/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6659970]

What are some good arguments for this claim?

[Anonymous No.6659974]

There's zero evidence for God, the concept isn't testable

[Anonymous No.6659977]

neo reactionary scientism
absurdism

that's it

[Anonymous No.6659979]

>>6659970
your life

[Anonymous No.6660000]

I took tons of drugs and realized i am god but also so is everything else so nothing is really.

[Anonymous No.6660003]

>>6660000
nice dubs

[Anonymous No.6660008]

>>6660000

Trip-quads tells no lies.

[Anonymous No.6660011]

God by definition is the uncreated creator of all of existence.

If God is the creator of all that exists than he himself has to not exist in the ordinary sense, therefore God Negatively Exists, or in layman's terms doesn't exist.

For God is a different material than all of creation, and is outside of existence.

Therefore the ultimate assertion of God's creative power and his unique form of existence, is saying God does not exist.

[Anonymous No.6660014]

>>6660000
Holy shit, these numbers. What are good books about Satan?

[Anonymous No.6660030]

That it is up to the opposition to prove his existence because proving a negative is faulty reasoning and discourse.

[Anonymous No.6660086]

>>6659970
What font, OP?

[Anonymous No.6660093]

>>6660011
or you can say God is pure actuality, which is the most perfect mode of existance

>>6660030
of course you can prove a negative, dipshit

[Anonymous No.6660116]

>>6659979
BTFO

[Anonymous No.6660118]

>>6660093

Prove I don't have a unicorn in my garage right now.

[Anonymous No.6660123]

Prove God and Allah don't job share

[Anonymous No.6660124]

Can we prove or disprove the existence of god with science or tech no matter how advanced it is?

[Anonymous No.6660125]

>>6659970
Well, we need to define that "God" first and then discuss about it, I think it's stupid to have discussion like this if we don't.

[Anonymous No.6660128]

Define "God" and we can start

[Anonymous No.6660130]

>>6660118
>go to garage
>look for unicorn
>no unicorn
holy shit i wish summer was already over

[Anonymous No.6660136]

>>6660118
Just because you can't prove one particular negative doesn't mean that negatives are categorically impossible to prove. Here's an example.

I'm allergic to peanut butter, so if I eat peanut butter then I will die.
I didn't die.
Therefore I didn't eat peanut butter.

[Anonymous No.6660138]

>>6660130
>go to heaven
>look for god
>no god
christfags BTFO

[Anonymous No.6660154]

Anyone who claims god exist obliged to prove it. Not the other way arround.

[Anonymous No.6660157]

>>6660138
>implying you can go to heaven
>implying heaven is a place
>implying heaven isnt just a state of existance
shit just go back to reddit, please

[Anonymous No.6660164]

>>6660157
how do you know?

[Anonymous No.6660166]

>>6660138
I here by bestow to anon with a Phd in Faith-Smashing.

[Anonymous No.6660167]

>>6660154
if someone claims God doesnt exists, then he has to prove it

[Anonymous No.6660173]

>>6660136

Yes, but they require no substantiation which is faulty logic. One could disprove the mundane but there is no measure for validating extraordinary and unfounded claims. Making a positive claim with evidence provides for something that can be meaningfuly discussed.

This is taught in k-12 schooling. None of this should be new information.

[Anonymous No.6660178]

>>6660167
Assume I have no stance either way. Prove god exists or that he doesn't. If you can't do either of these things then this argument is necessarily stupid.

[Anonymous No.6660192]

>>6660164
we know that the soul is immortal
we know God is the ultimate fulfillment to the human nature
we know God loves us
so God will fulfill the righteous' ultimate desire after death
this fulfillment is called heaven

[Anonymous No.6660196]

Problem of evil.
>inb4 God let us do good or evil
Yeah I'm sure those Philippinos who got raped by a typhoon had anything to do with people acting wrongly.
>inb4 plagues and natural disaster are good because they are part of God's plan and God defines what's good
Then the whole "God is omnibenevolent" thing is totally meaningless, if you decide good as God's will, of course he's omnibenevolent, that's not a sentence which means anything.

[Anonymous No.6660201]

>>6660192
Citation needed.

[Anonymous No.6660206]

>>6660173
We can construct an argument of the same form in regards to god.

If God exists, then P.
~P
Therefore God doesn't exist.

What do you find objectionable about this?

[Anonymous No.6660207]

>>6660167
>burden of proof is on the person making the claim
>if someone contests a claim on the basis that the claim has not yet been proven to be true, the burden of proof shifts to them

Both are true. I don't claim God doesn't exist but I'm still waiting for confirmation that he does.

[Anonymous No.6660210]

>>6660178
there have been arguments for both stances, it's up to you to see which ones work

[Anonymous No.6660218]

>>6660167
No he doesn't. Non existence is presumption, existence is exception. If you claim something exist have to prove it.

[Anonymous No.6660221]

>>6660196
natural disasters arent good or evil

[Anonymous No.6660229]

>>6660221
How so? If God is omnipotent he is the one knowingly unleashing them upon us, it's not just chance.

[Anonymous No.6660231]

>>6660218
if you claim anything you have to prove it either way
when you claim something, it's because you have new information that supports you claim

[Anonymous No.6660236]

>>6660206
I do not mean to push that lack of evidence is evidence of a negative, only that it is no evidence at all.

There is good logic in being ambivalent about god or possibly certain of some greater power since there is a great deal we do not know.

However, it is a huge leap to make that if there is some higher power, it is exactly the abrahamic one as described in the bible versus any other possible being or power.

[Anonymous No.6660243]

>>6660229
>occasionalism
>ever
you were a muslim before, right?

[Anonymous No.6660244]

>>6660231
>if you claim anything you have to prove it either way

You can't prove anything like that. There are presumptions, just like in the law.

I know it is lame but you can't prove any of my fantasies don't exist either.

[Anonymous No.6660249]

>>6660236
I don't really understand what you're trying to say. The original comment was that trying to prove a negative is 'faulty reasoning' and I provided a couple examples of completely fine reasoning that resulted in a proof of a negative statement. Where is the fault?

