Does God Exist?

[Divair]

You said it's true, yet dosent require facts.
That dosent make sense.
It isn't that hard to believe a magic man in the sky controls everything. It's fairly easy to have faith, it's harder to question and find out what's actually happening.

"That dosent make sense. " except when it does, haven't you ever had a gut feeling?

Not one that I would use to make any semi-important decision with, no.

[Genivaria]

You said it's true, yet dosent require facts.
That dosent make sense.
It isn't that hard to believe a magic man in the sky controls everything. It's fairly easy to have faith, it's harder to question and find out what's actually happening.

"That dosent make sense. " except when it does, haven't you ever had a gut feeling?

They've got about 50% reliability if that. They end up getting me in trouble more then anything.

[Ostroeuropa]

You'd be thrown out of a class on philosophy for suggesting A is not A and sent back to kindegarten math class. If there is such a thing.
When discussing objective reality, subjectivity is irrelevant.

Oh but subjectivity is relevant when discussing things such as objectivity. Because humans can only achieve a degree of objectivity. As humans with inherent biases we have no basis of objectivity. Facts are interpreted subjectively as good or bad. The existence of something or lack of existence is also merely subjective because objectivity is hard to accomplish. You may be able to check your biases, but it still doesn't take away from you the fact you are merely looking at things from your perspective and your perspective alone, thus A may not always be A when you only know A is A but you don't know is A is B for someone else.

Whether or not I mistake A for B is irrelevant.
A is ALWAYS A.
Regardless of whether or not I mistake it otherwise.

[Umikai]

"he can't know about things he doesn't know about- because he knows everything."
He's omniscient therefore he can't know about things he doesn't know about, because those things don't exist, there isn't anything else for him to know about.

I realize these concepts are difficult, but I've already explained to you why this is impossible. I do sympathize, really. But you are wrong. I have already addressed this above.

So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?
You still haven't disproven God.

[New Libertarian States]

You said it's true, yet dosent require facts.
That dosent make sense.
It isn't that hard to believe a magic man in the sky controls everything. It's fairly easy to have faith, it's harder to question and find out what's actually happening.

"That dosent make sense. " except when it does, haven't you ever had a gut feeling?

Not with any important decisions.
Or, really with anything.
My gut reactions, far and few between, are usually because I fucked up whatever I am attempting to do earlier, and will not probably not succeed

[Umikai]

"That dosent make sense. " except when it does, haven't you ever had a gut feeling?

Not one that I would use to make any semi-important decision with, no.

The concept of this is that I can have faith, I can believe something without facts.

[Genivaria]

I realize these concepts are difficult, but I've already explained to you why this is impossible. I do sympathize, really. But you are wrong. I have already addressed this above.

So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?
You still haven't disproven God.

Backpedal noted.

[New Libertarian States]

I realize these concepts are difficult, but I've already explained to you why this is impossible. I do sympathize, really. But you are wrong. I have already addressed this above.

So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?
You still haven't disproven God.

And you haven't proven him.

[Ostroeuropa]

I realize these concepts are difficult, but I've already explained to you why this is impossible. I do sympathize, really. But you are wrong. I have already addressed this above.

So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?
You still haven't disproven God.

I've disproven an Omniscient god.
Which immediately disproved an Omnipotent god as soon as it was done.
Finally, i've already shown that the CHRISTIAN god is not true.
I never claimed to be able to disprove god. I claimed to be able to disprove YOUR god.


My claim is:

"All gods can be rendered mundane, tautologous, impossible, incoherent, or disproven."

[Divair]

Not one that I would use to make any semi-important decision with, no.

The concept of this is that I can have faith, I can believe something without facts.

You can. No one is denying that.

You shouldn't.

[Genivaria]

Not one that I would use to make any semi-important decision with, no.

The concept of this is that I can have faith, I can believe something without facts.

I pity you for that, gullibility is something noone should be proud of.

[Umikai]

"That dosent make sense. " except when it does, haven't you ever had a gut feeling?

Not with any important decisions.
Or, really with anything.
My gut reactions, far and few between, are usually because I fucked up whatever I am attempting to do earlier, and will not probably not succeed

Are you familiar with object permanence?

[Transhuman Proteus]

Alright, this just got easier.
Now, explain these to me
1)It is estamited that if the bible is correct, 1.2 million slaves moved out of Egypt at once.
Explain how Egypt didn't crumble under such a large loss of free labor.
2)On Noah's ark http://reports.ncse.com/index.php/rncse ... view/44/36
3) Kindly explain how we got 2 of every animal on a ship smaller than the titanic.,

I just said facts don't matter- it's the message and the purpose of the book that matter, it's taking a leap of faith and believing in the truth- that God exists.

