Fine, think I'm mad, who cares. That's what YOU don't get. Nothing worse in my life, how 'bout yours? Just keep having disdain for people who believe in God, disdain for America, disdain for all the people here, and I hope that works out for you. Living well is the best revenge. You can't touch that.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Prove that God doesn't exist.
- Thread starter Kelly
- Start date
Werbung:
Correct. And the theology department is naturally a part of the college of philosophy, no? And if philosophy isn't a separate college, it most certainly is a part of the college of social sciences.
Duh?
Care to prove that they are mutually exclusive, hmmm?
Care to demonstrate how the universe came from a space-time singularity -- the starting point of any big bang cosmological model?
There is no evidence for the state of the universe prior to nor at the point of singularity of the big bang. What modern cosmologists are describing are events at least one planck time AFTER it.
Heisenberg's uncertainty made sure of that.
So, other than the whole of the universe laid out for your benefit, what sort of evidence are you asking for, really?
Certainly. You are an unmitigated *****. Happy?
Not at all. I would prefer to be done with my life as soon as it is finished.
It really is not a matter of wanting. If it were, then you would have proven your point by now. No luck there, I'm afraid.
It is not enough that you are what you were created to be, you need to choose it for yourself.
Is that not what the liberal schmucks in the us are teaching nowadays -- the absolute operation of choice?
Simple -- it is not fixed. Your choices and their possible effects, however uncountably many, ARE STILL FINITE.
Take the possible moves in any particular chess game. It is finite simply because it is played in a board that is finite and according to rules that are finite. The only way a chess game could drag on to infinity is by perpetual check, which isn't really an unknowable thing, since the moves merely repeat ad infinitum.
You need not be omnipotent to change the future in a significant way -- only the exercise of choice.
Just as your simple rational faculties can gain foreknowledge of the possible effects of your action, so does god's foreknowledge can -- only uncountably many times more infallible than yours.
Are you at all aware of how a computer's algorithm works?
When you speak of the universe originating from a space-time singularity, you are already talking of something physical arising from the non-physical.
Haven't you gotten at least this by now?
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
Look, if I say I know it will rain tomorrow then for me to retain any credibility one thing at least must happen.
It has to rain the next day.
If you can't understand this logic which demonstrates why the future has to be unchangeable to be knowable you are too stupid to entertain further.
Game set and match to the god-is-illogical crew.
It has to rain the next day.
If you can't understand this logic which demonstrates why the future has to be unchangeable to be knowable you are too stupid to entertain further.
Game set and match to the god-is-illogical crew.
When I say that all phenomena have their own causes, as sure as sun and rain, they have their own causes.
When I say that an infinite change of causality is impossible, as sure as sun and rain, it is impossible.
What more evidence do you need, eh?
Game set and match indeed! As if the operation of logic suffers the ramblings of one afflicted by an incurable case of stupid.
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
You haven't addressed the incompatibility of omniscience and omnipotence.
Because you can't.
The rest of your post is contingent on lots of laws you have made up and thus is inconsequential verbiage.
You produce a lot of that.
Because you can't.
The rest of your post is contingent on lots of laws you have made up and thus is inconsequential verbiage.
You produce a lot of that.
Of course I can, and I already have -- lots of times.
There is NO incompatibility with omniscience and omnipotence. The existence of an omniscient being does not make reality deterministic. Neither does god's foreknowledge contradict one's free will.
I am flattered but I most humbly decline the authorship of the logical and scientific principles I have posted.
I get my ideas from the accumulated knowledge of western thought.
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
Just denying my posts does not make you right.
It is an unequivocal fact that the future must be unchangeable to be knowable.
You cannot say why there cannot be an infinte regress of cause and effect.
You cannot say how the non-physical moves the physical.
In fact what can you actually say that makes sense?
It is an unequivocal fact that the future must be unchangeable to be knowable.
You cannot say why there cannot be an infinte regress of cause and effect.
You cannot say how the non-physical moves the physical.
In fact what can you actually say that makes sense?
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
And for the record, if god did make the world he did so knowing how it would turn out.
