God does not exist.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

On the contrary. I repeat what I have stated earlier. Most scientists believe in god.

You can research it.



Again. The opposite has been the case with me. Every professor in science I met in college believed in god. You can research nearly every famous scientist and discover they believed in god and that there was an intelligent order to the universe.

Most people believe in a god, that doesn't prove anything. Most scientists probably like cheese, does this mean that cheese and science are inextricably linked?

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by JCC

So? They were all theistic in an age where it wasn't allowed to not be a theist, with the exception of Einstein, who still would've been frowned upon, not that it matters anyway whether they were theists or not. Richard Dawkins is an atheist. Does quoting scientists who agree with you make your position infallible? No.

I brought up Einstein because he's pretty unanimously considered to be an intelligent person. I did it in order to argue Jillian's proposal that belief in God shows weakness and stupidity.

Anyway, what do you mean pagan dictatorships? Every religion has had its theocracy. Also, atheism doesn't make the most powerful person god. I'm an egalitarian and I'm an atheist.

Romania and Eqypt were pagan in that they considered their rulers to be gods.

An atheistic government where a person with the most power is in charge may as well be considered god. Though they'd take on the label of Potentate or Dictator. It doesn't matter. If a ruler places their self under God it is definitely preferable than them considering themselves the most powerful being.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by JCC

Most people believe in a god, that doesn't prove anything. Most scientists probably like cheese, does this mean that cheese and science are inextricably linked?

It proves that science cannot be a fallback for people trying to prove atheism as the more intellectually sound argument. Most scientific thinkers believe in God, so using scientific thinking as a basis for the argument for atheism equating intelligence is nullified.

You're being ridiculous and trying to downplay the argument the same way jillian did with his invisible animals being equal to belief in god routine. I really hope you're better than that, JCC.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

Romania and Eqypt were pagan in that they considered their rulers to be gods.

That's not paganism, that's monotheism. Although, Egypt had a very colourful and very structured religious tapestry and any pharoahs that were regarded as deities were often 'sons' of other deities. Paganism does not necessarily entail that a human ruler is a deity, in fact that's a fairly uncommon occurence.

[quote-Eclipsing the Son]An atheistic government where a person with the most power is in charge may as well be considered god.[/quote]
Why is this any different to a government ruled by a theist?

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

Though they'd take on the label of Potentate or Dictator. It doesn't matter. If a ruler places their self under God it is definitely preferable than them considering themselves the most powerful being.

Not really. Plenty of nice atheists, plenty of dickhead theists. Not believing that there is an omnipotent being doesn't automatically make it that you want to be an omnipotent being.

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

It proves that science cannot be a fallback for people trying to prove atheism as the more intellectually sound argument.

It doesn't have to be. Any self-respecting theist will concede that faith is not intellectually sound. You believe in something that you cannot prove the existence of or even somewhat validate a belief in, you just do believe in it. That's your business, but it's not logical and there's no amount of theistic biologists that can change that.

[MollyMac]

Paganism is mostly defined as those beliefs not under the umbrella of judeo-christianity. Monothiesm is One God. Save for the rule of Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten/Akhenaton) and Nefertiti, Egypt was polythiestic.

[Necrophagist]

Pascal's Wager - the answer to everything.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by MollyMac

Paganism is mostly defined as those beliefs not under the umbrella of judeo-christianity. Monothiesm is One God. Save for the rule of Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten/Akhenaton) and Nefertiti, Egypt was polythiestic.

Paganism tends to be polytheistic, spiritualist, naturalist folk religions. Calling anything non-Abrahamic Paganism seems to be a Christian knee-jerk reaction to people not pledging obeisance to Christ and trying to find some way to sully them. As for the Egypt thing, I know, Eclipsing the Son said that communities that regarded their ruler as their God were Pagan, which they weren't. If they were a part of a series of gods, they could be Pagan.

Originally Posted by Necrophagist

Pascal's Wager - the answer to everything.

Pascal's Wager is absolute horseshit, what kind of omnipotent, omniscient god doesn't know that you're putting it on?

[Necrophagist]

Haha excellent point!

[Eclipsing the Son]

Paganism is idol worship usually revolving around kneeling to idols that typically are not taken as seriously as the god of monotheistic cultures.

Paganism can be identified as Polytheism but usually the gods are less important that the leaders of pagan nations, whom are generally deified.

