• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Petition Against God

Do you want superpowers like Moses and Jesus?


  • Total voters
    23

ChrisP

Veteran Member
I want teh SUUUUUUUPER POOOOWERS!!!

No logical reason to believe in a source? All this energy must have come from somewhere, it can't always have been sitting in perfect equilibrium.

but anyway to your points:

"If something doesn't make sense, then it is irrational. Isn't that what irrational means?"

No. It isn't. Irrational means without rationale, if something doesn't make sense then it is non-sense. How does "this world was created" not make sense? It must have been created from something, even atheists believe in some creation myth like the Big Bang. Please don't bother arguing the Big Bang is fact. It will be fact when someone whom everyone trusts travels back in time and comes back to verify it, preferably with video evidence.

Seeing as nothing else you've said makes sense or has any basis whatsoever beyond your own small minded and baseless snipings, I leave it to you to come back with something a little more... substantial.
 

austheist

Member
Look, will you please not go off on a tangent? that's not where I am in my argument. If you can't keep with me on a logical level, then I shouldn't even be talking to you. We are at the point where



I told you why something must be described to have any rational belief in it. If we don't know what an urpal is, then to say, "I believe in urpals, is just a meaningless sound." Without any descripription of an unie, proof of it's existence is incoherent.This applies to God as well.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
austheist said:
Look, will you please not go off on a tangent? that's not where I am in my argument. If you can't keep with me on a logical level, then I shouldn't even be talking to you. We are at the point where



I told you why something must be described to have any rational belief in it. If we don't know what an urpal is, then to say, "I believe in urpals, is just a meaningless sound." Without any descripription of an unie, proof of it's existence is incoherent.This applies to God as well.
Sorry, but I'm confused. You are the only one I think goes off on tangents!
 

mr.guy

crapsack
austheist said:
If we don't know what an urpal is, then to say, "I believe in urpals, is just a meaningless sound." Without any descripription of an unie, proof of it's existence is incoherent.
No, it's a claim to believe in something i can't describe. How is that incoherent?
 

Bishka

Veteran Member
austheist said:
Look, will you please not go off on a tangent? that's not where I am in my argument. If you can't keep with me on a logical level, then I shouldn't even be talking to you. We are at the point where



I told you why something must be described to have any rational belief in it. If we don't know what an urpal is, then to say, "I believe in urpals, is just a meaningless sound." Without any descripription of an unie, proof of it's existence is incoherent.This applies to God as well.
Not go off on a tangent, he wasn't.
 

austheist

Member
Do you see why something must be described in order to have a rational belief in it? This is my question right now. If you are confused, then read about the urpals again.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
austheist said:
Do you see why something must be described in order to have a rational belief in it?
You didn't say something had to described in order to have a rational belief. You said it had to be described to have a belief.
 

austheist

Member
If you go up to a man who has never heard of God and say, "I believe in God and so you should so you don't go to hell," and he says, "What's God?" What do you tell him? Do you tell him that you don't have to describe to that man what or who God is? He must be described, or we don't know what you are talking about. God means different things to many different religions.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
austheist said:
If you go up to a man who has never heard of God and say, "I believe in God and so you should so you don't go to hell," and he says, "What's God?" What do you tell him? Do you tell him that you don't have to describe to that man what or who God is? He must be described, or we don't know what you are talking about. God means different things to many different religions.
Easily conditional. Does this man know what hell is?
 

Bishka

Veteran Member
Why would I say that? I don't believe that anyone who doesn't believe isn't going to hell. Obviously you will need to describe it and you can.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
austheist said:
I am saying you must have a description of something in order to have a RATIONAL belief in it
You are NOW. Guess your build up so far has been for nothing, as you're just going to abandon your structure and start making additional claims.
Fine, i don't really care.
So, what's a rational belief?
 

austheist

Member
austheist said:
Look, this was meant as a hoot and a laugh. But, if you want, I will force you to admit your belief in God is irrational.
From the beginning, I said i would tear down the rational belief in God
 

ChrisP

Veteran Member
austheist said:
Look, will you please not go off on a tangent? that's not where I am in my argument. If you can't keep with me on a logical level, then I shouldn't even be talking to you. We are at the point where



I told you why something must be described to have any rational belief in it. If we don't know what an urpal is, then to say, "I believe in urpals, is just a meaningless sound." Without any descripription of an unie, proof of it's existence is incoherent.This applies to God as well.
I'm sorry? were you talking to me??? Well then I apologise for addressing the topic of the thread. I thought someone should, seeing as you seem incapable.

Making up stories to suit your argument is what you are doing, which is quite amusing really because it is what you are accusing the abrahamics arguing with you of doing also
 

austheist

Member
All I've argued for is that something must be described in order to have a rational belief in it. All i've used is a hypothetical situation, which can be used in arguments.
 
Top