God does not exist.

God does not exist.

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    if dubs only satan exists

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Reroll for only god existing

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >trips
        trinitarian god confirmed?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          It adds to 3 too, maybe.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          he said if dubs. It's not dubs it's trips. but is dubs a type of trips? does one always get dubs when they get trips? God works in mysterious ways.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          both exist but not in a way you think

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Something can't come from nothing.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      if singles something can come from nothing

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Could you articulate yourself a little more coherently?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          You need to go back.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Except your god of course. It’s reasonable for him to have always existed but not reasonable for whatever the universe came from to have always existed.

      Why do you guys think “muh something nothing” is a gotcha? You believe that god wasn’t created lol.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Except your god of course. It’s reasonable for him to have always existed but not reasonable for whatever the universe came from to have always existed.

        Do you know why it is feasible for God to have always existed and not the universe? Let's test your knowledge of the cosmological argument.

        Where did God come from?

        Nowhere. God is self-sufficient.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          He's eternal

          So is God nothing, or can something come from nothing?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            God has always existed. He didn't bring himself into existence, he always has.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Natural world has always existed. It didn't bring itself into existence, it always has.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nope, impossible.

            Eternality necessitates immutability, and this universe is also comprised of contingent facts, which cannot exist in an infinite chain.

            So he came from nothing, so something can come from nothing. Glad you admitted you were wrong.

            No, he didn't come from nothing, moron. God ALWAYS existed. Fricking atheist moron.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >immutability
            >Eternality
            Your god just sits around unchanging forever, then changes his mind and decides to create a universe or what? Those are nonsense words.

            Besides, God is none of those things.
            God was alive, then died. Then is alive again.
            To deny that God changes is moronic.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God ALWAYS existed.
            So did he come from nothing, or did he come from something? Make up your mind instead of switching to cheap adhom like all other Christian midwits.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Black person, what part of ALWAYS EXISTED do you not get? The 'always' or the 'existed?' Something definitionally cannot come from nothing if it always existed, because there never was a state of affairs where said entity never existed.

            >immutability
            >Eternality
            Your god just sits around unchanging forever, then changes his mind and decides to create a universe or what? Those are nonsense words.

            Besides, God is none of those things.
            God was alive, then died. Then is alive again.
            To deny that God changes is moronic.

            >Your god just sits around unchanging forever, then changes his mind and decides to create a universe or what? Those are nonsense words.
            This is a laughably small-minded conception of immutability. Immutability doesn't mean you cannot perform any sort of action. It just means that God is a fully actualized being that is not subject to change whatsoever. God is the same now as he was yesterday, and he will remain the same tomorrow. Any change that occurs WITHIN creation is external to God.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God is the same now as he was yesterday, and he will remain the same tomorrow
            God literally DIED

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Black person, what part of ALWAYS EXISTED do you not get? The 'always' or the 'existed?' Something definitionally cannot come from nothing if it always existed, because there never was a state of affairs where said entity never existed.
            [...]
            >Your god just sits around unchanging forever, then changes his mind and decides to create a universe or what? Those are nonsense words.
            This is a laughably small-minded conception of immutability. Immutability doesn't mean you cannot perform any sort of action. It just means that God is a fully actualized being that is not subject to change whatsoever. God is the same now as he was yesterday, and he will remain the same tomorrow. Any change that occurs WITHIN creation is external to God.

            dying means changing from alive to dead*

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God literally DIED
            Black person, are you slow? GOD INTERACTING WITH CREATION DOESN'T MEAN HE HIMSELF CHANGES. Everything God does within creation is already predestined and foreknown to Himself, because God exists beyond time. There is no before/after for God, God is beyond all time.

            Even Jesus' death.

            >Acts 2:23 - This man was handed over to you by God’s DELIBERATE PLAN AND FOREKNOWELDGE; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Are you just pretending to be a Christian online, or what?
            Jesus IS God.
            Jesus changed from being alive, to being dead.