[Anonymous No.6660255]

>>6659970
God in the Abrahamic sense can't exist and sometimes can also be paradoxal since the Old Testament God have differences with the God in the New Testament for example.

A metaphysical God? Well, maybe, but first describe it to me and then we can talk.

[Anonymous No.6660257]

>>6659970
Things that exist have evidence of their existence.

[Anonymous No.6660260]

>>6660243
So there are events that occured that weren't preordained by God? How do you reconcile this with omnipotence/omniscience?

[Anonymous No.6660262]

>>6660244
im not claiming they dont exist
if someone claimed they didnt they would have to give proof, it isnt that hard

[Anonymous No.6660264]

>>6660262
Maybe i can't understand because i am a lawyer. In law when you claim something "is" you have to prove it. You don't have to prove something "is not".

[Anonymous No.6660275]

>>6660011
Groovy
>>6659970
Every thing is of the divine will of God, for every thing was created by God. The tangibility of God is, quite literally, every thing, opie.

I've said it once before and I'll say it here again:
Science is completely subjective. We are literally imposing OUR ORDER on things. Cataloging things by means which we have created in a catalog which we have created.

Pack sand, atheists.

[Anonymous No.6660283]

>>6660264
>You don't have to prove something "is not".
Of course you have.
>eyh guys what about Higg's Boson?
>can you prove it exists yet?
>no but we could build a particle accel...
>fuck that, let's just declare it non-existing
>American epistemology

[Anonymous No.6660294]

>>6660283
Are you retarded? I said in "law". And i am not an American.

[Anonymous No.6660311]

>>6660283
Higg's Boson doesn't exist until it is proven.

[Anonymous No.6660314]

>>6660260
of course there are, it doesnt mean he is the ONLY cause of them (occasionalism)

[Anonymous No.6660321]

>>6660314
How does that remove his culpability in the matter?
When multiple men commit a crime, they are all equally responsible, guilt isn't shared.

[Anonymous No.6660335]

>>6660294
well, i'd say you should take off your lawyer hat and try to understand
>>6660311
you cant claim anything unless you have proof, m8

[Anonymous No.6660345]

>>6660335
Yes but nothing is not anything. I claim god is nothing so i don't have to prove it. You claim god is anything so you have to prove it.

[Anonymous No.6660348]

>>6660011
>God Negatively Exists, or in layman's terms doesn't exist
those aren't the same things. an electron exists. it also negatively exists (the positron). neither of these do not exist.

[Anonymous No.6660354]

>>6660321
so if i make guns, sell them (assume i have the license for that), and someone commits a murder with one of them, am i going to prision too?

[Anonymous No.6660366]

>>6660345
>I claim god is nothing so i don't have to prove it.
of course you have to
if someone came to me and told me my liver didnt exist, they would have to show me it didnt
how dense are you?

[Anonymous No.6660369]

>>6660249

I already explained that. Extraordinary claims cannot be be falsfied. Take the unicorn in the garage example. You could come to my garage and see in fact that there is no unicorn. But then I would claim it is invisible. You could ask to touch it. I would respond that it is also intangible. You could ask how I could know there is a unicorn there at all and I could respond that it only shows to those who believe in it . You believe but still don't see it. I could respond by saying that you don't really believe it because you don't believe all of the edicts it espouses and that even if you do you don't follow them properly.

Eventually the amount of negative evidence you would have to provide would be far greater than any amount of evidence I would to provide for the invisible and intangible unicorn in my garage.

[Anonymous No.6660375]

>>6660257
>absence of evidence is evidence of absence
Undergraduate?

[Anonymous No.6660383]

ITT: filthy empiricists

[Anonymous No.6660389]

>>6660366
No. You prove it by living. If your liver didn't exist you would be dead. You are the proof.

[Anonymous No.6660391]

>>6659970
god is a thing forinasmuchasweareto believe in such a thing

therefore exists

[Anonymous No.6660397]

>>6660369
but you just provided a series of extraordinary claims that you then falsified. the problem here has nothing to do with the negation and everything to do with the fact that the garage owner keeps adding new requirements for no good reason.

[Anonymous No.6660398]

>>6660389
alright, replace liver with appendix, etc
that's not the point

[Anonymous No.6660412]

All things are objects of consciousness, else they wouldn't be. For them to exist, they must represent a phenomenon in reality. God never represents any phenomenon he's claimed to. Ergo, he doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.6660417]

>>6660398
If you want to argue with him yes, you have to prove it.
If you don't want to you can tell him to go fuck himself.

[Anonymous No.6660418]

>>6660412
all things exist therefore god exists

[Anonymous No.6660422]

>>6660418
/thread

[Anonymous No.6660423]

>>6660011
>existence
Had no beginning. There wasn't "nothing" before the Big Bang.

[Anonymous No.6660424]

>>6660412
>God never represents any phenomenon he's claimed to.
Expand on this.

[Anonymous No.6660433]

>>6660417

go back to reddit, faggot

[Anonymous No.6660437]

>>6660433
Great argument.

[Anonymous No.6660442]

>>6660128
>>6660125
>muh syntactics

If you're too pussy to attempt a semantic discussion of God, what you think he really is, or what the idea represents, ten defining God won't do anything because you're just a tool who plays in symbols like a calculator.

[Anonymous No.6660447]

>>6660397
Falsfied to a point, until you can no longer debate it at any level except at the garage owners unique form of logic.

[Anonymous No.6660448]

>>6660437
>If you don't want to you can tell him to go fuck himself.
i bow down to you, Dr Debator Tippington

[Anonymous No.6660453]

>>6660448
I've never been on reddit. I'm not even an atheist.

[Anonymous No.6660456]

>>6660442
But then you get faggots that have "disproven" God by just disproving the Abrahamic God. That doesn't preclude the existence of a God of a different nature.

[Anonymous No.6660459]

>>6660418

Dragons don't exist.

[Anonymous No.6660461]

>>6660424
Well, God is supposed to love us, but I never experience that, and if I don't experience what I'm supposed to experience, why should I believe?

Not to mention, predicates like "all-loving" don't really make any sense, they predate on my experience of love, and try to modify it.

OP, read Feuerbach

[Anonymous No.6660464]

>>6660453
you sure act like youve been there

[Anonymous No.6660466]

>>6660459
then what is a dragon?

[Anonymous No.6660473]

>>6660456
No other god is relevant to the discussion

[Anonymous No.6660479]

>>6660418
>all things exist

This isn't true.

[Anonymous No.6660481]

>>6660466
A thing which is known. But they also don't exist. Please explain.

[Anonymous No.6660486]

>>6660473
why? it sounds like all you want to is to skip sunday school

[Anonymous No.6660494]

>>6660481
how can we know that which doesn't exist

[Anonymous No.6660496]

>>6660486
He's the only God with sociopolitical importance, you idiot.

[Anonymous No.6660500]

>>6659970
If any of you actually studied the Bible you would know that God isn't just going to come to you one day and prove his existence. That is the whole point of Faith. If you have a choice between good(God) an evil (Satan), then your choice of God is worth something to him. If you don't live a TRUE Christian life, then you may never have an encounter with God as opposed to someone who walks the walk. Not to say you won't. Now at some point in everyone's life, and most likely more than once, God will put someone/ something in your path to persuade you of him or teach you. Some have this by word of mouth, an evangelist, someone who performs healing or miracles on the street( yes they are real), or an act that changes your life. If you don't try to live for God and open up to his world, then you will never know for a fact that he exist like I know he does. It's like asking someone you don't know to prove themselves in any type of way. Why would they? They owe you nothing. Only with God it gets better, because not only does he owe you nothing, but you owe him everything because the sole reason we were created; whether any of you believe it or not, was to worship him. Some people love to make the argument that if God was real then good things wouldn't happen to bad people, and vice versa. Let us not forget that to believe in God and prove his existence, you must do the same with satan. God does not do anything bad to anyone, but he does allow satan to do things to them. Satan can also further your life while not living for God, because you are not saved and you aren't under Gods protection. Thus adding one more person to hell because they believe that they have never lived for God, yet they are still "blessed". Also, just because you are a good person doesn't mean you are going to heaven. To go, one must be 'saved', meaning you have asked forgiveness for all of your sins, acknowledge the existence of God and Jesus. Confessed that Jesus was sent, died, and rose again for your sins; and finally that Holy Ghost is the comforter while we exist on Earth. So proving God does or doesn't exist can not be done in a conversation at all. You have to live, truly live it. Not with on the fence, or weekend Christians. I am talking living the real deal; holy ghost walking, day by day tongue talking, devil woopn', miracle working Christian. Then, once you have really tried to live for the Lord, once you have been saved, gone to church every day, whether it be an actual building or spiritual, you can come tell me that God does exist. Because I have not once in my entire saved life met someone who has put in their al living for the Lord, in the end, tell me that they don't believe in him. It is impossible. Because once you live for him, and go by the BIBLE and NOT man's doctrine, he will show you things you have never experienced or known have existed.

[Anonymous No.6660504]

>>6660500
I hope that's copypasta, because nobody is going to read it

[Anonymous No.6660505]

>>6660496
the God of classical theism has sociopolitical importance
try disproving that one

[Anonymous No.6660507]

>>6660447
it sounds like you don't actually care about logic and instead you have a deep seated hatred for religious people

[Anonymous No.6660512]

>>6660494

I know what it is, you know what it is. You could play stupid in the name of this circular word game, but it is a thing we both know of but doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.6660520]

>>6660500
"Faith: not wanting to know what is true."

"We ‘knowers’ are positively mistrustful of any kind of believers; our mistrust has gradually trained us to conclude the opposite to what was formerly concluded: namely, to presuppose, wherever the strength of a belief becomes prominent, a certain weakness, even improbability of proof. Even we do not deny that faith ‘brings salvation’: precisely for that reason we deny that faith proves anything, – a strong faith which brings salvation is grounds for suspicion of the object of its faith, it does not establish truth,it establishes a certain probability – of deception"

You're totally welcome to value faith, but just because you do, doesn't mean we ought to. Don't posture like you know what's right for me, pleb.

[Anonymous No.6660525]

>>6660505
Literally don't care, and nobody cares about your stupid thoughts on it either.

[Anonymous No.6660529]

>>6660507

That's a large leap of a conclusion. The point is religion is unfalsfiable. Is that really so outrageous a conclusion to project hatred on someone whose given no evidence of it?

[Anonymous No.6660535]

>>6660525
edgy, pls tell me more

[Anonymous No.6660536]

>>6660520
Well if you are going to include yourself in this conversation then you must be open to the fact that without Faith, a main factor of any talk about God, you will never know care exists. I've seen people see miracles and still not believe in God because they are scared and don't want the faith. Idc if you want to go to hell, it's your life. All I am saying is you will never know something exist if you don't try out seriously.

[Anonymous No.6660538]

>>6660512
the axiom of existence presupposes all by nature of all thought being confined to existence and all forms of thought predicated existence

[Anonymous No.6660542]

>>6660538
*predicated by existence

woops

[Anonymous No.6660545]

>>6660311
>Higgs Boson doesn't exist until it is proven.
/lit/ being retarded again.
Earth is not being in orbit because of Einsteins gravity formulations, science is just interpeting the world not imposing its rules on it.

[Anonymous No.6660546]

>>6660538
So dragons are real?

[Anonymous No.6660547]

>>6660536
You talk like a faggot and your shit's all fucked up. I'd post a pic of my sweaty balls but I would get banned.

[Anonymous No.6660552]

>>6660520
>>6659970
No one is born an atheist. People choose to become atheists as much as they choose to become Christians. And no matter how strenuously some may try to deny it, atheism is a belief system. It requires faith that God does not exist.

[Anonymous No.6660553]

>>6660546
yes

[Anonymous No.6660554]

>>6660423

Time begins when the big bang begins champ, "before" time there was Nothing, before matter there was nothing.

Existence comes from non-existence.

[Anonymous No.6660555]

>>6660536
I don't want to sound like a dick or nothing, but uh, it says in your post that you're fucked up, you talk like a fag, and your shit's all retarded.

