Have a look at this here website:
http://proofthatgodexists.org/
Step through the 'quiz', see what happens. I'd be interested in seeing the 4-ch'ers responses.
Oops, that was me again :-)
> Sure Christians have faith, but our faith accounts for the things your faith cannot.
How can faith fail to account for anything? The definition of faith I believe we are bandying about here is "firm belief in something for which there is no proof." As faith inherently has no basis outside of one's personal beliefs and convictions, if any faith is sufficient to account for anything, then all of it is. Or what basis will you determine which faiths are true and which faiths are not?
If you again use the basis of one's one's personal beliefs and convictions, it's called an "opinion."
Incidentally, if you have truly proven that God exists, this means you are faithless.
>>502 not quite, you might be convinced that god exists, so much that 'proof' has become irrelevant for you. Still, you need faith to believe in Gods goodness
What is God? Why is there only one? How does one know they are not several? Where are they? Are they still alive? Were they alive in the first place? What is Life? Where do I come from? Where am I going? Is this important?
We make artificial God.
kind of dead here without that guy here
yes allah is truth
Da Vinci Code Broken?
Read Answers provided by Islam
Islam claims to "break the code" so to speak, over 1,400 years ago. The answer, according to Muslm scholars has been in the Quran for over fourteen hundred years
Some may be surprised to learn, Muslims believe in the miracle birth and other miracles associated with Jesus. They actually consider him as the "Messiah" and they even say, "peace be upon him" when mentioning his name. However, they are quick to negate any connection between God and Jesus as a partnership or God-head, and they rule out the notion of God having any son (or daughter for that matter).
And he never answered >>494. Well, at least we didn't have to read yet another post of full of nothing but avoiding the question.
>>454
Hello, I'm still alive :)
>You can both be wrong, you cannot both be right.
Only if A and B are mutually exclusive. You didn't specify.
>If I perceive the law of non-contradiction to be that A can be non-A
Impossible. You can't perceive wrongly. But you can misidentify.
> >I don't need to be able to perceive the whole universe to know that things that are not themselves don't exist, never have and never will.
>How do you know? You certainly do not have universal knowledge.
Eh. I donno. Maybe this is the appropriate time to pull out the 'impossibility of the contrary' card. Any view that affirms contradictions in reality automatically invalidates itself... or something...
Nevertheless, A is A! The turtle moves!
He left already. Also, word to the wise: Quoting Ayn Rand only marks you out as a teenager who's just discovered philosophy and thinks he can have a controversial opinion. "Objectivism" is pretty much a joke, and you'd do well to grow out of that phase as soon as you can.
'A is A' is a controversial opinion? Wha? Or what?
disregard that, well not really, but post in the new topic pls :)
lol God does exists, I am your GOD!! SMELL YOUR GOD!! No Religion is correct! Everyone party!! NOW!! OR PARTY OR GO TO HELL LITERALLY!!
i bet u if god fucked u up the ass u'd believe in him..think about that! :P
...
>>515 if you'd be so kind to leave your address on this thread.
love,
bubba
I find irony in the site icon and quote. "...he who hates correction is stupid." from Proverbs, and yet, the icon is taken from the book of Matthew, which reads, "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" In other words, don't judge or be condescending onto others unless you are without fault. And then the site's quiz then goes on to proclaim that those with views contrary to theirs are stupid, illogical and so on. Irony.
>>519
I see no irony. His position is that his worldview is right and perfect.
i like how people can assume that they could possibly deduce and understand an infinite timeless being that could have created everything to which we have no access to and on top of THAT would actually "care" about our existence to the point of punishing us if we didnt believe in it.
I like how people will bump dead threads just to listen to themselves talk!
>>521 Surely you can deduce that an 'infinite, timeless being could reveal certain things to us, which we are to understand?
Also, we are not punished for not believing in God, we are punished for our sin.
I AM answering you!
This should be enough of a proof since I AM GOD!
Nuh-uh, I'm God.
That website is seriously pissing me off...
I took a crap today.
god must be real.
>>1
That test is a total waste of time. It's a one-way forced answer using twisted pseudo-logic brainwash.
You are going towards the proof that God does exists with these steps.
Yet if a single step is wrong, the whole thinking behind it is wrong.
It takes like six step for an average human to understand that you're wrong:
Universal means that they're true, anywhere, anytime.
