, his consciousness would be a still frame picture, except that you can't see the photo because he isn't physical.
Notice how God is synonymous with nothing?

So nothing is made out of nothing? But I think the universe is something.

:/ you just described God in accordance to your own beliefs. God cannot be____ because you said so? Atheist stating god's properties is funny, especially you, "god is nothing, nothing, and nothing" isn't a valid logical argument.

In no way, shape, or form, does that prove anything except that this is what you believe god's properties to be.

O.o You also said "if we are to use the anology of the movie again" when you never said one in the first place. Which the anology wouldn't make sense, since you were looking at timelessness, a movie is moving pictures.
----------------------------------------

All in all, cause and effect still proves god's existence. Which you did not disprove.
------------------------
@reaper: Discerning anothers intentions is pretty silly. You aren't capable of discerning the true intentions of the person right next to you, what makes you think that you could discern the intentions of God?

[barklolbark]

:/ you just described God in accordance to your own beliefs. God cannot be____ because you said so? Atheist stating god's properties is funny, especially you, "god is nothing, nothing, and nothing" isn't a valid logical argument.

In no way, shape, or form, does that prove anything except that this is what you believe god's properties to be.

O.o You also said "if we are to use the anology of the movie again" when you never said one in the first place. Which the anology wouldn't make sense, since you were looking at timelessness, a movie is moving pictures.
----------------------------------------

All in all, cause and effect still proves god's existence. Which you did not disprove.
------------------------
@reaper: Discerning anothers intentions is pretty silly. You aren't capable of discerning the true intentions of the person right next to you, what makes you think that you could discern the intentions of God?

No, I described God in accordance to Abrahamic relgious beliefs.

L2Read titles.

You say because we are here something had to create us. Cause and effect does not prove Gods existence. You assume that an intelligent being had to create something if it is here. Why do sand dunes exist? Did an intelligent being set them up in the order? No, wind is not conscience and not alive. Your cause and effect of a conscious being has been disproved.

[Empire]

No, I described God in accordance to Abrahamic relgious beliefs.

L2Read titles.

You say because we are here something had to create us. Cause and effect does not prove Gods existence. You assume that an intelligent being had to create something if it is here. Why do sand dunes exist? Did an intelligent being set them up in the order? No, wind is not conscience and not alive. Your cause and effect of a conscious being has been disproved.

:/ You really can't understand basic logic can you?

Something had to create the universe(from the start), we call that being God.

Cause and Effect really escapes your grasp? Man and i thought religious people were supposed to be stupid.

Look, one thing caused everything. Thing is God.

Therefore by going to the origin, god created everything, now did he create dunes? If you look at the cause, yeah. But did he just go "EXIST DUNES" no.
---------------------------

Disproving a certain religions god is easy, disproving god isn't. Silly atheist, tricks are for kids.

[barklolbark]

:/ You really can't understand basic logic can you?

Something had to create the universe(from the start), we call that being God.

Cause and Effect really escapes your grasp? Man and i thought religious people were supposed to be stupid.

Look, one thing caused everything. Thing is God.

Therefore by going to the origin, god created everything, now did he create dunes? If you look at the cause, yeah. But did he just go "EXIST DUNES" no.
---------------------------

Disproving a certain religions god is easy, disproving god isn't. Silly atheist, tricks are for kids.

Are you fucking retarded, or is religion finally getting to you? This whole thread is about "certain religions", those being Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. I'm not trying to disprove a creator in the broad sense, but when you apply ideas to him you are bound to lose, which you did.

[Paroxysm]

Cause and effect are properties of our universe. The universe doesn't necessarily need a cause.

[Empire]

Cause and effect are properties of our universe. The universe doesn't necessarily need a cause.

:/ It didn't just start from nothing.

@bark, woopee, you found a flaw in christianity/Islam/Judaism. Congrats bro, not like there was anyone saying it was flawless in the first place, but good job.
-You happy? Cus pointing out flaws in what everyone already considers a flawed system isn't hard.

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

Horse is dead. Stop beating him. Dayum..22 pages.

[Paroxysm]

:/ It didn't just start from nothing.

@bark, woopee, you found a flaw in christianity/Islam/Judaism. Congrats bro, not like there was anyone saying it was flawless in the first place, but good job.
-You happy? Cus pointing out flaws in what everyone already considers a flawed system isn't hard.

I'm not saying it started from nothing, I'm saying is that we are trying to connect a causal-chain to an event that doesn't necessarily require it. We are arguing with universal logic about an event that isn't necessarily bound by it. When people say the universe NEEDED a cause I feel obligated to point out that our perspective is skewing our understanding.

[Empire]

I'm not saying it started from nothing, I'm saying is that we are trying to connect a causal-chain to an event that doesn't necessarily require it. We are arguing with universal logic about an event that isn't necessarily bound by it. When people say the universe NEEDED a cause I feel obligated to point out that our perspective is skewing our understanding.

Hmmm, but for now, with current logic, it does.

[Nismo]

Current logic is now, Universe 'made' looong time ago.. 'before logic'

[Empire]

Current logic is now, Universe 'made' looong time ago.. 'before logic'

*sigh* if you don't know what you're talking about, keep it to yourself please.

[barklolbark]

:/ It didn't just start from nothing.

@bark, woopee, you found a flaw in christianity/Islam/Judaism. Congrats bro, not like there was anyone saying it was flawless in the first place, but good job.
-You happy? Cus pointing out flaws in what everyone already considers a flawed system isn't hard.

Well, since so many Christians believe their religion is oh-so-perfect, I think it's about time we knocked them down a few notches. We don't want their heads getting too big.

Horse is dead. Stop beating him. Dayum..22 pages.

You're still here?

*sigh* if you don't know what you're talking about, keep it to yourself please.

Practice what you preach.

Current logic is now, Universe 'made' looong time ago.. 'before logic'

Imagine we are on the world 1500 years ago. We cannot see the Earth from our perspective, so we assume it is flat.

You cannot see the universe, so you assume GODDIDIT.

[Nismo]

Imagine we are on the world 1500 years ago. We cannot see the Earth from our perspective, so we assume it is flat.

You cannot see the universe, so you assume GODDIDIT.

Uh.. no.. I'm on your side.

We can't assume anything, so until we go there or see the beginning, no one is really correct. But Atheism is the closest

[barklolbark]

Uh.. no.. I'm on your side.

We can't assume anything, so until we go there or see the beginning, no one is really correct. But Atheism is the closest

I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic.