Vegetarian Discussion: Could God Exist?

Could God Exist?
Posts: 51

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)

Mike Lovell
2011-09-26 16:53:02 EST
On 2011-09-26, dh@. <dh@> wrote:
> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
> [...]

Great, now prove he does. All these fictional rules mean nothing,
here's a few to bear in mind for you about the spaghetti monster:

1) He almost certainly has over 40 noodly tentacles

2) He exists in the dimension Z-Alpha-4 that you can never get to or
measure, this is why you can't see him or know his presence.

3) From this dimension he launches invisible meatballs into ours which
spawn into planets capable of supporting life

4) He then squirts pasta sauce over them with seeds life.


Keep those in mind.

--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder

Kelsey Bjarnason
2011-09-26 17:59:54 EST
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:31:12 -0700, dh wrote:

> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:

You might start with the most basic thing to think about on the subject,
namely, why waste so much as a second of effort thinking about the issue
at all until someone claiming their pet sky pixies exist actually gets
off their butts and comes up with some evidence?

Until then, they're welcome to their weird little fantasies, as long as
they leave the rest of us out of it.


How Quick They Get P****d Off
2011-09-26 18:16:26 EST

<*h@.> wrote in message news:tp228754j3ttb1ioli9qcb89d6eiqgb7ia@4ax.com...
> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
> 1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.
>
> 2. If there is a creator associated with this planet, all
> who refer to him refer to the same being regardless of what
> they call him or what they think about him.
>
> 3. Nothing that happens is supernatural, so anything gods do
> would be natural for them.
>
> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
> so would change things too much.

Your first three arguments are rational but the fourth is illogical. Please
explain.. or not.

--
J



D*@.
2011-09-26 19:31:12 EST
Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:

1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.

2. If there is a creator associated with this planet, all
who refer to him refer to the same being regardless of what
they call him or what they think about him.

3. Nothing that happens is supernatural, so anything gods do
would be natural for them.

4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
could not provide proof of his existence because doing
so would change things too much.

5. Since the terms omnipotent and omniscient appear to
make themselves impossible, it's unrealistic to try assigning
those particular characteristics to God if he exists.

6. Since disbelief is a form of belief, the degree of faith a
person has that God does not exist is what determines how
strong an atheist he or she is, or is not.

7. People who have put their faith in a belief often/usually find
it impossible to comprehend the ability of considering the possibility
that God does not exist and also the possibility that he does.

8. People who have put their faith in a belief often/usually find
it impossible to comprehend much less appreciate basic number 2.

9. People who claim to be strong atheists often/usually asburdly
try to deny their own faith that God does not exist...faith which is
a necessary part of being a strong atheist.

10. Whether God exists or not it seems apparent that life must have
originated from lifelessness to begin with, and may do it fairly often.

11. We should not allow what appear to be conflicting or unlikely
beliefs encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate
and interfere with our own attempts to think about this topic
realistically.

12. We should not allow childlike and unrealistic attempts at comparing
the concept of gods with those of childlike ideas like the tooth fairy,
the Easter Bunny, invisible pink unicorns, spaghetti monsters etc
encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate and interfere
with our own attempts to think about this topic realistically.

13. If gods exist they would necessarily have to be technologically
advanced far beyond we humans on Earth, to the point that they became
gods.

14. If God exists he almost certainly would not be restricted to any
particular body, form, or gender. (disclaimer: I refer to God as "he" out
of convenience and because that's how we are encouraged to refer to "him"
in most if not all canonical texts.)

15. If God exists it seems most likely that he has as much influence
over the content of canonical texts as he wants to have.

16. If God exists, it seems quite clear he makes use of the evolutionary
method of creation.

17. If there are things which people consider to be spiritual, they are
most likely actually physical in ways we just can't appreciate yet.

Dutch
2011-09-26 22:07:11 EST


<*h@.> wrote
> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
> 1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.

I don't believe you exist because nobody could be this stupid.

Sylvia Else
2011-09-27 09:16:58 EST
On 27/09/2011 9:31 AM, dh@. wrote:
> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
> 1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.

Why? Generally, I would have thought of an alien as incapable of being
God. That is to say, aliens (if they exist) are creatures like us - just
different.

>
> 2. If there is a creator associated with this planet, all
> who refer to him refer to the same being regardless of what
> they call him or what they think about him.