[Anonymous No.6660557]

why would anyone need to prove some fantawy book wrong

what is wrong with you

[Anonymous No.6660562]

>>6660554
time begins when change begins, m8

[Anonymous No.6660564]

>>6660520
>>6659970
Some atheists categorically state that there is no God, and all atheists, by definition, believe it. And yet, this assertion is logically indefensible. A person would have to be omniscient and omnipresent to be able to say from his own pool of knowledge that there is no God. Only someone who is capable of being in all places at the same time - with a perfect knowledge of all that is in the universe - can make such a statement based on the facts. To put it another way, a person would have to be God in order to say there is no God.

[Anonymous No.6660565]

>>6660552
lmao why does everyone who participate in these debates try to shoehorn you into a belief

literally there's a stance called "not giving a fuck", i'll sacrilege God and piss and not give a fuck about any of it, literally the "muh existence" debate is stupid as fuck.

Get into philosophy past Kant, it's super interesting.

[Anonymous No.6660568]

>>6660564
>Some atheists categorically state that there is no God, and all atheists, by definition, believe it.
NO

ATHEISTS SIMPLY DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT RELIGION AND DON'T FOLLOW ANY OF IT'S RULES

IT'S NOT THE BELIEF THAT GOD DOESN'T EXIST, BECAUSE THAT RETARDED CONCEPTION OF EXISTENCE FORCES AN EMPIRICAL METAPHYSICS THAT IS UNNECESSARY AND SUPERFLUOUS TO HUMAN LIFE

LITERALLY READ ANY PHILOSOPHY PAST KANT AND STOP POSTING

[Anonymous No.6660575]

>>6660568
>EMPIRICAL METAPHYSICS
lol

[Anonymous No.6660577]

>>6660568
that would be called irreligious, tipmaster

[Anonymous No.6660584]

>>6660552
>being this retarded
You do realise that the main statement of atheism is "I do not believe in a god because there is not evidence for one, therefore I conclude there is not god". This same reasoning is used in everyday life, in every sphere of human endeavour, but for some fucked up reason religion is free of this. Imagine if you went to your doctor and he does a CT scan of your head. He has not found traces of tumours. "Atheist" stance is to conclude that there are no tumours, but the "believer" stance is "there is a tumour, even though I cannot see it, but it says so in this dusty old textbook ".

[Anonymous No.6660585]

when will you fuckers realize that the universe, being reflexively self-processing, is self-perceptual in nature and thus endowed with various levels of self-awareness and sentience, or constructive, creative intelligence?

[Anonymous No.6660586]

>>6660575
defend your materialism then

>>6660577
Then literally nobody of any importance or significance is an atheist. By that definition, even Richard Dawkins is just irreligious and not an atheist, because..

RICHARD DAWKINS DOES NOT BELIEVE WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY GOD DOESN'T EXIST

And literally no "atheist" actually believes that.

Isn't there a term for someone who argues against a completely made-up opponent?

[Anonymous No.6660588]

>>6660584

[Anonymous No.6660592]

>>6660585
http://www.reddit.com/r/iamverysmart

Purposefully being esoteric just makes you look like an idiot.

[Anonymous No.6660596]

>>6660585
i already know this

ask me anything

[Anonymous No.6660597]

>>6660553

Where are they then, because I've been missing out.

[Anonymous No.6660604]

>>6660584
I have to point out that even that "atheist" stance is not "THERE IS NO TUMOURS 1000 %", there is a chance, but it is arbitrarilly small. Following the same logic believers do, you would not exit your house today because there is a small, but existent, chance of thunder striking you down out of the blue.

[Anonymous No.6660612]

>>6660584
youre analogy assumes that there has been someone who has given a rational argument against God and it assumes that the belief in God is completely unfounded

both assumptions cant be further from reality

[Anonymous No.6660614]

>>6660588
And this is the intellectual capacity of an average christfag. Post some more fedora pics.

[Anonymous No.6660621]

>>6660588

[Anonymous No.6660625]

>>6660614

[Anonymous No.6660626]

>>6660614
Christians are smarter than atheists.

[Anonymous No.6660627]

>>6660612
Are you really THAT intellectualy limited?
I hope you are baiting, but here is your answer in case you were serious.
>it assumes that the belief in God is completely unfounded
Belief of God is founded ? What is your motivation, God from the gap ?
Come on, I am geniunely interested.

[Anonymous No.6660630]

>>6660625
Yeah, fucking loudmouth hateful atheists.

[Anonymous No.6660635]

>>6660621
>>6660625
>>6660626

[Anonymous No.6660650]

>>6660635

[Anonymous No.6660673]

>>6660627
see The Five Ways of Thomas Aquinas

also, your attitude makes me think you have an unfounded disdain to theists in general, so i think argumentation will be useless if youre that emotionally motivated

[Anonymous No.6660692]

>>6660673
Calling me emotional doesn't bother me. The fact that you would even attempt that means you assume I'm one of those "muh logic, emotions are for women" cringey types, which proves you're an arrogant, bigoted stereotyper.

[Anonymous No.6660693]

>>6660473
Really? You see, since OP didn't define God in his post we don't know whether he means Abraham's God or the concept of a higher power altogether. You're a moron.

[Anonymous No.6660696]

>>6660650

[Anonymous No.6660699]

>>6660692
Random anon, here.

That's, uh, not proof of anything, actually. You just made a big cognitive leap based on very little.

[Anonymous No.6660700]

>>6660693
>Really? You see, since OP didn't define God in his post we don't know whether he means Abraham's God or the concept of a higher power altogether. You're a moron.
Hold up now. Define moron! I can't know what you mean!! I can't infer, because it wasn't defined!!!!!!!

>inb4 you believe moron only has one use

[Anonymous No.6660703]

>>6660699
Exactly, now you see the flaw in the post I was replying to. Making assumptions about people based on 4chan-tier psychology.

[Anonymous No.6660704]

>>6660692
well im sorry, that's what i got when you thought that any attempt to justify belief in God must be b8 or comes from a retarded person

[Anonymous No.6660709]

>>6660704
You're certainly a retarded person, and people who believe in God are pathological and I'd suspect all secretly like fingering their buttholes.

[Anonymous No.6660715]

>>6660709
b8, youre not the original anon
but if you are, that would prove my point

[Anonymous No.6660716]

>>6660210
What proof for any side? There is no definitive evidence, and that's why each side thinks they're right

[Anonymous No.6660717]

>>6659970
what is this unfalsifiable nonsense?

