>arguments for the existence of God are: the cosmological proof, the ontological proof, the transcendental proof, and many, many more
>arguments against the existence of God are: "I don't like God", "REEEEE I HATE YOU FOR BELIEVING IN GOD", and something incoherent about unicorns or something
It's not the religious people who are irrational.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Your post proves you are.
What is this cope lol
You presented no proof, created an absurd strawman. And have done nothing to even specify which God you mean, much less why your arguments for that specific god are better than for other gods. I was raised without religion, it was never a topic, God's simply didn't exist in my house hold there was no rejection, in the same way you don't reject owning a unicorn, it's simply not present.
Your parents did you wrong.
By not indoctrinating me into one of thousands of religions that can't even decide between themselves who is right while also having no proof.
Dunno, the cosmological, ontological and trascendental arguments seem pretty rational to me.
>the cosmological proof, the ontological proof, the transcendental proof, and many, many more
Could you describe them in your own words?
Yes.
Cosmological proof basically says that everything is cause and effect in the universe, so there must be a first cause that is effect on itself, it doesn't depend on anything. That's God, the first cause.
Ontological proof says that God, as a perfect being, must exist cause its perfect, because a perfect being that exists only in the mind would be imperfect by definition, because a perfect being that actually exists in reality, outside of the mind, it is more perfect.
Theological proof says that logic, arguments and morals depend on God, otherwise we wouldn't have them.
>prove it
>prove it
>prove it
None of that has any backing to "prove" the existence of a god. All of them amount to "because I said so".
>I don't understand [natural proccess]
>therefore God
>presume you believe in God
>therefore God
>God is math
theistsisters, is this really the best we can do?
These are not proofs
These are really weak arguments
for the existence of God are: the cosmological proof, the ontological proof, the transcendental proof, and many, many more
And all of them garbage that have been disproven again and again
Granting you the extremely generous stance that those arguments are rock solid, they don’t prove a religious god.
Religious God is redundant.
It really blows my mind that you can’t see that the universe having a creator doesn’t mean any religion has it right.
They don’t even have their creation stories on straight.
>It really blows my mind
I'm glad I could help you discover new ideas.
And we’ve reached the cutting sentences in half to miss the point, ignoring the other main point cope.
This is why people are dropping your religion in developed beyond
No they're doing that because they're degenerates and they want an excuse for their bad behavior.
Bro even children don’t believe this shit
Who's teaching the children?
Stop deflecting wienersucker. The universe has a creator =/= the god of any religion is true. Post your entire saved folder of trans people it does not make any religious god real.
Please cope.
…I’m not the one claiming God will help me become immortal in paradise or that God loves me.
>be theist
>engage in arguments with a “holier than thou” tone
>gets Byron
>starts spamming Reddit phrases
every time
>If I pray to Jesus all of my bad things will go away and people I don't like will be tortured forever
I’ll reiterate so you can’t bury the fact that you have no response.
Even if the universe has a creator that wouldn’t mean that any religion has it right. For one thing their creation stories are wrong.
>Even if the universe has a creator that wouldn’t mean that any religion has it right
You are pretending not to understand the terms of the discussion.
I’m not. Even if any of those arguments are airtight it does not mean that the god of any religion is the Creator.
I agree, that's why many people have studied and dedicated a lot of time to understand the nature of God, and the christian God is the one that fits that nature.
>and the christian God is the one that fits that nature
Why?
Because a God that is evil or that wants people that serve him instead of loving him by their own free will makes no sense. It doesn't fit the idea of a perfect good, and good is perfect by its own definition.
A God that isn't perfect is just a Zeus, and devoid of all praise or admiration, just a more powerful entity in the same way a human is more powerful than an ant, it means nothing.
No it isn't moron
>im such a rebel
oh yeah, Sieg Heil right now to prove your rebellious spirit, otherwise youre just a coward looking for emancipation from your parents.
Why the frick would the prime mover of the universe be the ethnic god of the israelites?
Is the farmer supposed to be Satan? Because he's literally only raising the cows to be sent to slaughter for his own gain?