Step Six: The Nature of Laws
"Laws of Math, Science and Asbolute Morality are Universal"
Even if we assume that Math's laws and absolute morality are universal, science's law is not.
Let's take physics as an example: laws that works for normal-gigantic masses does not work for subatomics masses.
So if you try to use classic mechanics ( or even the G.Relativity mechanics) to find the position, or the speed, of a subatomic particle, you fail. (They can be found using Quantum Mechanics)
Since a theory that unifies them both hasn't been found yet, they're both non-universal.
So the early statment:
"Laws of Math, Science and Asbolute Morality are Universal"
is wrong.
And that makes your test wrong.
um... maybe i should be ashamed too, these above id-tags are all the same. Case of severe split personality?
>>532
He has learned to sage now, at least.
Prove that "God" DOES exist. I dare you.
That is as impossible as proving "God" doesn't exist.
So don't bother. This will achieve nothing. Spend your time at better things.
Consider two even integers x and y. Since they are even, they can be written as x = 2a and y = 2b respectively for smaller integers a and b. Then the sum x + y = 2a + 2b = 2(a + b). From this it is clear that 2 is a factor of x + y, therefore God exists.
"God" is like "Al Qaeda". There is no such thing as Al Qaeda, but the American gov fights it anyway.
>>535
OH SHIT... looks like it's back to church with my heathen ass.
http://proofthatgodexists.org/no-morality.php
FUCKIGN RETARDED
I accepted that laws of mathematics and science exist, but morality does not, and it gives me this bullshit
Also, when i denied absolute morality, it asked me if raping a child for fun is right.
WHAT HTE FUCK DOES FUN HAVE TO DO WITH THIS YOU FUCKING MORON PIEC OF SHIT FAGGOT
RAPING A CHILD IS AN ACTION, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
FUN IS IRREVELANT
FEELINGS ARE IRREVELANT
YOU FUCKING FAGGOT PIECE OF SHIT MOTHERFUCKER
NO I DONT RAPE CHILDREN BECAUSE I FEAR THE CONSEQUENCES, NOT BECAUSE MORALITY TELLS ME ITS "BAD"
TEHRE IS NO BAD OR GOOD. FUCK YOU.
>>538
However, your very post was rather bad in content, argument, spelling, grammar, caps lock moderation, and general communicative success.
omfg...if you click "there are no absolute moral laws" it asks you "are you a child molester" WTF? this is the most bias crap ive seen...someone should fuck up this site >:[
"It is true that God does not need anyone, let alone this website, to prove His existence" my god then stop trying, your failing at it anyway
and what else do they say "The Bible teaches that the existence of God is so obvious that we are without excuse for denying it"...what the hell is that crap "we dont need to prove it cuz its obvious that it exists" GAH THATS NOT AN ARGUMENT.
> someone should fuck up this site
No, no one should fuck up any site.
They have a right to say whatever bullshit they want, no matter how goddam stupid it is.
Doing so would only validate a persecution complex.
http://proofthatgodexists.org/no-morality.php
disappointed,... Fun was over almost from the beginning (cf the options give if you don't believe in absolute moral laws). And it doesn't get better after that...
But if you survive through the drivel to get to the proof, you get this:
"The Proof that God exists is that without Him you couldn't prove anything."
ROFL
Wow, so through their logic since God must exist then the "Christian worldview" must also be absolute?
I don't know if they have been living under a rock but this could apply to the Talmud/Quran/whatever as well.
>>544
i hate you
Protip: There are no "laws of mathematics"
http://proofthatgodexists.org/no-morality1.php
closed the window here. don't want my co workers to know i'm a------i mean, THINK that i'm a pedo
The only thing that website proves is that the people who made it, are just as stupid as expected.
I noticed some odd things about the "proofing" shown in the website:
I find it hard to believe that all the world's cultures hold the same views on morality.A quick look at the definition of morality states the definition as "The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct." For example, Isn't tipping in Germany immoral?
2. Absolute morality is unchanging.
Lets think about civil rights. Initially, slavery was regarded as a moral practice. Currently, slavery is frowned upon.Have we not experienced a change of morality?
3. "Only in a universe governed by God can universal, immaterial, unchanging laws exist."
By looking at points 1 and 2, our universe does not apply to this statement. So god may not exist within this universe.