[Anonymous No.6660724]

>>6660715
I'm not baiting, I'm mocking the entire discussion because the fact you take this seriously is fucking pathetic.

[Anonymous No.6660726]

>>6660500
I spent every day reading my Bible, praying, going to church, doing evangelism to random people, the whole 9 yards.

It feels like my prayers lie unanswered, and I have more questions about the nature of man than I did before. I have not seen God, like every other Christian claims. Is my earnest seeking not enough? The scriptures say he will reveal himself if you follow his commands, (John 14:21) but I have seen nothing.

[Anonymous No.6660728]

>>6660461
But doesn't that assume that the object of affection necessarily must know they are as such? There are cases where someone is loved by another but is unaware of it.

For example, I genuinely hold a special place in my heart for moths. I think they're adorable. However, they do not know I love them, and cannot experience anything I do to show my affection (eg feeding them, freeing them from my house and providing a garden for them in which to live) as love. Does this mean I don't care about them? No, obviously not. So how do you know that God (presuming he exists) is not showing his love in a way you cannot experience or are incapable (either due to being above human comprehension or your own misinterpretation) of interpreting as love?

[Anonymous No.6660732]

>>6660726
If you want to believe a sign will come enough, one will come. That's why everyone who "finds" God finds God after introspection about God, and nobody ever finds him randomly in areas who have never heard about Christianity.

[Anonymous No.6660741]

>>6660724
you give of a scent of pure ideology anon, perhaps you should sit down for a while

[Anonymous No.6660742]

>>6660728
>There are cases where someone is loved by another but is unaware of it.

Yes but there are no cases where someone is all-loved by another.

[Anonymous No.6660744]

>>6660741
>pure ideology
>the guy mocking everyone

xd m8 i'm the ubermensch bitch suck my wangalang ding dong schlong

[Anonymous No.6660747]

>>6660742
love, as understood by christian philosphers, is to will for something/someones good

[Anonymous No.6660749]

>>6660552
I guess it also takes faith to believe that flaming unicorns with 1000 eyes don't exist.

[Anonymous No.6660752]

>>6660747
Okay, so what is all-loving?

[Anonymous No.6660754]

Is this just a bad thread or is /lit/ stupid as fuck?

[Anonymous No.6660755]

>>6660744
stirners philosophy is pure ideology, thanks for proving my point

[Anonymous No.6660759]

>>6660732
>If you want to believe a sign will come enough, one will come.

Wouldn't that just lead to someone looking for a sign and then attempting to justify any coincidence as one?

>That's why [...] nobody ever finds him randomly in areas who have never heard about Christianity.

Well. I mean, it would be hard to understand a sign from a God you have never heard of before as being from that God and not one of your own. Why wouldn't God appear to these people? Aren't they His children? Wouldn't He want to save them?

[Anonymous No.6660761]

>>6660749
No it doesn't, it takes faith to get fucked in the ass by a horse like Mr. Hands.

[Anonymous No.6660763]

>>6660752
that loves all

[Anonymous No.6660765]

>>6660700
Looks like we're resorting to shitposting. Good discussion m8

[Anonymous No.6660772]

>>6660755
>stirners philosophy is pure ideology, thanks for proving my point
Pure ideology is based on Stirner's philosophy laamo

[Anonymous No.6660774]

>>6660754
Both

[Anonymous No.6660775]

>>6660752
Willing for everyone's good.

[Anonymous No.6660778]

>>6660759
>Wouldn't that just lead to someone looking for a sign and then attempting to justify any coincidence as one?
Welcome to faith

>Well. I mean, it would be hard to understand a sign from a God you have never heard of before as being from that God and not one of your own. Why wouldn't God appear to these people? Aren't they His children? Wouldn't He want to save them?
He wants to save them, but is too busy to show himself.

[Anonymous No.6660780]

>>6660752
Think of the parent that rebukes a bad child but still loves it.

Now apply this to everything, since in essence, God is the Father of everything.

[Anonymous No.6660786]

>>6660765
>so sayeth the shitposter

Trying to collateralize discussion by controlling the form of discussion, and being averted by a person smart enough to not be baited by your obvious shenanigans, isn't me shitposting, it's you getting frustrated because i refuse to play by your rules.

[Anonymous No.6660787]

Can we stop with these useless threads?

[Anonymous No.6660794]

>>6660775
>>6660763
>>6660780
Oh, interesting, I have never experienced that or anything like that in my life, so I can ignore it as a completely retarded, made-up notion.

[Anonymous No.6660806]

I just scanned this thread. 96% of the posts are 1 line long. Moreover, this is a chinese cartoon website. Therefore, I estimate the probability that anyone has put forth a compelling argument for or against Theism to be 0.

[Anonymous No.6660810]

>>6660806
>for or against theism
>being for or against an idea

I'm for and against people actually doing shit based on ideas. And Christians are all annoying faggots IRL so that's why I find them all so punchable. LOL

[Anonymous No.6660813]

>>6660794
So you think your father hated you for scolding you once?

[Anonymous No.6660814]

>>6660810
your mom is a christian

[Anonymous No.6660815]

>>6660348
only correct post ITT

[Anonymous No.6660819]

>>6660813
My father wasn't all-loving.

[Anonymous No.6660820]

>>6660810
So most of the western world is made of annoying faggots in your eyes?

[Anonymous No.6660825]

>>6660794
>my personal experience thus defines everything
>I've never seen a giant squid IRL ergo giant squid don't exist
Embrace rationalism anon.

[Anonymous No.6660826]

>>6660810
You know perfectly well what is being said.

[Anonymous No.6660827]

>>6660819
It's the same on essence. I am an atheist, but you'd have seriously stupid to be unable to grasp the concept.

[Anonymous No.6660830]

>>6660819
all-loving is just applying that to all of a being's (in this case, God's) creations

All is theoretically created by God, and God loves all He creates, so God is All-Loving

[Anonymous No.6660835]

>>6660820
Most of the world is annoying faggots, anon. Including you and me.