Is he supposed to be God? Because a farmer deals directly in person to raise his cattle day to day and would raise zero questions of his existence.
None of this makes sense as an analogy.
>Because a farmer deals directly in person to raise his cattle day to day and would raise zero questions of his existence.
Like God
Oh shut the frick up, you disingenuous cretin. God doesn't literally manifest in my house to feed me by hand. He didn't personally deliver my daughter for my wife.
Plus this is still ignoring that the farmer is literally the one slaughtering the cows. Is this comparable to God? Is God evil?
>God doesn't literally manifest in my house to feed me by hand. He didn't personally deliver my daughter for my wife.
These things happened by His providence.
>Plus this is still ignoring that the farmer is literally the one slaughtering the cows. Is this comparable to God?
Yes: "cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
>whoa the world is so beautiful, this could only be created by god!
>uh actually it's terrible and cursed tho
I know Christian theology. I'm saying the comic makes no sense as an analogy and is mongoloid-tier. The cow doesn't believe in the farmer when the farmer would have looked on in the eye as he pierced his nose.
>The cow doesn't believe in the farmer when the farmer would have looked on in the eye as he pierced his nose.
Absurd, right?
If a god pierced my nose id believe in him
he doesn't believe he is a farmer, he believes he is a nice man who opens gates for him so he can eat grass in the next field
Based gnostic knows the true nature of the demon yahweh.
Now, Anon, uncover all the suffering of living beings that you have so artistically hidden in that picture. Oh, that is not God, suddenly?
>god real because of day night cycle
its amazes me religious larpers will look at that pic and think its deep without a hint of irony, even a child would be able to realize how much of a bs argument that is
Why does the sun come up every morning?
because the earth rotates, like every other planet
Why does the earth rotate?
gravity
Why does gravity exist?
can't really say beyond how it affects the universe, you can probably ask sci for more answers
I'll cut to the chase: you will never be able to answer. Natural laws are constant and universal indisputable proof of God's existence which expose the absurdity of the naturalist deception. You have yet to even answer why the sun rises, as opposed to not. Since in naturalism there is no "why", the rocks are magic, they move on their own. Consequently, when I ask why, you give me the "how" and "what" but not a why, and since these mechanistic explanations themselves necessarily refer to another natural law I will never not be able to just ask "why" again, since these natural laws demand explanation just as much as the first. Even on an infinite timeline a mechanistic explanation could never aspire to the level of "why".
But as a Christian, I can tell you why, since I do not replace the creator with His creation. As God has designed this world with several natural laws in place to govern His creation till the end of days, among them being those by which night and day happen upon the earth. And that is WHY the sun rises, as opposed to not.
>Natural laws are constant and universal indisputable proof of God's existence which expose the absurdity of the naturalist deception.
Source: It appeared to me in a dream
I accept your concession.
>Haha I'm being purposely moronic so I win
>Why is Christianity declining in the West?
We answered this question already
seething about people leaving is not an answer, it just shows you have the mentality of a spoiled child since the idea your own actions cause people to view you negatively is anathama to you
Only one seething here is you friend.
You’re the ones resorting to insults
>its natural proof of god
why
>Natural laws
Laws of Nature aren't like the fricking 10 Commandments idiot, the speed often Earth varies over time, and is actually getting faster in recent years. The force of gravity on the Earth varies, and so does the speed of light.
Nature has habits, not laws.
The laws are not changing, the context in which they are applied is
>Nature has habits, not laws.
Ok then start levitating
>The laws are not changing, the context in which they are applied is
Except they do, because if they were "laws" they wouldn't change, but you can get wildly varying results when measuring the speed of light in a vacuum, the data just gets "smoothed" by assuming that the anomalous results are errors, and that minor perturbations are random variance. Nature is messy, and chaotic, and only has (again) HABITS, not rigid machine-laws.
>Ok then start levitating
Did you seriously think this was a gotcha? I'm part of Nature. Therefore, I am embedded in certain habits regarding my biology and physics.
>because if they were "laws" they wouldn't change
They don't change.