            No Christian would deny that.
            Doing that goes so hard against the creeds it doesn't even make you a heretic. You'll just be straight up not a Christian. Like the JWs.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus IS God.
            I know, you moron, but you're so confused and mentally discombobulated that you're incapable of even following my point.
            >Jesus changed from being alive, to being dead.
            That's not the kind of change I'm talking about, moron. Everything that God does, has done, and will do, is predestined to himself, because he is beyond time. When Jesus came down to die, this was fated to happen. God is present at all points in time simultaneously.

            Yeah, I would like to hear an argument for why anyone should believe that.

            How can a "mindless" God bring about creation without a will to effect said creation?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How can a "mindless" God bring about creation without a will to effect said creation?
            How can a leaf fall without a will to fall?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How can a leaf fall without a will to fall?
            It was made to fall by external factors. What external factors exist that will push the Prime Mover to effect creation when the Prime Mover is literally the only thing that exists prior to creation?

            Just tell me why "a mind" is a necessary attribute for the initial state of the reality.
            You're were supposed to give an argument for this.

            >Just tell me why "a mind" is a necessary attribute for the initial state of the reality.
            God needs a mind in order to say "Let there be light."

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're implying that minds don't rely on external factors

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not God's, is the point.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sounds like a special plead. All minds we know of rely on external factors

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >All minds we know of rely on external factors
            >WE KNOW OF
            And that sounds like an appeal to incredulity + black swan fallacy, so checkmate, reddithest. Take your shitty unsubstantiated inductive reasoning somewhere else. The universe doesn't revolve around your finite knowledge.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Similarly, all rabbits we know of are on Earth. We don't know that there aren't any on Mars. You haven't yet provided reasoning that what you're talking about can be described as a "mind" given what we know about minds. Take your argument from ignorance somewhere else.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're actually a fricking moron, aren't you? He's fricking GOD. Why in the fricking frick would a self-contingent, necessary being with dozens of omni-attributes need to be beholden to external factors to have a mind?

            ALL FINITE, CREATED HUMAN MINDS WE KNOW OF RELY ON EXTERNAL FACTORS, NOT GOD.

            KYS.

            >NOOOO the laws of physics can't just exist! God MUST have made them!
            >huh? Where did God come from? He just exists, obviously

            the laws of physics can't just exist! God MUST have made them!
            Can you tell me the reasoning I used as to why they can't exist and why God can? Let's see how sincere you really are, and if you're not just some moronic troll.

            When God makes a choice, what explains why he choose one thing, instead of another? (Nothing external to him can explain it.)
            What I'm getting at is; you're very comfortable with saying that it's fine for some things to not have explanations. Like God's choices.

            I'm agnostic about the possibility of infinite regress. But I think you were throwing a stink about it.
            Would you allow a naturalist to escape infinite regress in the same way you do?

            To just postulate that at some arbitrary point, there's no more explanations to be had, but the regress ends.

            >When God makes a choice, what explains why he choose one thing, instead of another?
            Frick would I know? He's God.

            >universe is also comprised of contingent facts

            I'm fine with saying that the initial natural state of reality is either necessary or brute. It would not be contingent.

            >I'm fine with saying that the initial natural state of reality is either necessary or brute. It would not be contingent.
            You missed my point, but granted. Let's say that the universe is eternal. It is still comprised of contingent facts, such as you and me. We are all contingent on something external to ourselves for our own existence, and even in an eternal universe, this regression cannot persist forever.

            >Something definitionally cannot come from nothing if it always existed, because there never was a state of affairs where said entity never existed.
            Is there an x such that God came from x? No? Then he came from nothing. Not my fault if it makes you seethe of the fieriest of burning rages.

            You're moronic. Simple as. God didn't emerge from non-existence into existence. He IS existence itself. Can't wait to see you burn in Hell at the end of days. It'll be glorious.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's a special plead and argument of ignorance in place of actual reasoning. You can just define God to have any properties you want to suit your argument, just like I can define the word "God" to mean "any object that doesn't exist." You have yet to provide actual reasoning that what you're proposing has a mind besides "you don't know he doesn't" which is just an argument from ignorance.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Shut the frick up. Don't give me a (You) unless you actually come up with a rebuttal this time. I told you that it is necessary for the Prime Mover to possess a mind because without it, it would not possess the will needed to effect creation, and would be effectively inert. Do you have an argument against this?