The only problem I have with my criticism is point 1. I'm not too sure if the web site is referring to a consistent absolute moral law that is universal (Everyone has the same moral values), or if the concept of absolute morality exists universally. (Everyone has moral values, though they may not be the same.)
TLDR: I'm a fag
This can go on forever.
Of course, I'm assuming. All we can do is assume.
This can go on forever.
Of course, I'm assuming. All we can do is assume.
Lets say human beings are the only life in this universe:
then god sucks because he could have made so much more. +why would god be so awesome if god really did his best he would have made some kind of creature that would abide his laws and not even be able to sin. if we are now turning our back to god and sinning the hell out of everything that is gods fault. human beings are the way they are and look how we are. god made us this way so god is a sinner.
the church accepts the idea of extraterrestrial life since a couple of months
to the test: Absolute morality does not exist,
an animal, the last male of its kind is attacking another human.
do you have the right to kill the animal and thus condemning its species to extinction just to save one out of 5 billion humans?
some might say "hell yea, humans above animals"
some might say "don't kill the whales, dude" and smoke some weed and stuff
But what if you where one of the animals females? and the male animal was just defending its last remaining peaces of territory and its pack. (you are a part of it)
If morale was absolute we would live in a world without war, corruption, or anything generally evil about humans.
fact is, we are living in a world with war corruption and a lot of generally evil stuff...
Anyone saying absolute morale exists is a hypocrite, possibly a xenofobian, suffers from autism and would probably never have learned how to debate or have an argument with another person
That or he lies to himself
I can prove, without necessity for a magical skyman, the following:
When I suspend any object in the air and allow it to leave my grip completely, it will fall toward the ground every single time. At the same speed as any other object, mind you; 9.8 m/s. Every single time an object is suspended then let go, it will enter free fall in a direct downward path at 9.8 m/s (true free fall with no measurable air resistance, that is).
You can prove natural, physical realities without needing a god. They are physical laws.
"But who put those laws in place, lol?" Shut up. Who said it was a 'who'? Why can't they have always existed in the universe? Why do they need intelligence or the anthropomorphizing of scary bearded wizard skydudes?
As for morality: Morality is not a science. It's a point of view, usually societal.
Morality does not require a magical skyman either. You judge the "word" of your god when you read something like Leviticus where it says you should stone your children to death for talking back. You decide not to follow it for whatever reason. Or on the repeated occasions where it not only fails to condemn, but actually advocates slavery, you say "oh, it's a cultural thing," or you just deny the text all together. You do not take your morality from the bible or from any other holy text, because you judge them on your own innate morality and choose what to follow and what not to. Even the most fundamentalist crazies choose to ignore parts of the bible. You use your conscience.
why did you bump this thread?
3/4 top threads are god threads.
/science/ is a cesspool
Oh, I'm sorry you don't like deep discussions.
Go back to /b/.
wtf. i always get back to "This is not a glitch
(Think about it)"
shit sucks.
>>559
Oh, I'm sorry you're a pretentious twenty-something philosophy major assclown.
Go back to Starbuck's.
There's too many leaps in logic in there for me. I should stop trying to prove God exists/doesn't and just live making others and myself happy while causing the most minimal amount of damage to the world.
>>562
Life is much to short to worry about and try to figure out anyways. Furthermore, what good would it truly do?
I'm with you on this. I'm taking a nap.
i chose "i don't care if absolute truth exists" and it sent me to disney. this test is accurate.
>>559 What's deep about anything in this thread, other than the level of bullshit?
Religion and science are orthogonal to one another. You cannot use the methods of one to accomplish anything useful in the other.
so that web site has some many holes in it logic that I can't begin to list them all. first the thing about absolute truth that is true and is a good argument. if you drop an apple while on the planet earth it will head to the thing with the largest mass A.K.A the ground/ earth. now the talk about the law of contradiction can be dis proven with the law of superposition or Schrodinger cat which states that a thing can be both alive and dead till you observe whether the cat is alive or dead. the laws of mathematics is true when adding two things together but when using imaginary numbers come in it can' do anything. I bet that none of you know how to add imaginary numbers together. the laws of science argument is some what solid yes you drop a rock and it will hit the ground. but when it says that the laws of science never change that is so blatantly wrong I laughed. science is always changing we learn new things about our world that can change the laws of science. absolute moral laws is wrong. the society in which we live is what decides morals not some crazy notion that the universe has its own morals think back several thousands years we killed our enemies raped their women and the average life span was like 20 years so there had to be older men having sex with young women but now it is fairly opposite.
