Druganator Posted July 29, 2009 Author Share Posted July 29, 2009 This thread has grown repetitive. Everyone keeps saying the same thing over again. because, again, for whatever reason deities are exempt from reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 Then that means God has to be proven to exist before he could be used in an argument. It's been proven to me. I couldn't care less whether or not it's proven to you or anyone else. I'm no evangelist. And I haven't been arguing for God's existence as much as trying (in vain, obviously) to get certain people to realize that arrogantly making absolute statements with no proof doesn't help their argument. And what if there is no evidence that he does? What then? How about dropping the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druganator Posted July 29, 2009 Author Share Posted July 29, 2009 It's been proven to me. I couldn't care less whether or not it's proven to you or anyone else. I'm no evangelist. And I haven't been arguing for God's existence as much as trying (in vain, obviously) to get certain people to realize that arrogantly making absolute statements with no proof doesn't help their argument. you have less proof than people who believe in Bigfoot, theyve at least got that fake tape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 it proves that a supreme being is the creation of man in order to fill the void i mentioned before If true, it would prove that the supreme being from religious text were false. It does nothing to disprove the existence of a supreme being. It would just prove that man’s limited concept of God was false. May I suggest you look up the concept of the burden of proof? For the record, I am not asking you to disprove the existence of God because I would consider that impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 you have less proof than people who believe in Bigfoot, theyve at least got that fake tape. And yet, strangely enough, I don't give a damn. Like I said, I'm no evangelist. You and D_Y can feel free to burn in hell for all I care. I won't stop you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trench Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 you have less proof than people who believe in Bigfoot, theyve at least got that fake tape. And yet, strangely enough, I don't give a damn. What he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Yuthura Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 And I haven't been arguing for God's existence as much as trying (in vain, obviously) to get certain people to realize that arrogantly making absolute statements with no proof doesn't help their argument. You said yourself that you wanted proof. Is is so wrong to ask for proof before the opposite side submits something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druganator Posted July 29, 2009 Author Share Posted July 29, 2009 If true, it would prove that the supreme being from religious text were false. It does nothing to disprove the existence of a supreme being. It would just prove that man’s limited concept of God was false. May I suggest you look up the concept of the burden of proof? For the record, I am not asking you to disprove the existence of God because I would consider that impossible. there is no reason to believe in any supreme being. Quantum physics my friend, everything is random, we are the way we are by chance, we are not perfect beings, we are just the most intelligent ( i'm not the crunchiest chip in the bag mind you). so i ask you this, what is the most universal human characteristic, fear? or laziness? (that's from Waking Life by the by) Are we as humans afraid of what it would mean to know we are truly alone? or just too lazy to try and find out through work as opposed to simply believing what "that guy said" @Q if there was a hell i would take offense but since the only thing remotely close to an afterlife is the 6 minutes of brain activity left after we die i'll just have a very long pleasant dream. or a nightmare but it won't matter as i'll be quite dead. for real this time, not like the last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 You said yourself that you wanted proof. No, I didn't, because I know that there isn't any either way. And, once again: How about dropping the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 there is no reason to believe in any supreme being.[/Quote] Did I say there was? No, I did not. And none of the rest of that does anything to prove or disprove there is a supreme being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druganator Posted July 29, 2009 Author Share Posted July 29, 2009 Did I say there was? No, I did not. And none of the rest of that does anything to prove or disprove there is a supreme being. Did I say it did? No I did not. Then are you saying that it was spam and had nothing to do with your original point of this thread? ~ mimartin can i reply to you? if i can here's what i'll say. it was a statement of how i believe we came into being. not proof or disproof of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 Well, there's a couple of hours that I'll never get back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 Well, there's a couple of hours that I'll never get back. QFT...don't ya hate it when that happens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 can i reply to you? if i can here's what i'll say. it was a statement of how i believe we came into being. not proof or disproof of anything. OK, I have to ask again: are you high? SRSLY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Hunger Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 Lol, this thread is a joke. The thread starter, Druganator, has failed to address several major arguments made against his and has offered no rational evidence to support his views. Meanwhile, Darth_Yuthura has done a better job of defending the premise of this thread than it's maker, though I disagree with many of her points as to be expected. I request that the moderators shut this thread down please. There is little to be said anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druganator Posted July 29, 2009 Author Share Posted July 29, 2009 Lol, this thread is a joke. The thread starter, Druganator, has failed to address several major arguments made against his and has offered no rational evidence to support his views. Meanwhile, Darth_Yuthura has done a better job of defending the premise of this thread than it's maker, though I disagree with many of her points as to be expected. I request that the moderators shut this thread down please. There is little to be said anymore. which arguments prove the existence? if there are none then i see no need to respond to them. in order for something to be true in every case it needs to be proven. Earth's Gravity for instance is true in all cases. Since no one has proven there is a god then i have won. Religion is pointless if it believes in something that caannot be proven. if you can prove me wrong please do so, if you can't then "go home and rethink your life" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 "go home and rethink your life" I'm rethinking why I accepted Darth333 offer. Since this thread is not even touching on the topic "Why does religion still exist today when most former religions died out?" and has only became a spamfest it is being shut down. There are other threads devoted to the Atheist vs. Theist debate. This would have been an interesting topic had it not been a disguise for the real agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.