            >even in an eternal universe, this regression cannot persist forever.
            False.
            A universe without a first point, would not have a first point.

            Exactly, and yet contingent facts demonstrably exist. Contingent facts cannot obtain in an eternal universe. It's like a chandelier having an infinite chain, or a person having infinite ancestors. moron.

            >God didn't emerge from non-existence into existence.
            So he came from nothing.

            >He IS existence itself.
            Typical Christoid empty word salad. Symptomatic of absolute zero cognitive abilities.

            >Can't wait to see you burn in Hell at the end of days. It'll be glorious.
            "Here let me tell you about my bitter incel revenge fantasies so you can realize that Christians are the pious ones and atheists are the psychopaths with a broken moral compass."

            Alright, then. You want to act like a moron, I'll treat you like a moron. We'll go through this systematically.

            Has God ever been in a state of non-existence? Yes or no.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're begging the question. You're saying it needs a will therefore it has a mind.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Can something have a will without a mind? You fricking moron.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            No. Which wasn't my issue.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            How can the Prime Mover bring about creation without a will? Stop playing games.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're assuming your conclusion in your premise. It's like me saying how can he create anything if he never existed.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Has God ever been in a state of non-existence? Yes or no.
            Yes. Right now for example.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ha ha. The retort of a thwarted individual. Get fricked.

            You're assuming your conclusion in your premise. It's like me saying how can he create anything if he never existed.

            Are you going to answer the question?

            Contingent facts are compatible with a natural reality without a first point.

            No, they aren't, and you know they aren't, too, which is why you didn't substantiate your answer.

            If contingent facts exist in an eternal universe, then there must be a contingent fact that contains all other contingent facts. Said contingent fact cannot explain itself, because it is itself contingent, so it needs something external to itself to properly explain it. What is your solution to this dilemma if not God?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Are you going to answer the question?
            I did.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Really? Where? You never answered why it isn't necessary for the Prime Mover to have a mind in order to bring about creation. So who's going to galvanize the Prime Mover into action? What external factor? Black person, just shut up.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I stated that your premise states your conclusion, meaning that "the Prime Mover brought about creation" is logically the same statement as "the Prime Mover has a will", which answers your question.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, because if what galvanizes the Prime Mover to actually bring about creation isn't contained within itself, then it has to be from an external source, which obviously isn't the case because the PM exists ex nihilo.

            I already told you I was okay with natural reality being necessary or brute.

            Contingent facts exist in an eternal universe, right? I'M NOT SAYING THE UNIVERSE ITSELF IS CONTINGENT, but that WITHIN the
            universe there exists contingent facts. Which means that there is a contingent fact that contains all other contingent facts, right?

            You're not implicitly asserting that even YOU and ME are necessary, right?

            [...]
            >Said contingent fact cannot explain itself, because it is itself contingent, so it needs something external to itself to properly explain it
            To be clear: It's explained by natural reality being necessary (or brute)

            >To be clear: It's explained by natural reality being necessary (or brute)
            How? Again, even in an eternal universe, an infinite regress of contingent facts is simply incoherent. Unless you are trying to assert that there are no contingent facts?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >PM exists ex nihilo.
            What's the reasoning for this?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I just claim what caused this, is natural reality. Not God.

            How did natural reality cause this?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look, I think it's should be crystal clear, that I'm running a parody argument. Asking me for details, it's a waste of time. I'll say what you say.
            Besides, it's not like theists have ever explained how God causes anything. I don't have to go into details.

            Natural reality has whatever relevant causal powers to cause the effect we're trying to explain. Just like God.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Natural reality has whatever relevant causal powers to cause the effect we're trying to explain. Just like God.
            Okay, and what causes the natural reality to activate these "causal powers" as opposed to just remaining inert forever and ever? That's logically identical to saying that the universe brought itself into existence from non-existence, which is nonsense, obviously.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I agree, I think this is a problem for people who actually hold this position (theists). And don't just run it as a parody argument.