we think any one with different culture is the enemy. I call this the invisible enemy. this is when the government set up a culture to be the enemy of everyone when they do nothing only a select few do some horrible thing. much like 9/11 and turning every Muslim into a terrorist. their are also several other examples like in WWII the Nazi's attack on the Jews and Americas treatment of the Japanese. each of these turned fear and hate upon innocents.
now to the laws are universal this is wrong this is just the human race wanting to make everything theirs an alien race will have a different culture and way of speaking and a different understanding of the universe so no none of these laws are universal. Now when it comes to god I can't tell any one what to believe but think about this there are tons millions or more that believe in the same god.this god being Jews Christians and Muslims. now think about the shear power of the mind couldn't our collective concience create our own god.
also we know that there are higher planes of existence why cant there be a species with the power to start the chain of events needed for our accidental creation.
im sorry, i tried to read your text, but i couldn't make heads or tails out of it. I got lost in-between you arguing the state of existence and non-existence and then talking about something about absolute morals and people raping little girls and something about aliens.
:\
Whatever side of the debate you're on, I'll take the opposite.
I ended up at the step where I was supposed to acknowledge that absolute moral laws exist. Neither option entirely reflected my opinion, but I said no because that was closest.
The site tried to push into saying what it wanted me to say anyway. I persevered in refusing to.
The site told me my view is irrational and inconsistent.
I conclude the site is bigoted and one-sided.
The one-sidedness goes to show from the fact that every step has only two options. My point of view with regard to morality is just a bit more articulate than either "morality is absolute" or "anything is okay". These are only the two extreme ends of quite a few more possible positions.
Morality is a series of abstract ideas. It's comparable in nature to language; a memetic system of innate principles that guide the mind.
Some parts of morality are shared among all of the human species, but that neither makes all morality absolute, nor does it in fact make any of it absolute. It will always at most be relative to the human species. And the human species is NOT THE CENTRE OF THE UNIVERSE.
Good day sir.
I just accepted everything he wanted me to accept to see what would happen. This is his great incontrovertible proof that god exists.
"Only the Christian worldview can logically support rationality.
(...)
You use the universal, immaterial, unchanging laws of logic, mathematics, science, and absolute morality in order to come to rational decisions, but you cannot account for them.
(...)
Hoping that an alternate explanation for universal, immaterial, unchanging laws can someday be found apart from God, is a blind leap of faith, or wishful thinking."
Can you see the hypocrisy? It all boils down to "the rules are there, the only origin I COULD THINK OF would be god, so god exists. (And of the thousands of god that people have come up with, it has to be the Christian one.)"
And the icing on the cake is that he says that not jumping to the conclusion that Jehovah must have done it, and keeping open the option that maybe it could have been something less far-fetched, is "a blind leap of faith" and "wishful thinking".
Followed of course by a lot of psychoanalysis that contains more wishful thinking than proper logic itself.
Typical Christian rhetoric.
The only proof that a 'God' exists is when he actually SHOWS himself in physical form (that's God himself, not Jesus) to the whole world. And proves he is who he says he is with demonstrations of his powers to my satisfaction (i.e. he does whatever I say). But until he can do so, there's no such thing as a 'God'.
Religion is nothing more than a fairytale for adults. And stupid adults, at that.
I like this thread.
I HATE THIS THREAD
> And proves he is who he says he is with demonstrations of his powers to my satisfaction (i.e. he does whatever I say)
That's just asinine. If there was a god, and I was he, I'd turn you into a retractable ass-wiping stick for expecting me to demonstrate my powers to your satisfaction.
>>571
Sure, you can make up a fairy tale and call it god. but that doesn't mean that there a very different god from the one you've imagined doesn't exist.
I bet you're one of those people who think that black holes can't possibly exist only because the earth hasn't fallen into one in your lifetime.
>with demonstrations of his powers to my satisfaction (i.e. he does whatever I say)
As "give me all your powers" demonstration? ;)
Anyway, the site is weak just as many of proofs around here. Faith doesn't need proving. And I also think that it is "you either believe or you don't". And why people do care about what anyone else believes in?
