Ifiwerearichman
Member
Now, ladies, it looks like some people may have got a bit too overhyped. Where are the atheistical arguments? And how is the design/cosmological/ontological argument faulted?!
-
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!
Proofs for God/Religion. Got a good one?
- Thread starter muffin8or
- Start date
exactly what i was about to say
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Really?
So you honestly think that the Christian is so gullible as to fall for that?
At any rate, it is my opinion that any deity who falls for the Pascal's Wager deceit is not a deity worth worshiping.
how is it deceit? it is genuine belief coming from a good reason to accept god.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
It is the puddle saying, "Oh, look how perfectly this hole contains me! It must have been specifically made for me!"
cablescavenger
Well-Known Member
I haven't read every post, it is like reading the bible, but I am guessing no one offered the proof you asked for. You should have asked for proof of Santa and his elves, you would have found a more convincing argument. P.S. If you do have any luck with that argument, I want a bikeHaving studied only a handful of religious proofs I know I shouldn't be reaching any conclusions. But from what I've seen it all seems to be unconvincing by the end. The cosmological argument argues everything had a cause except the first cause which seems inconsistent. The teleological argument doesn't take into account small changes over time making up complex things we see today. Rather it asserts that a complex thing simply must have a designer. The ontological argument defines God into existence but I don't know how it deals with conflicting claims about the nature of God. Arguments from morality and love etc. are all on shaky ground.
So the floor opens. Do you have any proofs for religion or God? If they are or are part of the arguments above don't hesitate to make your points. I'm all ears and would love more light to shine on these argumentsI'm not looking for strictly logical proofs but rather persuasive proofs. Feel free to bring in why you believe in God or personal experiences.
Muffin8or
BTW I will argue against the big G
McBell
Admiral Obvious
So you are saying that the Christian god is fine with people believing in him "just in case"?
And here I was under the impression that the Christian god was all about honesty...
Ifiwerearichman
Member
It is the puddle saying, "Oh, look how perfectly this hole contains me! It must have been specifically made for me!"
__________________
One day they woke me up,
so I could live forever.
It's a shame that the same
will never happen to you
doesnt get us any closer to finding a fault with the arguments
__________________
One day they woke me up,
so I could live forever.
It's a shame that the same
will never happen to you
doesnt get us any closer to finding a fault with the arguments
yes but how else can you explain the world's beauty, and the sheer ability of nature to amaze people with her gaze? the world is awesome, vibrant in its colour, and this cannot be by luck
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Who says it is?
Ifiwerearichman
Member
you. Lol. anyway, where are the faults?
McBell
Admiral Obvious
What post are you replying to?
I mean, the thread is only 232 posts long and you have given no indication which one of those 232 posts you are replying to.
Ifiwerearichman
Member
You.Lol. Anyway, faults, people? please?
BottomlessThought
Member
You seem to me to be an uneducated idiot, but your ideas do impress upon me one thing: the commonality of the Design Argument, such that even someone who has not looked it up knows how to invoke it. But do you know how to defend it? Does it not strike you that God is even more unlikely to exist than the chances of our nature coming about by chance? Does it not occur to you that our nature's arisal can be explained easily and effectively via evolution? I do, at least, applaud your attempt to genuinely engage with the question at hand.
One argument at a time, if you please. Shall we start with the Design Argument? Please follow with an explanation of whatever argument you wish to debate in terms of the version you wish to put forward, and then I (not to mention a few others, I'm sure) will reply with the destructive counter-arguments, and we'll all be happy (or, at least, I will).
The aim being that by the end of each debate, you will realize the flaws in each argument and go back to putting God's existence down to faith.Don't feed the troll. Oh wait, your "religion" ...
Ifiwerearichman
Member
Who says it is? that post, mestemia.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
You need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
I never made any such claim.
horsemanoftheapocolypse
child of humanity
Rather it being nature's way of being beautiful (design argument), how about "humanity's way of perceiving that beauty"
as far as i know, animals aren't moved by incredible sights. yet human's see beyond the atoms and molecules that build up the image. we see the beauty and diversity. ideas are more beautiful and breathtaking than anything created. ideas are the pinnacle of advancement. mind vs computer. not the creation itself, but what sprung from creation.
not planets/stars/life itself, but what sprung from life: feelings, ideas, society. what we call "humanity" is what i believe we should appreciate, not stress and worry about it's source. sure, ask a question, but dont lose sight of what actually matters, and what is holding our planet together.
as far as i know, animals aren't moved by incredible sights. yet human's see beyond the atoms and molecules that build up the image. we see the beauty and diversity. ideas are more beautiful and breathtaking than anything created. ideas are the pinnacle of advancement. mind vs computer. not the creation itself, but what sprung from creation.
not planets/stars/life itself, but what sprung from life: feelings, ideas, society. what we call "humanity" is what i believe we should appreciate, not stress and worry about it's source. sure, ask a question, but dont lose sight of what actually matters, and what is holding our planet together.
Ifiwerearichman
Member
Design and complexity. Fine tuning of universe. Purpose of universe. Too complicated to come about by chance. Multiverse, doesnt work. No abiogenesis. OK? Now beddybyes for me- nighty night, my little ones...
BottomlessThought
Member
:clap I don't know what I'm applauding, but :clap
Now, where's the relevance to the thread? Master Horse, if you're taking up the atheistic position, you'd do well to quote the people you're replying to.
If not, don't worry. Be happy. Revel in the safety of neutrality.So we're looking at the universe and the fine-tuning of its properties rather than the world and nature? Bear in mind that two different arguments are at work here.
I'm afraid that, before we proceed (or you go to sleep at an unnaturally early time), you need to give a step by step explanation of the argument you're putting forward and why it counts as evidence for God. Without that, we don't know what we're attacking; we could guess what you're suggesting, but never really be sure.
Last edited:
horsemanoftheapocolypse
child of humanity
as an agnostic - i enjoy doing so
but tbh, my bottom is hurting a little because of this damn fence!
it was actually in response to a comment on the design argument, one which you replied to, but i didn't quote it