No. Some, or all, of the people who believe in God could be completely
deluded, with the entity they believe in not actually existing,
notwithstanding that there is a God.

>
> 3. Nothing that happens is supernatural, so anything gods do
> would be natural for them.

I don't know that this actually means anything. I suspect that it doesn't.

>
> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
> so would change things too much.

That's clearly true. Is it important?

>
> 5. Since the terms omnipotent and omniscient appear to
> make themselves impossible, it's unrealistic to try assigning
> those particular characteristics to God if he exists.

There were always simplistic notions. That's not about to change.

>
> 6. Since disbelief is a form of belief, the degree of faith a
> person has that God does not exist is what determines how
> strong an atheist he or she is, or is not.

What has this to do with whether God exists?

>
> 7. People who have put their faith in a belief often/usually find
> it impossible to comprehend the ability of considering the possibility
> that God does not exist and also the possibility that he does.

Do they? Have you done studies? Can you cite any?

>
> 8. People who have put their faith in a belief often/usually find
> it impossible to comprehend much less appreciate basic number 2.

Another meaningless statment.

>
> 9. People who claim to be strong atheists often/usually asburdly
> try to deny their own faith that God does not exist...faith which is
> a necessary part of being a strong atheist.

Who exactly is defining the term "strong atheist"?

>
> 10. Whether God exists or not it seems apparent that life must have
> originated from lifelessness to begin with, and may do it fairly often.

May, or may not. We have no idea how often it might occur.

>
> 11. We should not allow what appear to be conflicting or unlikely
> beliefs encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate
> and interfere with our own attempts to think about this topic
> realistically.

Of course we shouldn't.

>
> 12. We should not allow childlike and unrealistic attempts at comparing
> the concept of gods with those of childlike ideas like the tooth fairy,
> the Easter Bunny, invisible pink unicorns, spaghetti monsters etc
> encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate and interfere
> with our own attempts to think about this topic realistically.

Ditto.
>
> 13. If gods exist they would necessarily have to be technologically
> advanced far beyond we humans on Earth, to the point that they became
> gods.

It seems to me that being technologically advanced, and being a God, are
pretty much mutually exclusive.

>
> 14. If God exists he almost certainly would not be restricted to any
> particular body, form, or gender. (disclaimer: I refer to God as "he" out
> of convenience and because that's how we are encouraged to refer to "him"
> in most if not all canonical texts.)

There was never a good reason to attribute aspects of a reproductive
mechanism to God.

>
> 15. If God exists it seems most likely that he has as much influence
> over the content of canonical texts as he wants to have.

If he's omnipotent. Oh, wait...

>
> 16. If God exists, it seems quite clear he makes use of the evolutionary
> method of creation.

That's far from clear. Evolution is evidenced by observations about the
past, but what if there was no past to speak of? Perhaps the entire
world, complete with fossil record, ourselves, and including our
memories, was created ten minutes ago. Of course, in that case, God
created "your" posting.

>
> 17. If there are things which people consider to be spiritual, they are
> most likely actually physical in ways we just can't appreciate yet.

You probably need to have a clear definition of spiritual before you can
even begin to give meaning to that assertion.

Sylvia.


Don Martin
2011-09-27 10:24:34 EST
On Sep 26, 7:31 pm, dh@. wrote:
>     Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:

If, if, if, if, if, ad nauseum. You imagine all this speculation to
be a "realistic way" to approach this?




Mr. Smartypants
2011-09-27 11:19:50 EST
On 9/27/2011 7:24 AM, Don Martin wrote:
> On Sep 26, 7:31 pm, dh@. wrote:
>> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
> If, if, if, if, if, ad nauseum. You imagine all this speculation to
> be a "realistic way" to approach this?

Don't waste your time trying to engage Fuckwit David Harrison ('dh@.')
Fuckwit is a 53-year-old high school dropout living near Atlanta, GA.
He lives on a rusty, leaky houseboat on Lake Lanier. He has no
qualification at all to be discussing the existence of any "god". He's
completely uneducated, and is only parroting nonsense he heard from
someone else.

Christopher A. Lee
2011-09-27 12:00:00 EST
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:24:34 -0700 (PDT), Don Martin
<*n@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Sep 26, 7:31 pm, dh@. wrote:
>>     Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
>If, if, if, if, if, ad nauseum. You imagine all this speculation to
>be a "realistic way" to approach this?

