Can science disprove the existence of God?

[Crypto2015]

So what you are saying is that Christians are people who would be beating children and worse if they didn't fear God?

No. They wouldn't. However, neither them nor any other person would have a rational reason to avoid beating a child to death. Acting morally and having a rational reason to act morally are too different things. For example, you may be a good person, but you have no rational reason to be a good person.

 

[Crypto2015]

What people like me do is point out the moral bankruptcy of an all-powerful being standing idly by while atrocities take place.

In your dreams. What people like you do is to encourage evil and atrocities of every kind. You do it by rejecting a loving God that rejects sin.

 

[ArtieE]

Fixed

"But what would happen if all the MEN and WOMEN stopped believing in God and His judgment? Can you imagine what they would be capable of doing and what the world would be like?" Can you answer the question? What would the men and women now believing in God and His judgment be capable of if they stopped believing? All the horrific details please.

 

[ArtieE]

No. They wouldn't. However, neither them nor any other person would have a rational reason to avoid beating a child to death. Acting morally and having a rational reason to act morally are too different things.

What's the difference between not beating a child to death for fear that a god will punish you and not beating a child to death for fear that society will punish you? The difference is that if you can get people to believe in a god whose punishment you can never escape it might stop more people from beating children to death.

For example, you may be a good person, but you have no rational reason to be a good person.

I live in a society and I want to live as good and long life as possible and I have a better chance of doing that if I'm a good person as opposed to a bad person.

 

[ArtieE]

In your dreams. What people like you do is to encourage evil and atrocities of every kind. You do it by rejecting a loving God that rejects sin.

You are simply projecting what you would be capable of onto other people who don't need to believe in a punishing god to behave morally.

 

[gnostic]

On the contrary, your ideology asserts that there is no consolation for suffering and no punishment for evil. By promoting this ideology you encourage people to kill, fornicate, steal, kidnap, rape, maim, and torture.

Straw man.

You don't even know me, so how could you possibly know what ideology I follow. And the thing is that I don't even have an ideology.

And what people are you talking about?

I know of no one whom promote or condone anything like murder, rape, maiming, torture, etc. It is just your paranoid delusion and more of your baseless straw man.

Is there some invisible voice whispering things that I may have done? Or are you that dishonest that you have to make things about what you think that I believe in?

 

[Shad]

Did I say what Abu Bakr did was right? No I didn't. If I was in that situation, I would ask for the proof. Same goes with my mother. Claiming prophethood is not something that you should take lightly. The reason why I accept Muhammad as a prophet is because I believe the Qur'an is the word of God, and since the Qur'an states Muhammad is a prophet, I have to accept that. So everything goes back to the book. I don't have to worry about Muhammad's personal life, I wasn't there. What I have to worry about is whether the Qur'an is God's revelation, or it is man made, and my research on it gives me the reasons to believe that it is the former.

By providing the example in which Muhammad's trustworthiness was enough you have declared Bakr was right. Otherwise you wouldn't have used an example if it was actually false or unjustified. You used this example to support a point you were making. You also used this example linked to your "mother" example to show that faith is justified. Backpedaling nothing more.

Again you put faith in the reliability of text centuries old that has gone through the hands of humans, edited, etc over your own experience of your mother. More so you have used used circular logic in regards to the Quran.

 

[psychoslice]

But what would happen if all the Christians stopped believing in God and His judgment? Can you imagine what they would be capable of doing and what the world would be like?

Yes that is true, and its very sad that people need a belief system such as religion to keep them from going stupid.

 

[OurCreed]

It is? A meteorologist who says it'll "most likely" rain tomorrow has faith that it will rain tomorrow?

Yep! That is exactly what it is!

 

[viole]

Suffering is the result of sin, not the result of God's existence. Furthermore, your atheist message is the cruelest possible message on Earth because it deprives those children of all hope.

I told something similar to my mom when she told me there was no Santa.

If God doesn't exist, those children will never be comforted and the injustices that they have suffered will never be redressed. Furthermore, it even aggravates their situation because people that do not believe in a universal judge and in a judgement day do not have any rational reason to stop exploiting other people. Hence, next time you see those children remember that your ideology is actively contributing to their suffering.

You are confusing God with belief in God. From a functional point of view, they are not related. If God does not exist, that will not have an influence on those children at all, as long as they still believe He does.

i agree that believing in God can create some positive things. Like hope, quest for justice, which are just some of our strengths as a species.

That is why the natural predisposition we have to believe in imaginary beings, or agencies, that will ultimately settle things up, has been naturally selected.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Science has disproved God by building a God detector, here is the proof:

 

[Demonslayer]

Science has disproved God by building a God detector, here is the proof:

Checkmate theists! LOL

 

[idav]

Science has disproved God by building a God detector, here is the proof:

You can't show people that, its top secret, the c-i-a is going to have to go ahead and confiscate that, they don't want people just going around murdering and coveting and stuff.....

edit: we'll delete the posts as soon as the n-s-a tells us you've read this

 

[Crypto2015]

I told something similar to my mom when she told me there was no Santa.



You are confusing God with belief in God. From a functional point of view, they are not related. If God does not exist, that will not have an influence on those children at all, as long as they still believe He does.

i agree that believing in God can create some positive things. Like hope, quest for justice, which are just some of our strengths as a species.

That is why the natural predisposition we have to believe in imaginary beings, or agencies, that will ultimately settle things up, has been naturally selected.

Ciao

- viole

Just because God's existence is advantageous that does not mean that God exists. I'll grant you that. I didn't write the preceding posts to prove that God exists, but to familiarize you, the atheists, with the ultimate consequences of your stance. What you said about God being a byproduct of natural selection does not prove that God does not exist. Even if our belief in God stemmed from evolution, there would be no reason to believe that God couldn't have used evolution to infuse into us the need for the divine. After all, evolution is not at odds with creation. Furthermore, just as a curiosity, it is worth noting that if evolution resulted in our need for the divine, it follows that this need is advantageous and important for the survival of our species. Since most atheists base their morality on what is advantageous for our species, if they were consistent with their own set of beliefs, they would be forced to conclude that atheism is immoral.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In your dreams. What people like you do is to encourage evil and atrocities of every kind. You do it by rejecting a loving God that rejects sin.

It is odd you say that. I stand opposed to your god, but yet I support peace, tolerance, and helping the poor far more than what most Christians do.

My point is that without God justice is impossible.

What exactly is justice? Is it anything more than our primitive urges and desires to see punishment?

If there is no God, the suffering of the innocents will never be redressed. There is no possible compensation. No possibility of future happiness.

Much suffering is never redressed. However, it doesn't meant future happiness is futile. Having good coping methods helps a lot.

Finally, if God does not exist, mankind is destined to disappear from the universe and become extinct as so many other species.

So? Of course we will be replaced by the predecessor of modern Homo Sapiens. Hopefully this future species will be an improvement.

This makes any sort of altruism pointless.

How can you think this? Altruism is doing good for nothing more than the sake of doing good, giving yourself selflessly without expecting anything in return - such as helping a friend in need. How is that ever pointless?

 

[Crypto2015]

It is odd you say that. I stand opposed to your god, but yet I support peace, tolerance, and helping the poor far more than what most Christians do.

What exactly is justice? Is it anything more than our primitive urges and desires to see punishment?

Much suffering is never redressed. However, it doesn't meant future happiness is futile. Having good coping methods helps a lot.

So? Of course we will be replaced by the predecessor of modern Homo Sapiens. Hopefully this future species will be an improvement.

How can you think this? Altruism is doing good for nothing more than the sake of doing good, giving yourself selflessly without expecting anything in return - such as helping a friend in need. How is that ever pointless?

You may think that you support peace, tolerance, and everything that is good. However, you have no real reason to do it. All you have are feelings that, in the absence of God, are nothing but an evolutionary mirage. Furthermore, if you follow your ideology to its ultimate conclusions, you actually support everything that is not good, since you rob people of any rational reason to do good. For instance, if someone has an overwhelming desire to rape, what will you tell him? Will you tell him that he should not do it because it hurts other people? He will reply that the suffering of his victim is more than compensated by the pleasure received by him. Will you tell him that raping is bad for our species? He will tell you that that is not true because in some species, such as the sharks, raping is the only means of reproduction and that, moreover, all he has are the few years of his life and that it is indifferent to him if after his death our species goes extinct or not. Will you tell him to sacrifice his evil urges for the good of others? He will say that in the absence of an afterlife, all he can derive pleasure from is this earthly existence and that, hence, he sees no reason to sacrifice himself for others. You may seem that I am exaggerating and that no rapist will reason in this way. Nonetheless, it has happened. This is actually the way in which Ted Bundy used to think and from a purely materialistic point of view, no one was able to prove him wrong. Bundy said the following:

"Then I learned that all moral judgments are "value judgments," that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either "right" or "wrong." I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments. Believe it or not, I figured out for myself - what apparently the Chief Justice couldn't figure out for himself: that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any "reason" to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring, the strength of character, to throw off its shackles. ... I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable value judgment" that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these "others"? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog's life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as "moral" or "good" and others as "immoral" or "bad"? In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my education has led me"”after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and uninhibited self.