            Theists are fine with handwaving the problem away, by saying stuff like "mind" or "free will" -> special causal powers. Like that makes the issue of why God isn't inert forever go away.
            me? I would like a deeper explanation of what's supposed to be going on.
            But for now, I'll also just suppose natural reality has special causal powers.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Like that makes the issue of why God isn't inert forever go away.
            It does. God desired to create, so he created. What are you having a hard time comprehending?

            > I would like a deeper explanation of what's supposed to be going on.
            If you want a deeper answer, then I guess the Trinity answers this quite beautifully.

            Essentially, all three persons of the Trinity were loving each other eternally before creation, and the Father and the Holy Spirit decided to create the universe as a gift to the Son.

            >Colossians 1:15-16 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and FOR Him.

            >Romans 11:36 For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.

            >Daniel 7:13-14 13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

            >John 3:35 The Father loves the Son and has placed all things in His hands.

            >Luke 10:22 All things have been entrusted to Me by My Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.

            This is also why the Son is the one who came into the world to both judge and redeem creation, and not the Father or the Spirit, because it is the Son to whom all of creation has been committed. Jesus created us because he wanted us to be partakers of eternal life, just as he Himself possesses eternal life which he receives from the Father. Deep enough for you?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It does. God desired to create
            Natural reality just has a predisposition to cause the universe. It's literally that easy.
            Apparently we don't have to explain how any of this is supposed to work outside time. It just does.

            My explanation is simpler, btw.
            You have to give a contrastive explanation for why God chose to create, rather than not create. Unless you want to say he is determined to create, because of his nature, and has no free will.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Natural reality just has a predisposition to cause the universe. It's literally that easy.
            Why?
            >You have to give a contrastive explanation for why God chose to create, rather than not create. Unless you want to say he is determined to create, because of his nature, and has no free will.
            God didn't spontaneously decide to create. It was eternally destined to happen. There is no before or after for an entity that is beyond time altogether.
            >Unless you want to say he is determined to create, because of his nature, and has no free will.
            Sorta, kinda, ish, if you're getting at what I'm thinking you're getting at.

            I recommend you just go and grab a book on classical theism and also read some Aquinas and his writings on Divine Freedom. It has to do with your exact qualms. Don't just think you have it all figured out. Go out and fricking read. Christianity has a rich 2,000 ecclesiastical tradition full of bright-minded thinkers that have pondered over the same questions that you have.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Why?
            It already told you, It's a necessary fact. Means that It's not explained.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It already told you, It's a necessary fact. Means that It's not explained.
            Tomatoes are a necessary fact too. You know, since we're both throwing out unsubstantiated assertions here.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >we're both throwing out unsubstantiated assertions here.

            No, we are doing theory comparison.
            We both agree about some data, like the fact that the world exist.
            Now we're trying to figure out what best explains this.

            I've given my "natural reality hypothesis", you have given you "God hypothesis" (unsubstantiated assertions?)
            They both explain the data.

            Now we just have to figure out which explanation is better.
            I like mine, because it's simpler. Only uses facts we both already agree on, like that natural reality exist.
            Doesn't hinge on complicated stuff like the Trinity or disembodied omnipotent minds.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look, either God is free to chose, to create, or not create. Or his will isn't free (in this respect).
            I don't have to read Aquinas, to know that it's incoherent to say; it's impossible for God not to create, while at the same time it's true that God is free to chose between creation, or not creation.

            Luckily we agree about this.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Which means that there is a contingent fact that contains all other contingent facts, right?
            No, it would be a necessary fact, that explains all the contingent facts. Same way God explain things.

            I think your objection got to do with time. That's where you see the regress you don't like.
            But - My view is not that there has been an infinite amount of time prior to the current moment. I don't think that.

            I'm fine with saying time has only been a thing for some (finite) amount of billion years, since big bang, or something like that.
            I just claim what caused this, is natural reality. Not God.

            Contingent facts leading back billions of years. No infinite regress.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Get fricked.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I already told you I was okay with natural reality being necessary or brute.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I already told you I was okay with natural reality being necessary or brute.