>Therefore, I am embedded in certain habits regarding my biology and physics.
Ah, of course, you can't levitate because of natural "habits". Completely different
>They don't change.
They absolutely do. The force of gravity on the surface of the Earth also changes, as does the Earth's rotation, and the speed of light. It varies by small amounts usually, great amounts on occasion. Unless you have surveyed every single atom in the Universe for all possible lengths of time, it's genuinely mentally moronic to claim that you can pronounce eternal, immutable laws onto it. Imagine the arrogance of assuming that a species that until very recently was rubbing sticks together to make fire can somehow tell the Universe what it is.
>Ah, of course, you can't levitate because of natural "habits". Completely different
Yes, I don't see why this bewilders you so much. People like you are so mindbroken by techni and machinery that you can't wrap your head around Nature being alive, and having habits rather than laws. What a cold, dead way to see the world.
>They absolutely do.
No, they don't change, the context in which they are applied does. Thereby altering their interactions with each other.
>Unless you have surveyed every single atom in the Universe for all possible lengths of time, it's genuinely mentally moronic to claim that you can pronounce eternal, immutable laws onto it.
Still waiting for that levitation.
>Imagine the arrogance of assuming that a species that until very recently was rubbing sticks together to make fire can somehow tell the Universe what it is.
We can't. God does.
>Nature being alive
There's no magic in the rocks.
>No, they don't change, the context in which they are applied does. Thereby altering their interactions with each other.
Hate to break it to you, but your precious human-created Laws get blown out by observing nature.
>Still waiting for that levitation.
Mind if I ask, what religion are you?
>We can't. God does.
I'm not sure if I missed a memo somewhere, but it's humans writing all the laws down, I don't think I ever saw God come down and write a book on the Laws of the Universe.
>There's no magic in the rocks.
Again, hate to break it to you, but YOU are part of Nature. You're woven into it's living tapestry, and you are as alive as it is, rocks and all.
>Ok then start levitating
funny thing is that's actually possible, just very unlikely
Ah yes, the everything is a possibility and everything is possible because quantum mechanics bullshit
If I keep asking why than eventually you won't be able to answer and that means you're wrong and that God is real and sent his son to die on a cross and come back after three days and then leave but he's gonna come back someday in the vague future and I will get to have endless pleasure and everyone who disagrees with me will be tortured forever.
>If I keep asking why than eventually you won't be able to answer
Why won't you be able to answer, if your worldview is correct?
Why can't you answer any of those questions? Saying "because God" or "God did it" is akin to someone else saying "because of science". Your logic is flawed because it's a highly specific doctrine you adhere to justified by the inability to prove something. There's a difference between "something created the universe therefore maybe God" and "something created the universe therefore the bible is literal truth and a israelite was executed but came back and then left but he's coming back again eventually to reward me and punish others."
It's like asking the question "who planted the first crop" and when someone can't answer you claim "Yakub the inventor of white devils created agriculture as part of his plans to domesticate the black race and make them easier to conquer and exterminate it by white people and black people didn't have civilization because they had to abandon civilization to survive against white people." And obviously you're right because the other guy couldn't answer your question. Fricking dipshit not believing in Yakub.
No, your irrational schizo rant is entirely incorrect.
>Make up a stupid argument
>Give it a pretentious name
>Claim victory
Ah yes the ontological argument which boils down to "I think this is true so it is true." I mean shit if God is the greatest being to exist she must have big mommy milkers and a big futa dick to sodomize bad boys. Sorry Christians that's now biblical canon.
I always found the ontological argument to be funny, because I would expect the the maximally greatest being that exists would be able to make himself openly known to me beyond any shadow of a doubt, instead of be a spook in my head.
What would be the point of trust and free will then?
You wouldn't have free will if you knew with 100% certainty that he was real. Everything that you do that went against his designs would be objectively wrong and what would be the point.
His gift is the gift of free will. Look at it in the same way as a father son relationship, he loves his son so much that he lets him leave the house and doesn't bother him cause he doesn't want to see his father.
>What would be the point of trust and free will then?
"How can you trust and freely love your parents if you know 100% that they exist?"
That's how mentally moronic that is. I love and trust people who love and trust me, and are there for me in hard times. I DON'T trust phantom spooks that other people promise are watching me.
>Look at it in the same way as a father son relationship, he loves his son so much that he lets him leave the house and doesn't bother him cause he doesn't want to see his father.
Last time I checked, a loving father would absolutely never allow his son to suffer in eternal horrific agony either. At least, MY father would never allow that, no matter what I'd done. Because he loves me.
But a father wouldn't allow his kid to eat candy, and for a kid that is evil. We know it is not evil because it is for the greater good (to be healthy). How is that different.
Love doesn't mean to indulge in endless pleasures and a hedonistic life, sometimes you have to do sacrifices, sometimes you have to do a bit of "bad" for better things to come.
I think that eternal torture in Hell, and a lifetime of hideous suffering on Earth is a bit worse than not letting your son eat candy.
God doesn't send you to hell. It's you refusing to go to heaven. It's like trying to enter through a door by closing the door and pushing through the wood.
It's logically impossible.
>gaslighting
In Christian theology, doesn't literally examine you upon death to determine whether you're heaven or hell bound? That's what spastics here eventually cope with when you make them angry enough.
>YOU WON'T BE SO SMUG WHEN YOU'RE FACING GOD'S JUDGEMENT
To compare it to going through the wrong door is entirely dishonest.
I don't know what christians have you encountered, but Christianity is about making yourself better and forgiveness, not being about following blind laws and getting punished if you fail.
>You won't be so smug
That's what I'm talking about, you always come to these debates on the defensive, as if Christianity is attacking you. You have nothing to prove, Christianity isn't attacking you.
>as if Christianity is attacking you
Christians are literally attacking atheists in the OP
Black person, the OP of this very thread is attacking nonbelievers. Your pilpul won't work. Everyone knows what christians are. From the prots who say you will burn in hell for not believing to the caths who say you burn in hell for dancing to the LARPers who say you burn in hell for not being based. There is no forgiveness, it's all wrath and threats.
There is no forgiveness without repentance.
What a worthless platitude to deflect the issue.
The "issue" is "how dare God judge me for sucking dicks what a homophobic bigot".
>christians aren't attacking anyone, the faith is only forgiving
>angrily calls you a sodomite
There's no anger involved friend.
I'll pray for you
Likewise brother
>winter schoolbreak
>tradlarping kids flood the board
Nah the issue is that you people will lie when proof to the contrary is right in front of people and then attack them when they call you out on your blatant lie. Here’s a little tip, people are more likely to believe your psychotic ramblings when you don’t try to act passively aggressively smug when called out.
I've seen lots of christian vs atheist debate, and most of the time is the atheist coming from a prideful and narcissistic attitude.
The atheist redditor is a meme for a reason.
I'm talking about this very thread bro
But that's not true? You see christians calling other christians off all the time
>Meanwhile in this thread nobody has asserted anything along the lines of “I’m a Christian and your ideas on Christianity are wrong other Christian.”
>I don't know what christians have you encountered
It’s 2024 in a few days and I live in America, so Christians are an endangered species in real life. Myself and I’m sure many others overwhelmingly get our impressions of Christianity from edgelord christlarper internet posts.
You are the worst people on earth representing a religion and ruining its reputation, or I guess more accurately kicking it while it’s already down on the ground.
How am I ruining its reputation; I've never insulted you yet you attack me, and I am the bad guy?
That doesn't make sense.
And I don't doubt that Christianity is decreasing nowadays. People are also more unhappy nowadays, living lives without meaning and trying to find it in an empty void where they don't find anything. Of course that fits.
You’re denying that they insult and use sophistry and you do not interfere to tell them to stop.
This is the core issue. People need to realize that when they're part of a group they get judged by the actions of members of their group
>But they aren't real Christians
Than call them out, don't even attack them as vigorously as you attack Atheists, attack them more vigorously. They're poisoning the well that is your religion. The bible constantly preaches about being wary about false prophets but apparently no part of that entails actually trying to counter their messages or preventing them from spreading their false message.
