it does not make a difference, in both cases we don't know our preordained choice, whether it (objectively)existed or not, subjectively it doesn't exist, and that's what affects our decision, our choice making.
which is?
"proof that the christian god can't exist, debunked"
- Thread starter Mrs.Lucysnow
- Start date
And therefore the "choice" (or more correctly the illusion of it) is subjective. Objectively we do not have a choice.
Wrong: being an atheist is a position of not believing. Despite the "fact" (if such is the case) that we were "programmed" to not believe we still hold that position. It remains a fact that we do not believe: therefore we do know.
The one we do pick, of course.which is?
It has become painfully clear that neither you nor Jan are capable of holding a logical argument, even if someone were to lend you a bucket.
Each time you make a statement you either reverse position in the next post or claim that it somehow "doesn't apply in this case".
Jan's "reason" has become apparent: he's unwilling to concede even the possibility that god does not exist, hence everything he states is from that position: whatever is said, no matter what, must inevitably come back to "god exists". Yours, I suspect, is much the same motive but not voiced quite so obviously.
Despite your assertions that you would, you are not prepared to do the same as you have insisted I do: that is, admit error when it is pointed out.
It's up to clueluss now... (unless he gets sick of banging his head against a wall too).
Last edited:
btw, we went all this distance what are a few more posts?
lol.
choice is explicitly subjective, objective choice has no meaning.
a current atheist doesn't know if god know's he'll die an atheist. period.
lol.
D said:
me said:which is
:roflmao:D said:
Wrong.
If I tell you to choose which door to go through (out of two) to win a prize and they both lead to the same room how is that not a subjective choice that is objectively no choice?
Of course not. I have never claimed to be able to see the future. (Or, for that matter, to know what god knows, if he exists).
Quite. I repeat your OWN words at you and you laugh. So much for that...
What's the point of continuing if you're going to state something in one post (something, incidentally, that I have at least twice agreed with) and which you then treat with derision when I restate it?
Last edited:
Scifes writes :
I guess you missed the part about coersion. The choice is false. The parameters of the choice are insane. To believe these parameters are the construct of some 'all knowing, loving, omniscient god' is equally insane.
But then, that is what all religious beliefs are anyway .... insane.
I guess you missed the part about coersion. The choice is false. The parameters of the choice are insane. To believe these parameters are the construct of some 'all knowing, loving, omniscient god' is equally insane.
But then, that is what all religious beliefs are anyway .... insane.
This sentence makes no sense unless you are admitting that God purposefully designs people to be atheists. If so then I think you not only owe all of us atheists an apology but God also.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
There's just to much suffering, oppression, rape, murder and torture for any higher power to exist. Anthropologists have also concluded, based on the early fossils they've excavated, 1 in 4 men during ancient times died a horrible violent death. For a majority of Earths existence life has been brutal and short, and most of it's inhabitants were on the brink of starvation. And the system of eating another alive is the most awful, hellish and draconian method a higher power could institute to continue the cycle of life. It's paralyzing once you realize at this very moment, millions upon millions are suffering through horrid living conditions. If God were real, I would rather go to Hell than to participate in his sick game of intentional mass suffering.
Well... in my effort to debunk that by showin how God mite actualy be good;;; mayb God ant all-knowin... an all the sufferin you speek of is actualy jus an illusion... an the reason God populated earf wit humans is for a test to weed out (flush) the "dingle-berrys" who are gullible enuff to beleive that sufferin is caused by sin... an then God will mass produce an re-populate earf wit whats left/people such as you'rself who have enuff common sinse to realize that Bible-God is a monster.!!!
Last edited:
a guy tells you to choose black or white, before you make your choice, he scribbles something into a paper you can't see, you choose white, he shows you his paper with "white" written on it. you repeat, this time he scribbles into the paper, you choose black, he shows you the paper with "black" written on it.
you repeat it for a million times, you try all tricks and stuff, he always gets it right.
this is just an example, as i don't think god has time to play games with you, not as dull as that one at least
actually, what is our world, but that game in a complex form?
god has a spreadsheet even before you start playing, counting your black choices and white choices, he also bought an open check or a loaded gun depending on which color would be more.