Disregarding facts helps people get to the truth?

[Umikai]

So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?
You still haven't disproven God.

I've disproven an Omniscient god.
Which immediately disproved an Omnipotent god as soon as it was done.
Finally, i've already shown that the CHRISTIAN god is not true.
I never claimed to be able to disprove god. I claimed to be able to disprove YOUR god.


My claim is:

"All gods can be rendered mundane, tautologous, impossible, incoherent, or disproven."

You haven't disproven an omniscient God.
So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?

[New Libertarian States]

Not with any important decisions.
Or, really with anything.
My gut reactions, far and few between, are usually because I fucked up whatever I am attempting to do earlier, and will not probably not succeed

Are you familiar with object permanence?

Yes, objects existing but you cannot see them.
Do not tie god into this.
I can just as easily say "A magic teapot floats in space, but you just can't see him" by that logic.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Oh but subjectivity is relevant when discussing things such as objectivity. Because humans can only achieve a degree of objectivity. As humans with inherent biases we have no basis of objectivity. Facts are interpreted subjectively as good or bad. The existence of something or lack of existence is also merely subjective because objectivity is hard to accomplish. You may be able to check your biases, but it still doesn't take away from you the fact you are merely looking at things from your perspective and your perspective alone, thus A may not always be A when you only know A is A but you don't know is A is B for someone else.

Whether or not I mistake A for B is irrelevant.
A is ALWAYS A.
Regardless of whether or not I mistake it otherwise.

But you would still cling onto your opinion that A is A, which would be inherently wrong, regardless of what I think or not think.

A is always A in the universe. However as humans we can always mistake A for B and, ultimately, that is the perception of reality that you find most comfortable with, regardless of what I think or not, and regardless of any universal constant.

[Umikai]

I just said facts don't matter- it's the message and the purpose of the book that matter, it's taking a leap of faith and believing in the truth- that God exists.

Disregarding facts helps people get to the truth?

not always, but sometimes

[Genivaria]

Not with any important decisions.
Or, really with anything.
My gut reactions, far and few between, are usually because I fucked up whatever I am attempting to do earlier, and will not probably not succeed

Are you familiar with object permanence?

Object permanence is the understanding that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be observed (seen, heard, touched, smelled or sensed in any way).

Relevance?

[Umikai]

The concept of this is that I can have faith, I can believe something without facts.

You can. No one is denying that.

You shouldn't.

I shouldn't?

[Genivaria]

Disregarding facts helps people get to the truth?

not always, but sometimes

Never. Disregarding reality only brings harm and is a foolish thing to do.

[Ostroeuropa]

Whether or not I mistake A for B is irrelevant.
A is ALWAYS A.
Regardless of whether or not I mistake it otherwise.

But you would still cling onto your opinion that A is A, which would be inherently wrong, regardless of what I think or not think.

A is always A in the universe. However as humans we can always mistake A for B and, ultimately, that is the perception of reality that you find most comfortable with, regardless of what I think or not, and regardless of any universal constant.

That people can misinterperate things is not contested.
But A is always A.

[Umikai]

The concept of this is that I can have faith, I can believe something without facts.

I pity you for that, gullibility is something noone should be proud of.

I pity your inability to trust another person then. Or are you gullible like me?

[Genivaria]

You can. No one is denying that.

You shouldn't.

I shouldn't?

Gullibility is bad yes.

[New Libertarian States]

Are you familiar with object permanence?

Object permanence is the understanding that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be observed (seen, heard, touched, smelled or sensed in any way).

Relevance?

He's trying to tie god in with this.

[Ostroeuropa]

I've disproven an Omniscient god.
Which immediately disproved an Omnipotent god as soon as it was done.
Finally, i've already shown that the CHRISTIAN god is not true.
I never claimed to be able to disprove god. I claimed to be able to disprove YOUR god.


My claim is:

"All gods can be rendered mundane, tautologous, impossible, incoherent, or disproven."

You haven't disproven an omniscient God.
So you're still saying that God has unknown unknowns?

Not necessarily.
I'm saying he can't KNOW whether or not he has unknown unknowns.
Because they are unknown.
I've been over this a few times, and yes, I have disproven an omniscient god.