There wasn't any insults or sophistry here except from your side
What do you mean by sophistry, Im curious.
Also, these boards need poster ID per thread like in the other boards, it's impossible to know who is who sometimes.
>You wouldn't have free will if you knew with 100% certainty that he was real. Everything that you do that went against his designs would be objectively wrong and what would be the point.
I always found this cope absolutely hilarious when your own lore has a being with free will enter into open rebellion against God. Hell, some apologists even appeal to supernatural beings with free will in order to explain certain evils.
>Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
>James 2:19
How would God be a perfect being if you, an imperfect being, could comprehend it?
I'm not saying it as an excuse to say "it just is, don't question it" I'm talking. And God already makes himself known, what you want is for him to show himself in the exact way you want.
Another delicious cope. I never talked about comprehending God, so I won't even address that attempt at throwing up a smokescreen. The argument that "God makes himself known, but best he can do is a book" just makes me pity you.
Never said that. I don't think everything in the bible is true, because time and humans being imperfect can cause multiple books to change through history.
And God makes himself known in reality itself; I don't think you and me are using the same definition of God so that's why we should try to define what God is in the first place.
What I also find curious is that aymyheist mostly come on these debates from arrogance, it shows in the way you write, like "delicious cope". You don't make an effort to try to find truth or trying to understand each other, it's just appearances for you.
You can't even make a logically sound meme let alone a logically sound argument
Every single one received, as of yet in the history of philosophy, insurmountable criticism.
The ontological proof is just sad, like I believed less in God after reading Anselm of Canterbury.
As an atheist myself i will always admit that it is ways funnier when the atheists are the ones seething.
I’m not particularly fond of this metaphor of God as a butcher
>no empirical evidence
I don't care about anything you made up in your homosexual head, magic believer.
Very apt that you compare the god of el biblio with a butcher and heaven with a slaughterhouse
>arguments for the existence of God
Which God?
But they are all terrible arguments
>there maybe was a beginning; therefore a guy is the son of god
The thing is that most physicists don't even outright say that God isn't real, if God is a metaphysical being beyond evidence, then this question falls into the hands of philosophy. Most physicists do however agree than Christianity and all other established religions are bullshit, because the claims of Christians, much to their chagrin, are not beyond evidence.
>most physicists don't even outright say that God isn't real
Because god is useless in physics; you don't need to assume a vague term like that to do any science; philophy sometimes does bit it's always as a stopgap.
IIRC it was Sabine Hossenfelder who once said "We're not saying God isn't real, just that if he is, then he's not important for the universe to function"
You can't do any science without God. The atheist worldview can't give a foundation for science.
Which is absurd
The foundation for science is "I observe this phenomenon".
>I observe
You don't have this in atheism.
>this phenomenon
You don't have this either.
>DUDE
I don't need an ontological explanation for why my balls itch. You homosexuals are psychotic.
You do if you're gonna explain why your balls itch
There's already an explanation of skin irritation and physical reaction it causes. What good does it better our understanding to reduce it to "god did it"?
It allows us to explain it with skin irritation and physical reaction it causes.
It doesn't whatsoever
God is real -> science is possible. It's simple
>You can't do any science without God.
Prove it
>aggressively assert that god made the universe without any proof
>ya cant do no sahnce cuz if god dint make da universe you wouldn't have sahnce tuh doo
>*beat on this moronic argument like a drum*
>surely that will make me right because i am louder
How embarassing.
Yes, you are, clown
>christians piss everyone off with insults and condescension and then switch gears and act like they’re soft spoken monks wearing white robes after they’ve pissed everyone off
>they do not have the emotional intelligence or social skills to realize how much that makes people not like them
>they will leave this thread thinking they’ve won when they’re only further eroded respect for Christianity
This is honestly beautiful
>losing arguments makes me feelings hurt
>I'm a maladjusted weirdo, so I hate you for refuting me
>so you should stop resisting anything I say
>btw I was already spewing absolute hostility towards you but you're a meanie
Kind of amazing.