            >Said contingent fact cannot explain itself, because it is itself contingent, so it needs something external to itself to properly explain it
            To be clear: It's explained by natural reality being necessary (or brute)

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Contingent facts are compatible with a natural reality without a first point.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Frick would I know? He's God.
            It was a rhetorical question.
            I'll help you out.: You hold other beliefs that commits you to the belief that God's actions are unexplained.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >even in an eternal universe, this regression cannot persist forever.
            False.
            A universe without a first point, would not have a first point.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God didn't emerge from non-existence into existence.
            So he came from nothing.

            >He IS existence itself.
            Typical Christoid empty word salad. Symptomatic of absolute zero cognitive abilities.

            >Can't wait to see you burn in Hell at the end of days. It'll be glorious.
            "Here let me tell you about my bitter incel revenge fantasies so you can realize that Christians are the pious ones and atheists are the psychopaths with a broken moral compass."

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            When God makes a choice, what explains why he choose one thing, instead of another? (Nothing external to him can explain it.)
            What I'm getting at is; you're very comfortable with saying that it's fine for some things to not have explanations. Like God's choices.

            I'm agnostic about the possibility of infinite regress. But I think you were throwing a stink about it.
            Would you allow a naturalist to escape infinite regress in the same way you do?

            To just postulate that at some arbitrary point, there's no more explanations to be had, but the regress ends.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Just tell me why "a mind" is a necessary attribute for the initial state of the reality.
            You're were supposed to give an argument for this.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Something definitionally cannot come from nothing if it always existed, because there never was a state of affairs where said entity never existed.
            Is there an x such that God came from x? No? Then he came from nothing. Not my fault if it makes you seethe of the fieriest of burning rages.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >universe is also comprised of contingent facts

            I'm fine with saying that the initial natural state of reality is either necessary or brute. It would not be contingent.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >No, he didn't come from nothing, moron. God ALWAYS existed
            Do you realize "did not come from anything" and "came from nothing" mean exactly the same thing? If God exists, he either came from something or came from nothing. That's a logical necessity.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            THERE IS NO "CAME," JUST "IS."

            WHEN I SAY THAT SOMETHING CANNOT COME FROM NOTHING, I MEAN THAT SOMETHING CANNOT TRANSITION FROM A STATE OF ABSOLUTE NON-EXISTENCE INTO EXISTENCE IN AND OF ITSELF. AM I LYING?

            STOP BEING A SOPHIST c**t, Black person.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Watch your blood pressure, buddy.

            >SOMETHING CANNOT TRANSITION FROM A STATE OF ABSOLUTE NON-EXISTENCE INTO EXISTENCE IN AND OF ITSELF. AM I LYING?
            No, but that's not what atheists believe the universe did, and, once again, if there exists no x such that God came from x, then God came from nothing.

            >STOP BEING A SOPHIST c**t, Black person.
            I'm sure your god added this racist gamer rant to your moral record. Have a nice day!

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm sure your god added this racist gamer rant to your moral record. Have a nice day!
            What would you know about my god, Black person? My God forgives and forgets the iniquity of his people like the merciful god he is, unlike you who to this day still holds resentment to his parents for rejecting him after you trooned out and lodged an axe into your crotch. They were right, btw.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >My God forgives and forgets the iniquity of his people like the merciful god he is
            Thank you for admitting Christianity is just an excuse to incentivize people to rape and kill as many people as they want.
            >n-nooo but they must repent sincerel-
            You mean like you're not doing at all right now?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Thank you for admitting Christianity is just an excuse to incentivize people to rape and kill as many people as they want.
            As if the absence of God would solve that, lmao. What's stopping me from raping and killing as many babies as I want and then just blowing my brains out? There's no judgement unto me, or anything; no rhyme or reason to this meaningless world. Your kids would bear a lifetime of trauma while I sleep peacefully in my dirt bed as maggots and all kinds of insects swarm my dead body. Fortunately, atheism is just a fantasy, so don't worry, it'll remain as that: a fantasy.
            >You mean like you're not doing at all right now?
            I don't give a frick. I can do that later. I just want you to never join Christianity, or even have an inkling of doubt about it. I want you to go to Hell. God'll just forgive me later, no biggie. See how trashy and immoral my religion is? Don't you even think of joining us for a second, you hear? 🙂

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What's stopping me from raping and killing as many babies as I want and then just blowing my brains out?
            You can still do this in a world with a God in it. Gods not gonna prevent this.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yep. My God just watches back as babies get raped and killed. How immoral, right? See how trashy Christainity is? Don't fricking convert. Die, die, fricking die.

