An Ontological Proof that God Does Not Exist

[BilliardsBall]

The majority of them don't share your beliefs. The only thing they all absolutely have in common is a complete dearth of any objective evidence to support them.

Can you explain why an estimated 84%-99% of people live their lives according to deities, without evidence of deities?

And can you name anything else (not God/spiritualism/deism/invisible beings) that over 80% of people believe despite a lack of evidence?

Thing 1:
Thing 2:
Thing 3:

 

[ppp]

Can you explain why an estimated 84%-99% of people live their lives according to deities, without evidence of deities?

And can you name anything else (not God/spiritualism/deism/invisible beings) that over 80% of people believe despite a lack of evidence?

Thing 1: the number of people who believe a claim determines the truth of that claim.
Thing 2: astrology, runes and other forms of divination.
Thing 3: luck
Thing 4: cultural superstitions
Thing 5: repeatedly pushing the elevator button makes the elevator go faster.
Thing 6: that random fortuitous events are meant to be
Thing 7: psychic phenomenon
Thing 8: the number of people who believe a claim determines the truth of that claim.

]

 

[BilliardsBall]

Thing 1: the number of people who believe a claim determines the truth of that claim.
Thing 2: astrology, runes and other forms of divination.
Thing 3: luck
Thing 4: cultural superstitions
Thing 5: repeatedly pushing the elevator button makes the elevator go faster.
Thing 6: that random fortuitous events are meant to be
Thing 7: psychic phenomenon
Thing 8: the number of people who believe a claim determines the truth of that claim.

]

Not one of those things is believed upon by 85% of people. That's nonsense.

 

[ppp]

Not one of those things is believed upon by 85% of people. That's nonsense.

Of course they are. Especially the elevator, luck and divination. And yes, just like your belief that the number of people who believe a thing matters, they are nonsense.

 

[Tiberius]

No, ad populum is a logical fallacy that I recognize. Rather, now that you and I agree that most people who've ever lived believe in some kind of deity, I'm asking if you understand that despite ad populum, most of the time, when most people agree on a fact, they are correct.

Ha! You claim that you are not making the argument from popularity, then you say, "But when most people agree on something, they're usually correct!"

That's literally the definition of argumentum ad populum.

And anyway, provide a source to show that your claim is correct.

Or put differently, how did you come to understand that 84%-99% of all persons living today are nuts?!

I studied the arguments for and against the existence of God. I found the arguments against God were, from a logical point of view, more sound than the arguments against God (which were filled with logical fallacies).

 

[Sheldon]

Wrong. As a fallen angel, what we understand is hate suffers innately, and there is other way for nature to occur. The greatest possible fall was self sacrifice and a life time of suffering with the human race until I bring sorrow back to Heaven, and while I’m doing that I can deliver the wisdom the human race depends on.

Omnipotence is nice and all, but compassion is necessary to, and apparently something got lose from a healing pasture, fore it is told wrath must be purchased with blood, and we ask that you stand with wrath even though He suffers shortly. Without suffrage and salvation there is no gratitude, let a lone human nature. Therefore there is a human messiah, or your existence is flawed with pointlessness.

I have no idea who that is directed at, but I've read it 4 times now, and it is still indecipherable gibberish sorry. What specifically are you trying to say, and which post is it meant to be responding to?

 

[Sheldon]

I'm asking if you understand that despite ad populum, most of the time, when most people agree on a fact, they are correct.

Most people are not always correct, that assertion is the every definition of an argumentum ad populum fallacy. So it seems you really don't understand the fallacy at all.

Or put differently, how did you come to understand that 84%-99% of all persons living today are nuts?!

That one is a straw man fallacy, a pretty clumsy one as well, since you assume that being wrong equates to being nuts, you surely don't realty believe that do you? Have you never been wrong about anything ever? I certainly have, all the time, I would hardly say that makes me nuts necessarily.

 

[Sheldon]

Ha! You claim that you are not making the argument from popularity, then you say, "But when most people agree on something, they're usually correct!"

That's literally the definition of argumentum ad populum.

He also claimed to be familiar with the fallacy, so either he has misunderstood it, or he is happy to make arguments he knows to be irrational, or both of course.

 

[Sheldon]

Can you explain why an estimated 84%-99% of people live their lives according to deities, without evidence of deities?

You'd have to ask them, it seems an odd question to ask an atheist don't you think?

 

[Sheldon]

And can you name anything else (not God/spiritualism/deism/invisible beings) that over 80% of people believe despite a lack of evidence?

(1)Superstitions (other than religions), (2)conspiracy theories, (3)political rhetoric. It's astonishing how easily the sheeple are swayed by such nonsense.

 

[Sheldon]

Not one of those things is believed upon by 85% of people. That's nonsense.

Neither is your belief, you simply created a figure and pretended it's an homogenous demographic, rather then multiple groups who share wildly different beliefs. It seems you want to set a double standard, it's a form of confirmation bias.

