God is imaginary

Post Reply New Topic

Alright, I'll back this one up

Many people who believe in a supernatural force, God or whatever...

• ...are not thieves.
• ...do not hate homosexuals.
• Male circumcision has been shown by the World Health Organization to be a good practice, and female circumcision is more of an ethnic than religious practice―several religious groups of similar ethnic stock practice it AFAIK only in parts of East Africa. So why bring this up at all?
• ...do not believe God punishes "them homerseckshurals, harlots and Jewish Hollywood pimps" with natural disasters.
• ...do not believe in miracles.

You've basically generalized a Southern inbred redneck Christian hick stereotype to everyone who believes in some kind of supernatural power.

The one making fatuous quips here is you.

Stop projecting.



I've heard horror stories about computers. Can you tell me a little about the bad uses people put these contraptions to on a daily basis?

did i ever say everyone? there's a reason why i said convenience. it does get everyone in time on various levels but i only gave a few examples. god of the gaps is obviously the biggest and most common convenience for people.

male circumcision has not been shown to be good health practice. you're misrepresenting the facts. the facts are that the WHO said that male circumcision leads to a slightly lower level of transmission of the HIV virus and therefore the practice could be considered encouragible in such areas in africa where they don't like to use condoms for whatever reason (wonder if the missionaries and their anti-birth control agenda have any influence on this one, hmmmmm). and a condom protects better than circumcision 99% of the time. nice strawman to justify mutilating babies. doesn't work on me. already read the reports when they came out. not to mention we have soap these days, too.

as far as miracles go: http://www.pollingreport.com/religion2.htm

as far as thieves go: the majority of americans support israel and many think our current policies are either just enough or too little in support of israel, whose agenda very obviously is taking land in the name of god. soooooooooo http://www.pollingreport.com/israel.htm and if you look into the history of the formation of and policies and land-grabs going on (like the latest ones to grab more land in the west bank after the "cease fire" that never was), you'd see that it's quite clearly just stealing land in the name of god at the end of the day.

god is listed in many holy texts as summoning natural disasters to strike down enemies. so this is one actually listed in religious texts and cited by those who are more popular in between new york and california.



and like i said before (but not quick enough), i was citing examples. the biggest one is and will always remain the convenience of the god of the gaps. what better way to stay lazy and ignorant than just use god to explain everything?

and do you even know why circumcision works at all to prevent the spread of HIV? it's because you're exposing what's supposed to be soft tissue and allowing it to essentially harden and not operate in the same manner.


we have condoms now (and soap!). it isn't necessary anymore.

You have yet to show how any of these problems are inherently faults of religion.

It would be equally ridiculous to say that degrading industrial practices are inherent faults of science. They are altogether too common after all.

and again, at the end of the day: show me example of one the existence of a god.


you can defend and theorize and use semantics to do cartwheels into your safety position but at the end of the day all you're left holding are holy texts and whole lotta nothing.


it's okay, i'm holding a whole lotta nothing too.


except, i accept that.

Uhhh

I'm agnostic.

But, in my view, the Chinese room scenario of John Searle seems to imply some kind of mind-body dualism. I'm not sure what exactly.

Just for s**ts and giggles, let's say someone did know the truth and were to tell you the truth... about God, why we're here, where we came from and where we're going, all the big mysteries of life.

How would you know it was true if you don't already know the truth?

Even better, what if the stars rearranged themselves in the sky to form the message "There is no God"?

Really? That's the best you can do?

I wasn't really trying.

I get your point though.

I wonder who will eventually win this argument once and for all.

Oh, that's easy.

I WIN!! ! I WIN!! !

IWINIWINIWINIWIN!! !!

Therefore, I have won.

Case closed.

This is an imaginary proof.

No understanding whatsoever of how prayer is supposed to work. That prayer doesn't work is not sufficient anyway to prove God is imaginary.


For most people out there that believe there is a super natural force out there, the bible would count as a strawman, the issues with the bible merely prove the bible is wrong, not that God is imaginary.


Again, that there is a scientific explanation for these things doesn't really deny the existence of God.


However, there is no scientific evidence agains the existence of a god either.


Once again, meh.

Ok, after so many lame proves I stopped taking this whole site seriously, oh, by the way there are hundreds of Christians out there that could swear #50 worked for them. I have met a couple.

What's the point of this thread? It should be either abadonned or locked. It's good for one thing, getting people riled up and angry. It's the classic unwinnable argument.

I read through about 20 proofs before stopping. While I'm an atheist myself, most of those 'proofs' are not valid. For example, in a lot of them, you're using the Bible as essential evidence. That doesn't work for non-Christian religions, and most intelligent Christians I know do not take the Bible seriously (you may say that those people are not Christians or similar, but the important thing is that they believe in God).

Personally, I take the view that I do not know if God exists or not, and it is unlikely we will ever be able to prove it, but my general view is that you have to prove that something exists, not prove that it doesn't. So for all intents and purposes I am an atheist.

I take the Bible seriously. I do not, however, take it literally. I think in your mind you equate "seriously" with "literally," which is incorrect.