Otherwise he is not omniscient.
He could have changed it so it turned out without lots of people going to hell if he was omnipotent.
Ipso facto it is his fault how it turned out.
Cue a complete load of bollocks from you trying to wriggle out of this inassailable argument
Otherwise he is not omniscient.
He could have changed it so it turned out without lots of people going to hell if he was omnipotent.
Ipso facto it is his fault how it turned out.
Cue a complete load of bollocks from you trying to wriggle out of this inassailable argument
Do you actually understand what the word "omniscience" mean? Because you talk about it as if it were no more than mere prophetic foresight. (If one were to accept at face value the notion that God exists outside of time than the distinction between past, present, and future is mere orthographical jerking-around anyway).
Omniscience is the knowledge of all that which is knowable. If an omnipotent and omniscient being were to consider doing X, he would be infinitely aware of the consequences of doing X. And of not doing X. And of doing X but not Y, Y but not X, both X and Y or neither. It's not so hard to understand.
Because it is logically impossible. And how can something exist that is logically impossible, hm?
Here's a good demonstration of why infinite regress is fallacious:
"A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
Now, how in the world can an infinite chain of turtles be standing atop one another, hmm? Somewhere at the bottom of the chain there must be a turtle on which all other turtles are standing and which is not, itself, standing on a turtle. Understand?
Or do you require a mathematical proof against infinitude? I'd be happy to provide that, as well.
Perhaps you missed the bit about omnipotence.
And as numinus has already said, physical cosmology's explanation is literally no better in this regard.
Of course I am right.
Sigh
You do not wish to accept the purely philosophical explanation of sw85. How about one based on einsteins special and general relativity?
Everyone knows that time is a lorentz-invariant quantity, no? It can be made to go slow or fast depending on the observer's reference frame, no? In fact, it is merely an effect of a particular space-time geometry.
And what do you suppose an observer from a reference frame that is made to move very close to the speed of light be seeing in this particular reference frame, hmmm? Is that not like looking at us in fast forward? If one were to sufficiently curve space-time, isn't the net effect exactly the same?
When einstein posited the impossibility of simulteneity, the consequence should have been obvious instantly -- what is the future for one reference frame could very well be the past in another.
Unequivocal fact, indeed!
I already have. SW85 even took the time to present it in moronese, for your benefit, it seems.
Again I have.
A space-time singularity is an entity that has no measurable quantity, hence non-physical. According to all big bang cosmological theories, it is the starting point from which the universe came into existence.
Hence a non-physical entity itself, becoming a physical entity.
It is not my fault that you don't understand, is it?
Of course.
Do you know of anyone who god actually put to hell? By all means, point them out here.
Or do the choices people make bring about their own personal hells -- the same way your ignorance has brought you yours?
That you are able to make a choice means you are responsible for that choice, are you not?
Ipso facto, indeed!
Mere child's play.
Werbung:
Dawkinsrocks
Well-Known Member
You are possibly one of the thickest people I have ever debated with.
This is very simple, I will type s-l-o-w-l-y.
According to you god made everything including free will and he knew how it would be used.
So far so good?
OK. good.
He did not have to make the world in a way that millions of people would live a wretched existence and die of disease, famine and war did he?Or go to hell as per the bible?
No, he could have made it any way.
OK?
But he m,ade it this way in the knowldeg of how it would turn out eschewing other alternatives where the horrors of life don't happn.
So, it is all down to him.
I know that is noty too hard for you to understand.
It is just too hard for you to accept cos it makes your god a monster.
This is very simple, I will type s-l-o-w-l-y.
According to you god made everything including free will and he knew how it would be used.
So far so good?
OK. good.
He did not have to make the world in a way that millions of people would live a wretched existence and die of disease, famine and war did he?Or go to hell as per the bible?
No, he could have made it any way.
OK?
But he m,ade it this way in the knowldeg of how it would turn out eschewing other alternatives where the horrors of life don't happn.
So, it is all down to him.
I know that is noty too hard for you to understand.
It is just too hard for you to accept cos it makes your god a monster.