            >forgive and forget
            this is incompatible with justice

            >this is incompatible with justice
            You're right, it is. So don't convert. Remain atheist. Fricker.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I just want you to never join Christianity, or even have an inkling of doubt about it. I want you to go to Hell.
            says the guy who just spent 2 days laying out some moronic thousand-times-debunked argument for Christianity.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >says the guy who just spent 2 days laying out some moronic thousand-times-debunked argument for Christianity.
            I'm not your fricking boogeyman, moron. I've only started posting again since last evening.

            >we're both throwing out unsubstantiated assertions here.

            No, we are doing theory comparison.
            We both agree about some data, like the fact that the world exist.
            Now we're trying to figure out what best explains this.

            I've given my "natural reality hypothesis", you have given you "God hypothesis" (unsubstantiated assertions?)
            They both explain the data.

            Now we just have to figure out which explanation is better.
            I like mine, because it's simpler. Only uses facts we both already agree on, like that natural reality exist.
            Doesn't hinge on complicated stuff like the Trinity or disembodied omnipotent minds.

            No, your data doesn't explain shit. I'll repeat again: what galvanizes this "natural reality" into action? I've already offered my explanation in the case of God, but you've yet to offer yours. Inanimate, inert things don't have "dispositions."

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >what galvanizes this "natural reality" into action?
            I'm still not clear on how this is supposed to work for God.
            If you could explain your model, I would copy that. That way I don't have to invoke new concepts, and can keep using only things we both agree exist.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm still not clear on how this is supposed to work for God.
            God has a mind and a will. He began creating because he desired to.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I want to know how any of that is supposed to work.
            Not for you to handwave it away by just saying the words 'will', 'mind' and 'desire'

            What exactly is it about being a mind, that lets you take actions outside time?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I want to know how any of that is supposed to work.
            What is there to explain? God just wanted to create. Are you playing dumb now?
            >What exactly is it about being a mind, that lets you take actions outside time?
            Because a mind is what allows you to decide between different things, like the decision to create or not to create.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't understand in what way you think minds are special
            why they can do things nature cannot

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >forgive and forget
            this is incompatible with justice

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            So he came from nothing, so something can come from nothing. Glad you admitted you were wrong.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            moronic troony.

            Natural world has always existed. It didn't bring itself into existence, it always has.

            Scientifically impossible, you moronic troony.

            You can assert the natural world is eternal all you want ,just like you assert your smelly butthole is a pussy, doesn't make it so, freak.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Please tell us the relevant scientific facts, that makes it "Scientifically impossible"

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >God is self-sufficient.
          The universe is self sufficent

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The universe is self sufficent
            Explain the existence of contingent facts, then.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            They are contingent to the eternal universe

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >They are contingent to the eternal universe
            So you're saying an infinite regress of contingent facts is logically coherent? Like, say, the matter that comprises every atom of your body: does that stretch back into infinity?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            When did I say infinite regress? The non continget universe contains contingent things. Infinite regress is also an option, just because the greeks didn't like it it doesn't mean it's impossible

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The non continget universe contains contingent things.
            A non-contingent universe is an eternal universe. If this eternal universe contains contingent facts, then these contingent facts must've been around for as long as the universe has been around, which is logically incoherent.
            >just because the greeks didn't like it it doesn't mean it's impossible
            Resolve it, then.

            Seriously. You believe all this shit instead of just following Christ? And you call us the mental gymnasts.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Where did God come from?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        He's eternal

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous
    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >NOOOO the laws of physics can't just exist! God MUST have made them!
      >huh? Where did God come from? He just exists, obviously

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      The actual truth is that we don't know if anything came before the Big Bang, and anybody who claims otherwise (like you) is a lying moron

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    We are still waiting for even one piece of evidence about this. Its impossible to disprove that pink transsexual elephants created universe or anything else with our current knowledge.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >waiting for evidence
      What? Empirical science doesn’t determine what exists, it’s a way to describe and measure things that already exist. It’s not even authoritative, it’s constantly be rewritten and new information is always allowing us to discover previously unknown things. Spirituality is quite real, it’s as real as language and consciousness (immaterial).

      It’s so sad to see people who actually have such low self-awareness that they think the entire world is only what physically exists.

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    That's why he drank himself to death.

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Look, whatever special powers you say God have, that lets him escape the obstacles you claim exist for the non-god world.
    I'm just gonna copy them and parrot them back at you, except minus the mind -part. For a simpler atheistic explanation.

    So really, that's what you need to argue for. Is why it's necessary for the initial state of reality to be a mind.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >So really, that's what you need to argue for. Is why it's necessary for the initial state of reality to be a mind.
      Because a mind is necessary for the Prime Mover to bring creation into existence from non-existence. A mind has to make that decision.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, I would like to hear an argument for why anyone should believe that.

  6. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I believe mind ARE brains, btw.
    I don't understand what it would mean for a mind to exist outside time.
    Thinking is changing from one mind-state, into another.

    You'll have to me how that stuff work with God. I don't get it.

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'm here, you know.

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    True.
    However, God does not not exist.

  9. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    If I hide this thread, does it still exist?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, unlike God, who doesn't exist

  10. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I still don't get why being "a mind" gives you special causal powers, that lets you escape regress problems, etc

  11. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >What is your solution to this dilemma if not God?
    I don't understand why you think God "solves" this in a more satisfying way.
    It's the same thing, God explains the contingent facts by being necessary. -> Natural reality explains the contingent facts by being necessary

  12. 9 months ago
    Anon
  13. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    To atheists:
    What do you think theists mean when they say “god”?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      "God" or "a god"?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Either one.
        What do you think religious people in general mean when they use that word?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Depends on their religion. Derp.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Okay. What do people who follow Abraham if religions mean? (It’s the same.)

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Abrahamic*

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Which one?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm aware that many religious people view the universe itself as the personification of God but they also typically assign it some manner of consciousness or will, and I reject that notion.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Disembodied, eternal mind who caused the universe

  14. 9 months ago
    Destroy Religionigger / Atheisister Baitcunts

    >More spambait for atheist edgelords and dogma zombies
    Cool. Die.

  15. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    False because NDEs are real and prove that there is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die. As one NDE researcher said that he does not know anyone who has read the literature on NDEs who has not been convinced by it, and the book in pic related is known to convince even hardened skeptics that there is an afterlife. And NDErs talk about God running the afterlife.

    Indeed, NDEs are actually solid proof of life after death, because anyone can have them if they come close to and survive death. And they are so extremely real to those who have them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U00ibBGZp7o

    As this NDEr described their NDE:

    >"Now, what heaven looks like? 'OMG' doesn't even describe how beautiful this place is. Heaven is, there are no words. I mean, I could sit here and just not say anything and just cry, and that would be what heaven looks like. There are mountains of beauty, there are things in this realm, you can't even describe how beautiful this place is. There are colors you can't even imagine, there are sounds you can't even create. There are beauties upon this world that you think are beautiful here. Amplify it over there times a billion. There are, it's incredibly beautiful, there's no words to describe how beautiful this place is, it's incredibly gorgeous."

    And importantly, even dogmatic skeptics have this reaction, because the NDE convinces everyone:
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mysteries-consciousness/202204/does-afterlife-obviously-exist

    So anyone would be convinced if they had an NDE, we already know this, no one's skepticism is unique.

    >muh brain chemistry

    Neuroscientists are convinced by NDEs too. What do skeptics think they understand that neuroscientists do not?

    >muh DMT causes it

    Scientifically refuted already, and NDErs who have done DMT too say that the DMT experience, while alien and really cool and fun, was still underwhelming when compared to the NDE.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why do you think NDEs have anything to do with a God?

  16. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    God is alive and well.

  17. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MY LIFE HAS NO PURPOSE WITHOUT SKY israelite AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH FRICK YOU FRICK YOU FRICK YOU FRICK YOU

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *