So I just have a question to every one. What is the point in proving god to not exist? What makes it worth while to sit and flip out on people, the goverment, schools, kids, parents.....that they are wrong, and science is wrong?
I understand having an oppinion, and trying to get others to beilve that. But Have any of you heard of Pascals wager?
What he said was basically, if you belive in god, and he is real, you lived a good live, and if you belive in god, and he's not real, you lost nothing, but lived a life of good morals, which I will touch on in a second. However, If he is real, and you didn't beilve you go to hell. And if you didn't beilve and he isn't real, then you lost nothing, other then being remembered as a person who didn't care about morals.
I would like you to go read the ten commandments, and the other moral wrongs in the bible. How are ANY of them bad?
All I'm really trying to gather here, is what is the point in tryign to prove god as fake? Why does it matter if you beilve in god? And what do you lose by beilveing in him?
Ever hear of Dark Matter? And regardless your argument is still childish and I refuse to accept it as such until you have given me proof.
Very well wolf. I think you can have a turn. I want you to convince me that dark matter exists. This is not an insult, I am truly open to your argument.
Very well wolf. I think you can have a turn. I want you to convince me that dark matter exists. This is not an insult, I am truly open to your argument.
Thank you mage. Now I at least see no reason why there isn't a possibility that dark matter exists. If I understood that correctly, dark matter is what prevents all other solid, physical matter (planets, stars, etc..) from flying apart, correct?
proving god.. (sidenote did not read anything in the last 27 pages. b/c idrc)
>even the atheist understands the concept of that nothing greater can be conceived.
> it is better to exist in reality than to exist in the mind alone. so if the greatest thing that is understood in the mind, must exist in reality, because of the concept. so god, that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in reality.
so that which nothing greater can be thought must of logical necessity exist since, existence is greater than non- existence. hence, what must be is greater than what could be. Or to speak more clearly, a being whose existence is necessary is a more perfect being than one whose existence is not necessary.
>exstience is greater than non -existence > that than which nothing greater can be conceived would inf act be greater if it existed >that than which nothing greater can be conceived can not be thought as not existing since it can be thought Therefore: that than which nothing greater can be conceived must exist.
since "god" is a perfect being then he must be understood to exist because existence is logically implied by perfection.
derp. umad skater?
Thank you mage. Now I at least see no reason why there isn't a possibility that dark matter exists. If I understood that correctly, dark matter is what prevents all other solid, physical matter (planets, stars, etc..) from flying apart, correct?
If something lacks proof then the only reasonable position is to say that you are unsure and as such cannot make an assertion either to the positive or the negative regarding such a thing. For example I have not seen any proof that there are alien lifeforms flying spaceships through our atmosphere so I don't say that there are. However I also cannot conclusively say that there are not, although the complete lack of evidence would shift the likelihood of such a situation to being most likely false.
I am the same way with my atheism. I have looked and looked and not found any concrete evidence for the existence of any deity, so I do not say that there are any. However I cannot flat out say that there are no deities because I could be wrong. However due to the overwhelming lack of evidence, and the obvious contradiction and falsehoods contained in what many people use as evidence, make such a being highly unlikely, and even more unlikely if it is at all similar to what popular religious texts claim.
f something lacks proof then the only reasonable position is to say that you are unsure and as such cannot make an assertion either to the positive or the negative regarding such a thing.
Exactly. We just don't know enough about reality to be able to actually state "facts"
Sure we do, however we have to understand that simply because something is a fact doesn't mean that there is not a minute chance of it being incorrect. We know gravitational forces are a fact, however there is a possibility that it may be incorrect. However it is true enough so much of the time and in so many situations that we can say that it is a fact.
