Proof that the Christian god cannot exist

[DRR]

I'm wondering, then, why you would say he's not omnipotent in the post I quoted.

I believe that God's being able to create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it does not contradict his being omnipotent. You think it is obvious that it does.

Not to be confrontational, as that is not my style and as it rarely has the power to change minds, but would you mind beginning with the assumption “God can create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it” and taking me through to the point that it contradicts his being omnipotent?

 

[nds1]

Omnipotent means all powerful, right?

If a being has infinite power, then he should be able to lift any mass regardless of how much it weighs and regardless of weather he imagined it or not. There is nothing an omnipowerful or omnipotent God can imagine which can't be lifted by him.

 

[SnakeLord]

How about If I can prove to you that Abaddon exists and Lucifer, and if they exist God exists as well, see the abaddon thread

You'll find you can't. Of course you're under the delusion that a chunk of rock that has face like features is clearly "proof" (lol), of a hell but if you were to be serious you'd find you'll have serious trouble trying to prove anything of the sort.

 

[lightgigantic]

You'll find you can't. Of course you're under the delusion that a chunk of rock that has face like features is clearly "proof" (lol), of a hell but if you were to be serious you'd find you'll have serious trouble trying to prove anything of the sort.

I agree

It is very difficult to establish evidence to persons who lack the necessary foundations of theory, practice and values

 

[Godless]

It is very difficult to establish evidence to persons who lack the necessary foundations of theory, practice and values

Basically between the lines this reads: If you are not deluded as I am, you won't believe my assertions wihtout evidence!

 

[SnakeLord]

It is very difficult to establish evidence to persons who lack the necessary foundations of theory, practice and values

Well let's try anyway. What exactly do you consider evidence in a faced shaped rock? Or, forget that for now.. we're not talking evidence we're talking "proof" apparently. So kindly explain it to me.

 

[lightgigantic]

Basically between the lines this reads: If you are not deluded as I am, you won't believe my assertions wihtout evidence!

the high school drop out makes identical assertions to maintain their position in regard to electrons - yet persons who have applied the required process, having garnered a substantial knowledge base remain unphased

Well let's try anyway. What exactly do you consider evidence in a faced shaped rock? Or, forget that for now.. we're not talking evidence we're talking "proof" apparently. So kindly explain it to me.

I think you are mixing me up with someone else - I don't recall mentioning anything about a face shaped rock and have no clue what you are talking about

 

[Godless]

the high school drop out makes identical assertions to maintain their position in regard to electrons

This diatribe drivel bull shit has been reiterated & rehashed enough, many have already deemed flawed yet you keep using it! Next

 

[SnakeLord]

I think you are mixing me up with someone else - I don't recall mentioning anything about a face shaped rock and have no clue what you are talking about

Guess you shouldn't have butted in then, and indeed paid attention to what it was you were responding to.

You responded to me and directly quoted:

"Of course you're under the delusion that a chunk of rock that has face like features is clearly "proof" (lol)..."

I wasn't talking to you, you were talking to me.. You stated that it's apparently very difficult to establish evidence and, since I was talking about this chunk of rock and the claim that it's the door to hell based on the fact that it resembles a face, I proceeded to ask you to try and provide some evidence anyway. The fact that you butted in on a conversation that you "have no clue about", is your problem.

Pay attention or don't butt in on people's conversations. Understood?

 

[lightgigantic]

This diatribe drivel bull shit has been reiterated & rehashed enough, many have already deemed flawed yet you keep using it! Next

then maybe you could reiterate why it is flawed rather than trying to ad hom people into accepting your confidence statements - is it too much to ask for reasons for your opinions or should we simply accept your opinions on faith due to the strength of your charisma?

 

[lightgigantic]

Guess you shouldn't have butted in then, and indeed paid attention to what it was you were responding to.

You responded to me and directly quoted:

"Of course you're under the delusion that a chunk of rock that has face like features is clearly "proof" (lol)..."

I wasn't talking to you, you were talking to me.. You stated that it's apparently very difficult to establish evidence and, since I was talking about this chunk of rock and the claim that it's the door to hell based on the fact that it resembles a face, I proceeded to ask you to try and provide some evidence anyway. The fact that you butted in on a conversation that you "have no clue about", is your problem.

Pay attention or don't butt in on people's conversations. Understood?

the general principle still holds - you are not established in the field of theism, therefore your complete complexity in the field is predictable

 

[SnakeLord]

the general principle still holds - you are not established in the field of theism

No but I am established in the field of leprechaunism and Lenny, the leader leprechaun, ruler of the cosmos, told me that there aren't any such thing as gods - he indeed made up all the old texts just for giggles. Unfortunately you're not established in the field of leprchaunism, you're like the high school dropout, and as such have nothing to say on the matter.

There are no gods, Lenny said so.

However, established in the field of theism or not is of absolutely no relevance to providing evidence to support the claim that a face shaped rock is the doorway to hell.

 

[Sarkus]

LG, if you need to be so "established in the field of theism", why then do the majority of people who claim to be religious, e.g. 95% of the Christians in UK - do nothing different to UK atheists other than have "belief" in God - and maybe attend church once in a while.

Are you telling me that these people are also not "established in the field of theism"?

Please tell us what it is to be "established in the field of theism"?
Are you merely talking about those select people who have been sufficiently brainwashed to believe anything they are told by their "religious superiors"?
No?
Then what?

 

[Godless]

then maybe you could reiterate why it is flawed

I think Snake took care of it right here!

No but I am established in the field of leprechaunism and Lenny, the leader leprechaun, ruler of the cosmos, told me that there aren't any such thing as gods - he indeed made up all the old texts just for giggles. Unfortunately you're not established in the field of leprchaunism, you're like the high school dropout, and as such have nothing to say on the matter.

Now I'll explain it to you so perhaps you can grasp it!

It's because the "failed high school" charade of yours can be used to refuse any analogy made by the speaker against their criticisms of a belief.

Thus when Snake claims to believe in Leprechaunism, and you claim no such thing exists, he can use your same argument.

Since you are not educated in understanding the epistemology of leprechaunism you have no right to refute his analogy of leprechaunism, unless you educate yourself in such a concept. Once you become "enlightened" in the concepts of leprechaunism you will then understand that what he speaks is truth, you will accept Lenny as the one true god, of the universe, and that all other gods were made up by him.

Can you see how that flawed concept of yours can be made to refuse any discourse at having an intelligent conversation? Can you? or is it that reality to you is an illusion, and your brain is incapable of perceiving objective reality? Thus if Leprechaunism, had a 2000 year old following, ancient texts, many millions of adherents swearing this entity to be one true god, amongst the rest of thousands of religions in the world, claiming to be the "true religion of salvation" It be just another mystical belief that people would have, with out any credible empirical evidence, any belief system can be created, and some will be willing to believe such things. I.E newest religion invented by man scientology!

 

[lightgigantic]

No but I am established in the field of leprechaunism and Lenny, the leader leprechaun, ruler of the cosmos

then I guess you require something more philosophical substantial than your eager brethren with scissors and glue sticks on st patricks day

However, established in the field of theism or not is of absolutely no relevance to providing evidence to support the claim that a face shaped rock is the doorway to hell.

from your above statement, it should be obvious that a proper foundation of theory would be a humble beginning ....

 

[lightgigantic]

LG, if you need to be so "established in the field of theism", why then do the majority of people who claim to be religious, e.g. 95% of the Christians in UK - do nothing different to UK atheists other than have "belief" in God - and maybe attend church once in a while.


Are you telling me that these people are also not "established in the field of theism"?

there are many qualities of a theist - the bare minimum is that they take shelter of god - needless to say, a theist established in the field would be a bit more advanced, and distinctions between their activities and the activities of an atheist would be more pronounced

Please tell us what it is to be "established in the field of theism"?
Are you merely talking about those select people who have been sufficiently brainwashed to believe anything they are told by their "religious superiors"?
No?
Then what?

In short (because these 6 points can be elaborated at some length), pure devotional service to god has six qualities

(1) Pure devotional service brings immediate relief from all kinds of material distress.
(2) Pure devotional service is the beginning of all auspiciousness.
(3) Pure devotional service automatically puts one in transcendental pleasure.
(4) Pure devotional service is rarely achieved.
(5) Those in pure devotional service deride even the conception of liberation.
(6) Pure devotional service is the only means to attract God.

 

[Benauld]

there are many qualities of a theist - the bare minimum is that they take shelter of god - needless to say, a theist established in the field would be a bit more advanced, and distinctions between their activities and the activities of an atheist would be more pronounced

:roflmao:

Are you saying all the best scientists are theists!?

 

[cole grey]

(4) Pure devotional service is rarely achieved.
(5) Those in pure devotional service deride even the conception of liberation.
(6) Pure devotional service is the only means to attract God.

Please reconcile the above for me.

Or are you just another person who believes that 95% of humanity is going to hell?
Seems like you wouldn't be, but I don't know.

 

[cole grey]

There is something about the "leprechaun" defense, the "pink unicorn" defense, and the "santa claus" defense (among others), that bothers me.

Why, if all these other things are understood in the common worldview to be non-existent, does the idea of God still make so much sense to people? If they are based on the same construction, i.e. belief for no reason, why are the others so wholeheartedly dismissed, while the God "construction" holds on so strongly?

And don't say "tradition". Tradition only goes about 50/50 when talking about individuals deciding on their beliefs - many people brought up in religious traditions discard them, and many individuals brought up with athiest beliefs "find God".

 

[audible]

quite simply cole you dont get brainwashed into belief in any of the others, only god, you dont have a church of santa, or leprechaunism on every corner in every town.

many people brought up in religious traditions discard them, and many individuals brought up with athiest beliefs "find God".

yes the few manage to shake off the religious ties that bind and become clear thinkers, and a few non-believers may become brainwashed into a religious, belief, these are usually weak minded individuals, but no atheist, converts to religion, these are people with clear critical minds, it would take a blow to the head for them to convert.