>>576
Because you are either with us or against us!
> And why people do care about what anyone else believes in?
Whenever I hear someone saying this I know he doesn't understand shit.
Wow, that quiz is hilarious. But it's just the style christian fundamentalists use to convert people that carry the simple-mindedness within, on which fundamentalism relies.
>>578
Because? People can believe in anything they want to. And to be honest, all people believe in something else. I think that it is nearly impossible to find two people who believe in the same way. But when you have to atheists or two christians or two muslims or anyone else, they won't look into small differences between them, why do they believe so, do they really believe in God or that God doesn't exist. No, they will focus on bigger differences without even understanding their own faith.
And that's why I ask, why people do care about what anyone else believes in. Why? And why they don't understand their own faith? If you want to help anyone else, change their beliefs, etc. Well, good luck. I'd rather look into my beliefs and talk with other people about theirs. And if anyone wants to change, it should happen because they wanted to, not they were forced to (it is for all of God believers and not believers who think that other people are wrong because they don't believe as they do)
Did not read the beginning of thread, just posting results.
Exited at "laws of science". Theories != laws.
I didn't understand the site...
>>582
It's a trick. The website asks you questions and gives you a possible set of answers. Whatever your answers are, the logical conclusion of your answers is that God exists. Of course that doesn't actually prove anything, it's just a game of logic.
I believe that humanity is composed of morons who don't want responsibilities and would freak out if they understood that human life is a random event in this ultimate randomness that is time (and that's why they created god).
I believe that this web site is ugly.
>>584
How can there be responsibilities if events are random?
At second question it's author confuses logic and data.
Didn't go futher, all is clear.
Some parts are questionable, and some parts are downright absurd.
I like how after he spends alllll that time building up a supposedly sound and valid argument, he goes and resorts to "proof by the obvious" and asserts, without any connection to the previous steps in the argument, that the only possible way these "immaterial, universal, unchanging laws" could exist is if God were around to create them. I'm sorry, but EVEN IF every part of the argument up until that point were sound/valid, the fact of the matter is that God's existence does not follow logically from the existence of the kind of "laws" he describes. He's still going on faith, in the end, and he doesn't even realize it.
Of course, it's not just that -- there are so many other fallacies at work in this "proof" that it's hard to even take it seriously.
>>587
I believe the term for that is "argumentum ad lapidem."
This thread is slightly less annoying than hate-fueled political rants. Bump.
let's try that again
i fail at life
retarded.
I believe in a god simply because the alternative is too depressing. What if life was just a meaningless accident? If that's true, then the universe is just there - it's not there for us. The what's the point of even having a universe at all? It's all just meaningless, pointless suffering.
I prefer to think that God gives life context. It's like... If you think of god as a parent, and kids as all life, and the universe as a jungle gym.
The kids can play and be happy and be sad and make their games, and they can do so safely because their parent is right over there watching everything. (S)he won't interfere in the games, but when the games are all over, (s)he'll take you home, put bandaids on your bruises, and encourage you to go play tomorrow.
Without a parent there... The whole scene just becomes more sad.
>>593
Well, it is a meaningless accident. Life with it.
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Universals are a fine thought experiment, but equating universals to god is unfounded. A universal has a perspective: math measures unchanging facts, science measures facts that may change or be reinterpreted, and morality is variable however ethics (as a universal) is for the good of as many individual freedoms as possible (a perspective in itself).
But the quiz forces one conclusion, stating that God exists as a universal without a perspective. Not even one of human suffering. Pathetic, weak attempt at a faith-based topic that is inherently a faith-based topic. http://proofthatgodexists.org/ is fail.
If you want to believe in an all mighty, omniscient Creator because you fear there being an end to your existence, that's fine, but when you try to pass off faith and absence of answers as proof of existence for such a higher power, that's when you have failed. You can't go into a store to return an item without a receipt, no matter how much you believe you had bought it only a few days ago, the cashier still needs proof of purchase.
Well, you all can go F...K OFF
Well, you all can go F...K OFF
Proof that God Exists
When you assume there are some gods, nothing is contradictory to it.
Therefore God exists.
Quad Erat Demonstrandum.
Proof that God does not Exist
When you assume there are not any gods, nothing is contradictory to it.
Therefore God does not exist.
Quad Erat Demonstrandum.