Regarding altruism being pointless when it can't change anything. Would you throw yourself into a tempestuous sea in order to save someone that has already sunk too deep to be reached?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You may think that you support peace, tolerance, and everything that is good. However, you have no real reason to do it.

How do I have no reason to do so? Is desiring peace on Earth no real reason? Is supporting equality and civil rights for the sake of repressed minorities no real reason? What of ending poverty and elevating the status of the poor to raise the standards of everyone in society?

All you have are feelings that, in the absence of God, are nothing but an evolutionary mirage.

I can assure you, my life is much more rich than having nothing but an "evolutionary mirage."

Furthermore, if you follow your ideology to its ultimate conclusions, you actually support everything that is not good, since you rob people of any rational reason to do good.

I rob them of nothing. If they need a god to act good, they have some serious issues. I do not "rob" people of being a good friend, of the need to preserve and take better care of the Earth for the sake of all living things that inhabit it, or helping the poor as a means to improve society. I do not support violence, theft, murder, rape, or other acts that create victims. I simply just do not need a god or religious text to tell me such things. If you do need god or a religious text, I really must question what things you would do if you didn't have your religion?

For instance, if someone has an overwhelming desire to rape, what will you tell him? Will you tell him that he should not do it because it hurts other people? He will reply that the suffering of his victim is more than compensated by the pleasure received by him.

Such a reply from a rapist would be a strong indication the rapist has a personality disorder, such as a psychotic disorder, psychopathy, or narcissism.

This is actually the way in which Ted Bundy used to think and from a purely materialistic point of view,

Ted Bundy does not represent the majority of those who ascribe to a materialistic position. And even still, most people, regardless of religion, see why things like murder and rape are wrong, because it victimizes someone, violates their rights, and disrupts their life. And if someone can't see such a thing, then there is a good chance they have some sort of personality disorder.

Regarding altruism being pointless when it can't change anything. Would you throw yourself into a tempestuous sea in order to save someone that has already sunk too deep to be reached?

Probably not, but because I have a bad knee that would make it even harder to swim under those circumstances. But when I can help someone I usually will, and I do it despite the fact I have no religion, god, or holy text telling me to act in pro-social ways.

 

[Crypto2015]

How do I have no reason to do so? Is desiring peace on Earth no real reason? Is supporting equality and civil rights for the sake of repressed minorities no real reason? What of ending poverty and elevating the status of the poor to raise the standards of everyone in society?

I can assure you, my life is much more rich than having nothing but an "evolutionary mirage."

I rob them of nothing. If they need a god to act good, they have some serious issues. I do not "rob" people of being a good friend, of the need to preserve and take better care of the Earth for the sake of all living things that inhabit it, or helping the poor as a means to improve society. I do not support violence, theft, murder, rape, or other acts that create victims. I simply just do not need a god or religious text to tell me such things. If you do need god or a religious text, I really must question what things you would do if you didn't have your religion?

Such a reply from a rapist would be a strong indication the rapist has a personality disorder, such as a psychotic disorder, psychopathy, or narcissism.

Ted Bundy does not represent the majority of those who ascribe to a materialistic position. And even still, most people, regardless of religion, see why things like murder and rape are wrong, because it victimizes someone, violates their rights, and disrupts their life. And if someone can't see such a thing, then there is a good chance they have some sort of personality disorder.

Probably not, but because I have a bad knee that would make it even harder to swim under those circumstances. But when I can help someone I usually will, and I do it despite the fact I have no religion, god, or holy text telling me to act in pro-social ways.

The problem is that you base your morality on feelings, not on reason. That guy Bundy was a monster but he understood the topic very well.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The problem is that you base your morality on feelings, not on reason.

No, actually I have reasons - reasons that have to be thought out because I am not resorting to some ancient book of superstition.

 

[Crypto2015]

No, actually I have reasons - reasons that have to be thought out because I am not resorting to some ancient book of superstition.

You have absolutely no rational basis for your morality. You assume that your feelings are some sort of axioms that nobody can question. You are wrong.