:shrug:
anything not clear?
:yawn: this is getting boring..
So, how does God (or this guy) know what you are going to choose?
If you can't answer that, then predetermination becomes the prime reason.
jan.
Granymede,
Why?
Those people could have been casualties of war.
What if the majority of the worlds population cremated their dead?
Which higher power are you refering to?
What do you think hell is?
jan.
Why?
Those people could have been casualties of war.
What if the majority of the worlds population cremated their dead?
Which higher power are you refering to?
What do you think hell is?
jan.
Do you understand karma?
If yes, do you know what a slaughter-house is, and the purpose of these
institutes?
Consider this; We suffer because of our own actions.
To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
jan.
scifes,
Why?
jan.
ask Nicholas cage
Why?
jan.
Dywyddyr,
It has become apparent that you are unwilling to concede
because that so-called paradox has to be percieved as being set in stone
Other wise the whole house of cards logic will come tumbeling down.
And that cannot be revealed under any circumstances.
jan.
It has become apparent that you are unwilling to concede
because that so-called paradox has to be percieved as being set in stone
Other wise the whole house of cards logic will come tumbeling down.
And that cannot be revealed under any circumstances.
jan.
One more example of your intellectual dishonesty (or inability, I'm still not sure which it is).
There is nothing (on my part) to concede: the closer you get to making a point the quicker you are to say the opposite in your next post. In other words you're either unwilling, or unable, to put any effort into this "debate" further than "God exists and I must make that point until it sinks in".
You claim that the paradox has to be considered as "set in stone", yet YOU are the one who claims "it doesn't apply in this case" or "it isn't a paradox really" or "yes that's the way to view it. No wait that's exactly NOT the way to view it".
Like I said: get back to me when you know what you really mean.
Dywyddyr,
Intellectual dishonesty on your part I would say.
As in dodging crucial question, and using tedious
diversion tactics.
I'm afraid this is yet another diversionary tactic, in what can only be an attempt to win by any means necessary.
It does not take a belief in God to see through this concept, one only has to read and have basic understanding of a scripture.
Actually when analysed the effort put into this debate by yourself, as to be
based on "God does not exist...." simply because you are applying limited human abilities to a Supreme Being.
It is a paradox, but not as it is intended which is why I refer to it as
a "so-called" paradox.
It is a paradox if God is, as the atheist view Him, being convinced they can strengthen the ideal, God does not exist, or if He does, He is not as great
as He is made out to be.
They also refer to God as murder, mysonogy, and anything that paints a completely negative picture, because they believe this strengthens their cause.
Otherwise they play the "where is the evidence of His existence card"
Intellectual dishonesty?
Don't talk to me about intellectual dishonesty.
jan.
Intellectual dishonesty on your part I would say.
As in dodging crucial question, and using tedious
diversion tactics.
I'm afraid this is yet another diversionary tactic, in what can only be an attempt to win by any means necessary.
It does not take a belief in God to see through this concept, one only has to read and have basic understanding of a scripture.
Actually when analysed the effort put into this debate by yourself, as to be
based on "God does not exist...." simply because you are applying limited human abilities to a Supreme Being.
It is a paradox, but not as it is intended which is why I refer to it as
a "so-called" paradox.
It is a paradox if God is, as the atheist view Him, being convinced they can strengthen the ideal, God does not exist, or if He does, He is not as great
as He is made out to be.
They also refer to God as murder, mysonogy, and anything that paints a completely negative picture, because they believe this strengthens their cause.
Otherwise they play the "where is the evidence of His existence card"
Intellectual dishonesty?
Don't talk to me about intellectual dishonesty.
jan.