[Anonymous No.6660845]

>>6660820
Absolutely

>>6660825
>>I've never seen a giant squid IRL ergo giant squid don't exist
>Thinks it's a discussion of objects and not predicates
Holy fuck, you're so philosophically inept.

>>6660827
I grasp the concept, but I have never been able to apply the predicate because it doesn't apply to any phenomenon. It's an abstract synthetic with no real meaning.

Why not worship the all-green rockathon in space?

>>6660830
I have never experienced that, so it's meaningless to me.

[Anonymous No.6660849]

>>6660845
>I have never experienced that

Prove it

[Anonymous No.6660850]

>>6660827
Dude, why not worship the all-watering skygod rainicus? he's all watering because he waters all things, isn't that so amazing?

[Anonymous No.6660856]

>>6660849
>Prove it
can't, i can't prove things to skeptics. because skeptics, both christians and atheists alike, are iron-wrought cunts who actually believe what they think matters

[Anonymous No.6660857]

>>6660850
>>6660845

>why not worship the all-

Same poster replying to the same dude twice. You have to do better than that.

[Anonymous No.6660865]

>>6660857
Of course I did, are you actually trying to pretend as though I was pretending to be two posters?

>throwing literally any stupid shit out you falsely induce to be true in your rabid impetum ad hominem

fuck off you plebeian dirt

[Anonymous No.6660866]

>>6660845
>Absolutely
So either you're being contrarian or you're the edgiest motherfucker in town.
>Why not worship the all-green rockathon in space?
Because there isn't a religion about the all-green rockathon in space, with everything that implies.

[Anonymous No.6660870]

>>6660856
>both christians and atheists alike, are iron-wrought cunts who actually believe what they think matters

Prove it.

[Anonymous No.6660875]

I suppose the best you could do is show by their own holy shit books how the abrahamic religions's gods can't be real because of all the contradictions.

Disproving a God not related to shitty sand-nigger lineage is impossible, conversely just as proving.

Being agnostic is fine and all but if you think it's possible for the abrahamic gods to exist then you are a fool hiding behind something like the possibility of air existing in a vacuum of space a billion light years from our eye's reach.

[Anonymous No.6660880]

>>6660866
>Because there isn't a religion about the all-green rockathon in space, with everything that implies.
>belief suggests truth

>>6660870
no

[Anonymous No.6660886]

>>6660880
>no

Prove it

[Anonymous No.6660897]

>>6660886
suck my wang, mr. chang

>mfw i broke the skeptic and he's stuck on repeat

[Anonymous No.6660899]

[Anonymous No.6660902]

>>6660880
No, you're horrendously twisting my words. People don't worship the all-green rockathon in space because they have no reason to. It's very simple. People wouldn't worship the abrahamic god either if abrahamic religions didn't exist. It's just a thing they do because they were told to do it, and perphaps some can justify doing it somehow.

[Anonymous No.6660907]

>>6660902
>No, you're horrendously twisting my words. People don't worship the all-green rockathon in space because they have no reason to.
I have no reason to believe in God.

>It's just a thing they do because they were told to do it, and perphaps some can justify doing it somehow.
Okay I agree.

[Anonymous No.6660908]

>>6660897
>he's stuck on repeat
P R O V E I T
R
O
V
E
I
T

[Anonymous No.6660911]

>>>>>www.reddit.com/r/debateareligion

[Anonymous No.6660924]

>>6660908
proved

[Anonymous No.6660929]

>>6660849
>>6660870
>>6660886
>>6660908

cool shitposting, bro

[Anonymous No.6660932]

There are literally no good arguments for "God does not exist" and "God does exist." They're nonsensical statements.

[Anonymous No.6660933]

[Anonymous No.6660936]

>>6660929
thanks, it's a postmodern piece about the cyclical nature of unprovable claims.

[Anonymous No.6660941]

>>6660932
^

[Anonymous No.6660944]

>>6660932
That's why you should read Feuerbach. All atheists should.

[Anonymous No.6660947]

>>6660932
Demonstrate why this is so, please. Or at least sketch it.

[Anonymous No.6660950]

>>6660947
Even if God doesn't exist, one still should explain what is going on when people do believe in God. Which is why people should read Feuerbach.

[Anonymous No.6660952]

>>6660932

[Anonymous No.6660963]

>>6660947
Ur a faggot lol. Back to 9gag we go. Shell in a nutshell. Random is not funny. I am being serious. Black and white. Figaro figaro.

[Anonymous No.6660976]

>>6660952

[Anonymous No.6660979]

>>6660932
It's not some kind of philosophical statement. Take it literally. There's literally zero proof that God exists and plenty of ways to explain damn near anything that could be attributed to God. By this point the only way to defend the existence of God is to make him the god of gaps which become smaller and smaller with the passing of time.

[Anonymous No.6660981]

>>6660963
deep, bro

[Anonymous No.6660985]

The fact that we can track down the evolution of gods in an athropological sense, thats enough proof for me to doubt.

[Anonymous No.6660993]

>>6660981
I really try to make them as deep as possible. I will continue to dump some on this thread. I think it gives a strong message about it.

[Anonymous No.6660998]

>>6660985
Thanks Hegel! Thanks Feuerbach! Thanks Nietzsche!

[Anonymous No.6661009]

>>6660998
No prob anon

[Anonymous No.6661011]

>>6660979

[Anonymous No.6661017]

>>6661011

[Anonymous No.6661018]

>>6661011
How about you try to refute my post instead of posting memes?

[Anonymous No.6661026]

>>6659970
The fact that every god ever has been created by man, and Jehovah, Allah, Lord is just another fad.

It's funny how God is ever receding, isn't it?

[Anonymous No.6661027]

>>6661018

[Anonymous No.6661032]

>>6661027
It's funny cause it's TRUE!

[Anonymous No.6661040]

>>6660998
>>6660985
Hegel's analysis of it is wrong though. Zoroastrianism wasn't the first religion, nor did we worship disembodied, impersonal concepts alone. We worshipped ancestors along with Fertility, Nature, these types of things. Not sure what to make of that. There really isn't a clear evolution, as many of these practices continue today.
That being said, it seems that all religion comes out of a self-serving need or desire. Perhaps religion is just born out of wishful thinking. Perhaps not.

[Anonymous No.6661045]

>>6661027
>>6661017
>>6661011
>>6660976
>>6660952
why are you posting pictures of goofy looking people wearing silly hats?

[Anonymous No.6661048]

>>6661040
>reading hegel this badly

fuck, analytics are so bad at everything.

[Anonymous No.6661051]

>>6661027
"He knew it then. For what he saw in me was what I am".

This is what the creator said. It does not really justify the claims of all the people who hold it as truth. Maybe if the representative arguments were affirmed by democracy, we could be able to sustain this statement.

[Anonymous No.6661077]

any atheist who claims that because there is "no evidence" for god he doesn't exist should be ignored or mocked

[Anonymous No.6661082]

>>6661077
>mocked
>normie

[Anonymous No.6661105]

>>6661077
Christopher Hitchens was the first one to contribute to this. He claimed that whatever you do you are not fixated on it. You move and slide across all of reality without realising you don't move at all. Movement is not even there. You can't pinpoint movement because Schopenhauers laws do not allow it.

This is the very truth about our existential problems. This is why we are so important to us. We don't see the now as an excuse to think.

[Anonymous No.6661106]

>>6661048
I'm sorry, I've never taken a class on him. Please help me out.

He isn't the clearest writer.

[Anonymous No.6661109]

>>6661106
If Hegel says Zoroastrianism was the first religion, then he's basically beginning to define religion by Zoroastrianism's premises, it doesn't matter what the anthropologists later say.

[Anonymous No.6661125]

tfw I got called an athiest basher by my atheist freinds for asking why they would need conferences to talk about nothing

[Anonymous No.6661147]

>>6661125
Brah, that's how we feel about Church.

[Anonymous No.6661150]

>>6660845
>I have never experienced that, so it's meaningless to me.
you experience it by existing

[Anonymous No.6661154]

>>6661150
>you experience it by existing
lmao but then why am i atheist if existing suggests god exists?

[Anonymous No.6661159]

>>6660772
that's why it's ironic

[Anonymous No.6661162]

SHUT THE FUCK UP TO THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY!

[Anonymous No.6661172]

>>6661154
because you're wrong
and you take delight on it

[Anonymous No.6661180]

>>6660257
Don't they address this fallacy on an episode of the Boondocks?

[Anonymous No.6661181]

>>6661040
I haven't even read his work. I just stumbled upon some articles about proto-Aryan deities and myths and how they evolved into the religions of the Germanics, Greeks, and Vedics,

[Anonymous No.6661186]

>>6660257
>Things that exist have evidence of their existence.

If a tree falls in the woods...

[Anonymous No.6661189]

reminder that God is an atheist

[Anonymous No.6661195]

>>6661189
>God doesn't believe in himself

He has to work on his self-esteem.

[Anonymous No.6661200]

does it matter?

[Anonymous No.6661207]

>>6661172
oh okay thanks for the suggestion, i'll continue being wrong then :-)

[Anonymous No.6661220]

>thread about possibly the most important question one can ask
>the thread is complete shit

This thread is bad and I feel bad

[Anonymous No.6661223]

>>6661207
kek, you sound like a muslim m8

[Anonymous No.6661236]

>>6661109
But he makes the point that religion is an evolving organism. For him, it starts with the worship of abstract concepts, like light (Zoroastrianism), then moves onto more relatable natural concepts, like Fertility. Those concepts then become personified in the form of the Hellenic pantheon--Zeus is God of lightning and the sky, yes, but is depicted in human form with human motives. Penultimately, we come to Christianity, in which Jesus Christ, the divine figure, takes on human form and dies for the soul of Man.

This is to show the evolving personalization of religion, and that the idea at the end of this progression is that Man is God (issuing in the End of History, supposedly).

I'm not saying his reasoning is flawed. I'm saying that his progression isn't consistent with history, which could mean any number of things. Or nothing at all.

[Anonymous No.6661245]

>>6660294
Now you're just being stubborn. We're obviously referring to the philosophic burden of proof, not the legal burden of proof - which as a lawyer you should know. I don't think this is beyond your capacity for understanding, you're doing it deliberately.

You can't claim with any kind of certainty that something doesn't exist if you can't prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that it doesn't. A negative claim is still a claim that needs to be supported.

[Anonymous No.6661252]

>>6661181
That's pretty cool. Got a link?

And yeah, I was mostly replying to the other anon

[Anonymous No.6661254]

>>6661220
>>thread about possibly the most important question one can ask
lmao fuck off

[Anonymous No.6661258]

>>6661254
case in point

[Anonymous No.6661263]

>>6661236
My guess is that your view of history conflicts with his, and it's always possible that he missed details, but often his insights don't depend on the historical specifics

[Anonymous No.6661274]

>>6661220
It looks like it's turning around, actually
I mean >>6661236 managed to correctly summarize a piece from Hegel, which is more than most threads can claim

[Anonymous No.6661277]

>>6661258
case in point, people treating religion like it matters

[Anonymous No.6661285]

>>6660418
Even if that were true that wouldn't be sufficient proof of the existence of God

[Anonymous No.6661288]

>>6661277
you didn't make a point

[Anonymous No.6661292]

>>6661277
It affects virtually 85% of civilized life....

[Anonymous No.6661295]

>>6661292
>>6661288
>quoting statistics as though they have meaning

xd

[Anonymous No.6661300]

>>6660456
No one has disproven the Abrahamic God - only that His existence is highly improbable or that He only exists within very particular restraints of logic.

[Anonymous No.6661301]

>>6661295
i didn't quote statistics, cuck

[Anonymous No.6661305]

>>6661295
>living lives as if they have meaning

[Anonymous No.6661307]

>>6661263
I agree, often they don't (just look at Lordship and Bondage--I doubt that's how the first contact between two consciousnesses went)
But with this dialectic, as it is a direct observation about the history of religion, and whereas most others are general observations about human nature, there is a necessary level of accuracy required

[Anonymous No.6661380]

>>6659970
-Parmenidies
-Any work that refutes metaphysical explanations
-The lack of a divine element in religious texts
-The inconsistency of revelation
-Most Monist arguments outside ofo Berkley
-Materialism
-Inconsistent and generally purely subjective evidence that cannot be verified outside of appeals to authority.

[Anonymous No.6661631]

>>6660173
>>6660136
>faulty logic

You can't just call Modus tollens, literally the thing people learn on the very first day of any Logic course, faulty reasoning.

>>6660264
>Your honor, my client is not a murderer!
>prove it
>"You don't have to prove something is not."
>guilty

10/10 best lawyer ever

>>6660584
You do realize it's possible to know truths by means other than gathering evidence, r-right?

[Anonymous No.6661649]

░░░░░░░░░░░░▄▐
░░░░░░▄▄▄░░▄██▄
░░░░░▐▀█▀▌░░░░▀█▄
░░░░░▐█▄█▌░░░░░░▀█▄
░░░░░░▀▄▀░░░▄▄▄▄▄▀▀
░░░░▄▄▄██▀▀▀▀
░░░█▀▄▄▄█░▀▀
░░░▌░▄▄▄▐▌▀▀▀
▄░▐░░░▄▄░█░▀▀ SINUT ON SÄIKYTTÄNYT
▀█▌░░░▄░▀█▀░▀
░░░░░░░▄▄▐▌▄▄
░░░░░░░▀███▀█░▄
░░░░░░▐▌▀▄▀▄▀▐▄ KUUMOITTAVA LUURANGSMAN
░░░░░░▐▀░░░░░░▐▌
░░░░░░█░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░▐▌░░░░░░░░░█
░░░░░█░░░░░░░░░░▐▌LÄHETÄ TÄMÄ KUUTEEN LANKAAN TAI LUURENGOT SYÖVÄT

[Anonymous No.6661833]

>>6660275
You are such a fucking faggot

[Anonymous No.6661909]

>tfw 4 of my own oc meme pictures have been posted here by others

this thread is next level

[Dr. Dude !!xYApC7v7+j4 No.6661912]

>>6659970
If there is a god, then why would he allow the Holocaust to happen?

>inb4 Jew jokes or Fedora meems.

[Anonymous No.6661913]

>>6660584
>Implying the concept of God is univocal
>Implying it's meaningful to speak of the "existence" of God

Latin theology really did dig its own grave.

[Anonymous No.6661921]

>>6660568
>EMPIRICAL METAPHYSICS

[Anonymous No.6662381]

>>6660196
>implying death of body is bad
Yeah the problem with 16 year old internet atheists is that they look at non material subjects in a materialistic way making all arguments impossible because they can't take on an assumption they don't agree with.

[Anonymous No.6662385]

>>6660568
>empirical metaphysics

[Anonymous No.6662398]

>>6661921
>>6662385
>making fun of that which you don't understand

[Anonymous No.6662404]

>>6662398
>but you're making fun of god :^)

[Anonymous No.6662413]

>>6661912
Why wouldn't he? Sin has entered the world, this isn't heaven. Our existence here is temporary, it's a preparation for the next life.

[Anonymous No.6662432]

>>6660128
>>6660125
An all powerful entity the serves to create an objective sense of the sublime.

[Anonymous No.6662452]

>>6660577
That's not what fucking irreligious means you idiot. It's refusing to practice a cult. You can believe in God and be irreligious.

[Anonymous No.6662455]

>>6660354
No, because you're not omniscient.
However, if you knew that someone was going to commit a murder and you still sold him a gun, then yeah you're going to prison.

[Anonymous No.6662484]

>>6660192
What is this 'soul' you speak of? Some unnecessary, immaterial thing that does shit all now that we know more about the brain?

[Anonymous No.6662494]

>>6661631
>Your honor, my client is not a murderer!
>prove it
>"You don't have to prove something is not."
>guilty

It doesn't work like that. I don't go to court and open a case to claim my client is not guilty.

If someone claims my client is a murderer he/she has to prove it. Everyone is innocent until it is proven.

[Anonymous No.6662515]

>>6662413
Are you aware that fetishizing your death and casting off the importance of this life makes you a nihlist?

[Anonymous No.6662522]

>>6662515
I'm not fetishising death. Well unless Christianity does that. In which case it is nihilistic.

[Anonymous No.6662535]

>>6662522
So you don't see anything wrong with fixating on an afterlife that is literally unproveable?

[Anonymous No.6662543]

>>6662535
No.

[Anonymous No.6662697]

>>6661631
The burden of proof is with the prosecution you absolute melon

[Anonymous No.6662746]

>>6660545
>pretends the concept of "objective reality" is more coherent than the concept "god".

[Anonymous No.6662748]

>>6660562
aristotle go home

[Anonymous No.6662751]

>>6660481
Dragon is an idea, a concept in your mind/brain.
This concept does exist in this sense.

[Anonymous No.6662755]

>>6660597
In your brain.

[Anonymous No.6662777]

Satanism is the only true path

[Anonymous No.6662814]

>>6660626
I dont see how someone who has prescribed to a single religion, can be called smart because of such a decision.
Maybe non religious theists...

[Anonymous No.6662830]

>>6661380
in America, do they actually teach you at school to misuse the terms "subjective" and "objective"?

[Anonymous No.6662899]

>>6659970
1. entropy always increases. existence of DNA/RNA based living things is against that physical observation.
2. The scientific and philosophical method are based highly on causality. All things happen because of some previous thing that happened. How did life happen out of nowhere? Causality of Big Bang, if it really happened, is unimaginable.

[Anonymous No.6662926]

>>6662899
>someone actually thinks like this

[Anonymous No.6663146]

Just gonna leave this here. http://crucialconsiderations.org/philosophy/the-problem-of-evil-i/

[Anonymous No.6663149]

>>6662777
Trips confirm

[Anonymous No.6663211]

>>6663146
I'll see your apologist bs and raise you a http://www.philosophyoflife.org/jpl201309.pdf

[Anonymous No.6663276]

>>6662899
what does any of that have to do with god not existing lmao

[Anonymous No.6663280]

>>6659970
There aren't, God is whatever you want it to be

[Anonymous No.6663292]

Slave morality

[Anonymous No.6664490]

>>6662484
the substantial form of human beings