It has bugged me for the last 55 years that these idiots expect their
unjustified and ridiculous beliefs to be taken seriously, and resort
to that kind of stupidity and intellectual dishonesty when they
aren't. Starting the first time I encountered it when I was 8.

Alex W.
2011-09-27 12:31:16 EST
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:31:12 -0700, dh@. wrote:

> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>
> 1. If God exists he almost certainly would have to be an alien.

If a god exists, he would certainly be an alien because he could
by definition not be a member of our species.


>
> 2. If there is a creator associated with this planet, all
> who refer to him refer to the same being regardless of what
> they call him or what they think about him.

That conclusion does not follow.
To begin with, you assume one creator.


>
> 3. Nothing that happens is supernatural, so anything gods do
> would be natural for them.

Natural is that which obeys the laws of nature.
If one were capable of breaking or disregarding the laws of
nature, one would by definition be unnatural.


>
> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
> so would change things too much.

Of course a deity could provide proof of existence; such proof
would not by itself undermine the laws of nature or free will.
Consequently, actual knowledge as opposed to faith in the
existence of a deity would not change humanity's ability to
decide regardless of such knowledge.


>
> 5. Since the terms omnipotent and omniscient appear to
> make themselves impossible, it's unrealistic to try assigning
> those particular characteristics to God if he exists.

Which, in fact, makes a committee of deities a slightly less
logically implausible proposal than your monotheism: a bunch of
superhuman entities with specialised skills and responsibilitie
are marginally easier to explain -- if not to believe -- than one
single such entity. IOW, bring on Hinduism....


>
> 6. Since disbelief is a form of belief, the degree of faith a
> person has that God does not exist is what determines how
> strong an atheist he or she is, or is not.

Disbelief is not a form of belief but an absence of belief in the
same way that drought is not merely form of water supply but an
independent state, or hunger not simply being a form of
nutrition.


>
> 7. People who have put their faith in a belief often/usually find
> it impossible to comprehend the ability of considering the possibility
> that God does not exist and also the possibility that he does.

Incorrect; there are a great many people who have gone from one
state to the other, from belief to unbelief or vice versa.


> 10. Whether God exists or not it seems apparent that life must have
> originated from lifelessness to begin with, and may do it fairly often.

Which correct fact must also apply to any deity....


>
> 11. We should not allow what appear to be conflicting or unlikely
> beliefs encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate
> and interfere with our own attempts to think about this topic
> realistically.

IOW, you want extreme doctrinal orthodoxy.
Bring on the Inquisition!


>
> 12. We should not allow childlike and unrealistic attempts at comparing
> the concept of gods with those of childlike ideas like the tooth fairy,
> the Easter Bunny, invisible pink unicorns, spaghetti monsters etc
> encouraged by other people--however absurd--to contaminate and interfere
> with our own attempts to think about this topic realistically.

These are all alleged self-willed supernatural entities, and
therefore fair game for direct comparison.

Nor do you appreciate the fact that to us, your deity is equally
as childish and unrealistic as any tooth fairy.

Lastly, some of these non-existent creatures like the Easter
Bunny or Santa Claus do in fact have a smidgeon of historical and
cultural legitimacy as they are relics of earlier cultures and
religions and are therefore part of the cultural heritage if
nothing else.


>
> 13. If gods exist they would necessarily have to be technologically
> advanced far beyond we humans on Earth, to the point that they became
> gods.

Clarke proposed this theorem a long time ago....


>
> 14. If God exists he almost certainly would not be restricted to any
> particular body, form, or gender. (disclaimer: I refer to God as "he" out
> of convenience and because that's how we are encouraged to refer to "him"
> in most if not all canonical texts.)

He would be subject to the same laws of nature as any other
creature in this universe. If he is not, then he is not part of
this universe.


>
> 15. If God exists it seems most likely that he has as much influence
> over the content of canonical texts as he wants to have.

Which is a most excellent argument for his non-existence, given
the garbled waffle and downright incoherence of such scripture.


>
> 16. If God exists, it seems quite clear he makes use of the evolutionary
> method of creation.

Which requires utter non-interference on his part if he does not
wish to invalidate the lot....


>
> 17. If there are things which people consider to be spiritual, they are
> most likely actually physical in ways we just can't appreciate yet.

My spirits are most decidedly physical, and I very much
appreciate a dram or snifter on occasion....
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron