Is god real?

[Ceannairceach]

Also, even if you do believe in absolute morality, how does that prove that god exists? Why would absolute morality require the existence of god?

I believe its common belief of those who don't like the site that they are simply baiting you into saying "yes" to everything...

[Caninope]

As I have told you guys definitively before, I am definitely real.

You certainly seem to believe that.

*nods*

Wait...

So if I'm God, but I am only real because I think I'm real...what am I really?

[Gagatron]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

[Caninope]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

I suppose he could. But then he could just destroy it.

[Unhealthy2]

I suppose he could. But then he could just destroy it.

If he could, then wouldn't there exist a mountain he couldn't lift, and thus lifting that mountain would be something he couldn't do? Wouldn't that then make him not omnipotent?

[Ceannairceach]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

Wait, are you arguing for or against god now?

[Gagatron]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

Wait, are you arguing for or against god now?

I'm thinking critically.

[Ceannairceach]

Wait, are you arguing for or against god now?

I'm thinking critically.

Ah.

Well, your using someones argument for a bit ago...

"If god is omnipotent, can he make a mountain he cannot lift?
If he can, he isn't omnipotent.
If he can't, he isn't omnipotent."

A common argument, to my knowledge.

[Farnhamia]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

I suppose he could. But then he could just destroy it.

But the question wasn't, "Can he destroy it?" but "Can he lift it?"

[Seperates]

A better question to kill the idea of an all powerful, everloving God is the question is "Why is there evil?"

If God is willing but unable to stop evil he is not omnipotent.
If He is able, but not willing, he is malevolent.
And if he is willing and able, from whence comith evil?

And if he is not willing, and not able... Why call him God?

[Caninope]

I suppose he could. But then he could just destroy it.

But the question wasn't, "Can he destroy it?" but "Can he lift it?"

It's immaterial question, honestly. And lifting something doesn't require moving something physically, in theory.

[Ceannairceach]

But the question wasn't, "Can he destroy it?" but "Can he lift it?"

It's immaterial question, honestly. And lifting something doesn't require moving something physically, in theory.

But the idea still remains.

Can he make something he cannot lift/destroy/affect in any way?

[Sociobiology]

Either science is right and religion is wrong, or religion is right and science is wrong.

I tend to thrust the ones who invented airplanes and nuclear power, and who don't kill people for having a different imaginary friend.

[Big Jim P]

Either science is right and religion is wrong, or religion is right and science is wrong.

I tend to thrust the ones who invented airplanes and nuclear power, and who don't kill people for having a different imaginary friend.

Love the typo there.

[Azzers]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

This is the 'paradox of the stone' (or mountain in this instance).
The simple answer is when we talk about about God, we talk about what is logically possible for a being like God to do.
Therefore the phrase 'cannot lift' doesn't apply to God as it doesn't make sense for God to not be able to lift something.
Therefore, the entire paradox is rendered as a logical fallacy and we can't discuss it because we can only discuss the logically possible with any hope of attaining certainty about Him.

I'm sorry if it's badly explained, I'm not very eloquent.

[Azzers]

A better question to kill the idea of an all powerful, everloving God is the question is "Why is there evil?"

If God is willing but unable to stop evil he is not omnipotent.
If He is able, but not willing, he is malevolent.
And if he is willing and able, from whence comith evil?

And if he is not willing, and not able... Why call him God?

If God didn't create evil, then how would we know what is evil and what is good, what is right and wrong?

EDIT: People, this is like, A-level philosophy, paradox of the stone, problem of evil, whats next? Euthyphro's dilemna?

[Villerar]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

Of course not, that would be some pomo nonsense. The very notion is logically contradictory. It would be like a circle with two axes of different lengths or a metallic organic compound.

Omnipotence does not imply that God could do nonsensical things, but the problem is that many people do not state their definition of omnipotence and there are different definitions around.

[F1-Insanity]

Religion, because 'it just did' doesn't seem like a very good argument
Just because I believe in Allah, doesn't make me stupid
...
Freedom of speech is only apparent when insulting religion

Interesting sig.

Tell me, how do we 'insult' religion when we merely tell the truth? Because it is so hard to accept for the religious folks? I guess it can make one a tad bit uncomfortable having the knowledge that the person one has raised on a pedestal turns out to have been a vicious warmonger who had no respect for the (sexual) integrity of others? Demanding respect whilst giving none in return?

Freedom of speech includes the right to mock religion, especially since it is all BS anyway and god isn't real (what the OP asked).

And no, people are not stupid if they believe in imaginary beings such as 'allah', but the belief itself is.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Here's a question for everyone.

If God is omnipotent, can He create a mountain He cannot lift?

Of course not, that would be some pomo nonsense. The very notion is logically contradictory. It would be like a circle with two axes of different lengths or a metallic organic compound.

If there are universal laws that god cannot change, then there are by necessity aspects of reality god did not create. If universal laws can exist without a god, and the universe formed according to those laws, then the existence of a god is highly doubtable

[Farnhamia]

Of course not, that would be some pomo nonsense. The very notion is logically contradictory. It would be like a circle with two axes of different lengths or a metallic organic compound.

If there are universal laws that god cannot change, then there is by necessity aspects of reality god did not create. If universal laws can exist without a god, and the universe formed according to those laws, then the existence of a god is highly doubtable

And the doubt becomes even greater when you consider that there is no observable evidence that "God" ever existed or did anything. Everything the Intelligent Design brigade fires off is so easily countered that it's becoming laughable.

[Lunar Rai]

God exists if you don't believe in him, and doesn't exist if you do.
It's a paradox.

[Farnhamia]

God exists if you don't believe in him, and doesn't exist if you do.
It's a paradox.

Interesting, but ... no, I don't think so.

[Galloism]

God exists if you don't believe in him, and doesn't exist if you do.
It's a paradox.

Interesting, but ... no, I don't think so.

So... He does exist?

[Farnhamia]

Interesting, but ... no, I don't think so.

So... He does exist?

Given all the billions of people who think he does exist, the odds are greatly in favor of him not existing by this. And anyway, the "paradox" is just silly.

[Galloism]

So... He does exist?

Given all the billions of people who think he does exist, the odds are greatly in favor of him not existing by this. And anyway, the "paradox" is just silly.

I know, but it was humorous.