Most importantly it wouldn't matter if your claim were absolutely correct and we had no explanation, as we already know the number of people who hold a belief does not rationally lend it any credence whatsoever.

Argumentum ad populum fallacies have been explained to you, and you acknowledged this fallacy, claimed to be aware of it, then proceeded immediately to use it in post after post?

 

[Tiberius]

Not one of those things is believed upon by 85% of people. That's nonsense.

Your religion marker indicates that you are a Messianic Jewish Christian.

Out of all the people in the world, what percentage believe you are correct and what percentage disagree with you?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Of course they are. Especially the elevator, luck and divination. And yes, just like your belief that the number of people who believe a thing matters, they are nonsense.

Are you disagreeing that most of the time, most people when presented with the evidence believe correctly?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Ha! You claim that you are not making the argument from popularity, then you say, "But when most people agree on something, they're usually correct!"

That's literally the definition of argumentum ad populum.

And anyway, provide a source to show that your claim is correct.



I studied the arguments for and against the existence of God. I found the arguments against God were, from a logical point of view, more sound than the arguments against God (which were filled with logical fallacies).

Are you disagreeing that most of the time, most people when presented with the evidence believe correctly?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Your religion marker indicates that you are a Messianic Jewish Christian.

Out of all the people in the world, what percentage believe you are correct and what percentage disagree with you?

Most people agree with me, God IS.

Many Jews disagree with me, Jesus ISN'T. This last perfectly aligns with Bible prophecies, for example, the Jewish Messiah will be lauded worldwide, but by Gentiles--an extraordinary prophecy(s) that has been fulfilled!

 

[ppp]

Are you disagreeing that most of the time, most people when presented with the evidence believe correctly?

Irrelevant. You asked for examples of things that a majority of the population believe despite a lack of evidence. I gave you some. Have the grace to acknowledging that fact.

 

[Tiberius]

Are you disagreeing that most of the time, most people when presented with the evidence believe correctly?

This reminds me of that story that goes around on FaceBook fairly often. A person mentions to their friend that people tend not to change their minds, even when presented with evidence that they are wrong. The friend said, "Nah, I don't think people would be that silly. If you show them evidence that they are wrong, they'll change their minds." So the person pulled up the study that showed that people don't change their minds. And the friend said, "Nah, I still think I'm right and people will change their minds when presented with evidence that they're wrong."

So, generally speaking, if a person holds an incorrect belief, showing them the evidence that they are wrong is no guarantee that they will change their minds. And if the false belief is one they are invested in heavily, it's almost certain that they will reject any evidence that they are wrong.

Why people don’t change their minds — even when faced with the facts | MinnPost

Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds

 

[Tiberius]

Most people agree with me, God IS.

Many Jews disagree with me, Jesus ISN'T. This last perfectly aligns with Bible prophecies, for example, the Jewish Messiah will be lauded worldwide, but by Gentiles--an extraordinary prophecy(s) that has been fulfilled!

You are defining a group of people by what they LACK, not what they all share. You've pointed out a position on religion that they LACK, namely, atheism. You can not show that there is a position that the SHARE, and that destroys your argument. The vague claim, "There is a deity of some description" is hardly convincing. That's like saying flat earthers agree with those who say the Earth is roughly spherical by saying they both reject the idea of a donut shaped Earth.

 

[MonkeyFire]

Premise 1: God is the greatest possible being.

Premise 2: God accomplished the creation of the universe.

Premise 3: To accomplish something while suffering a handicap is greater than accomplishing that thing with no handicap.

Conclusion: A God who created the universe while being handicapped is greater than a God who created the universe without being handicapped.

Premise 4: The greatest possible handicap is non-existence.

Conclusion: The greatest possible God necessarily does not exist.

True Love is greater than Faith, and pleasure combined. God sends a selfless avatar so that your love may be in this world, and still be perfect in Heaven, like nothing happened even though it did. We come in to this world to specifically save Lady Sorrow, and subsequently she heals you from the harm you have been dealt in this world while we purchase our wrath with our own blood. God offers a Messiah, by nature, fore He would be unnatural, and evil if He impeded Him, as the Messiah Himself is divine, and He is invincible . Things exist in this world just to be saved in this world fore they are gratitude itself. The best part of this time on earth is that you can fall in love, the true nature of the fallen angel.

 

[Tiberius]

True Love is greater than Faith, and pleasure combined. God sends a selfless avatar so that your love may be in this world, and still be perfect in Heaven, like nothing happened even though it did. We come in to this world to specifically save Lady Sorrow, and subsequently she heals you from the harm you have been dealt in this world while we purchase our wrath with our own blood. God offers a Messiah, by nature, fore He would be unnatural, and evil if He impeded Him, as the Messiah Himself is divine, and He is invincible . Things exist in this world just to be saved in this world fore they are gratitude itself. The best part of this time on earth is that you can fall in love, the true nature of the fallen angel.

Not interested in your proselytizing.