I can easily rationalize my belief in god through the ideology that everything is eventual. It's how many reasonable people rationalize prophesy inevitable events that must eventually take place. Just as we continue to discover more and more about our universe, I see god as one of these eventual discoveries that is yet to be made conclusively but already recognized by most people.

Originally Posted by necrophukgit's signature

Happy now?

VOID ANDROGYNE THE ETERNAL{ILoveYouBecca} SmashItUp! says:
Necrophuckgit finally changed his signature!
ArcanVmXII says:
He probably needed his mom to do it for him
ArcanVmXII says:
My guess is he had a sibling do it the first time and the sibling mispelled it on purpose to make him look stupid
VOID ANDROGYNE THE ETERNAL{ILoveYouBecca} SmashItUp! says:
Ahahahhaa

[Necrophagist]

I hate it when people base their disbelief on this statement: ' I don't see God, so he can't possibly exist! '

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

It proves that science cannot be a fallback for people trying to prove atheism as the more intellectually sound argument.

Let me remind you again that Einstein used only God as a metaphor. He made very clear that he believed in Spinoza's god, meaning his god was the universe itself in its impersonal and objective totality.
The phrase believes say of "God does not play dice" to attribute faith to Einstein is really offensive towards Einstein. It ignores his real thoughts which are expressed in many many other talks and writings of his:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954) From Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press


That's the most important one, but here are others:

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. (Albert Einstein, Religion and Science, New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930

I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature. (Albert Einstein, The World as I See It)

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein) Following his wife's advice in responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the International Synagogue in New York, who had sent Einstein a cablegram bluntly demanding Do you believe in God? Quoted from and citation notes derived from Victor J. Stenger, Has Science Found God? (draft: 2001), chapter 3.

The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)

You're being ridiculous and trying to downplay the argument the same way jillian did with his invisible animals being equal to belief in god routine

I put forth that argument to prove to you the absurdity of believing we begin from a point of absolute belief instead of a point of skepticism.
The fact that you believe I was challenging your god with that argument proves that you're not paying attention and you're just angry I could challenge all of your faiths. Congratulations.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Necrophagist

I hate it when people base their disbelief on this statement: ' I don't see God, so he can't possibly exist! '

You can't see the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Should you arbitrarily believe in it without any evidence? Start believing in him even though you have no reason to, you close-minded fuck!

[Eclipsing the Son]

Einstein did not use god as a metaphor. He was theistic. His equating god with human weakness was attributed to our imagination reaching farther than our abilities.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -Albert Einstein

You cannot discredit Einstein's belief in the existence of god simply because he didn't box himself in with organized religion. He believed that the universe had structure and was created by god.

The way you keep attributing god to religion only points out your own narrow minded thinking.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I put forth that argument to prove to you the absurdity of believing we begin from a point of absolute belief instead of a point of skepticism.
The fact that you believe I was challenging your god with that argument proves that you're not paying attention and you're just angry I could challenge all of your faiths. Congratulations.

Foolish. I've stated plainly that I once held your same atheistic views. I came to my conclusion I hold today directly from the point of view you establish. When I was 19 I was just like you and used the same argument. Since then I've grown to hold less angst and spite toward the idea of god as I now see it as something that cannot be so easily tied down by religions.

Who's angry by the way? Why so many insults, oh logical and rational master of polite discussion? I'd hardly say MollyMac or I have gotten so worked up about this. Probably because we know what you're going through and are really quite bored with how juvenile it is.

You make yourself out to be much angrier than ANY of the people here defending the argument that there is a god. From every post about how there is no god there is a seething hatred and need to insult the other side. That's because we have already seen your side and can empathize with you. You're young still. One day you'll either know better or become an unproductive brooding source of circular logic and enmity for life and progress. I don't say this in pride, simply as a matter of fact.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

He believed that the universe had structure and was created by god.

He believed that the structured universe is the only thing deserving of the word God. There was no creator; merely a totality of creation.
The way you keep attributing God to Einstein only points out how desperate you are into placing your thought into someone with more authority.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

He believed that the structured universe is the only thing deserving of the word God. There was no creator; merely a totality of creation.
The way you keep attributing God to Einstein only points out how desperate you are into placing your thought into someone with more authority.

What's so metaphorical about that? It would mean there was no creator of god, but that god shows himself in the world around us. Hence, though lacking of a formal religion, certainly presents a theistic viewpoint.

[MollyMac]

And yet arguing Einstein's lack of a more traditional type of deity only points out your desperation in the opposite direction.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

You make yourself out to be much angrier than ANY of the people here defending the argument that there is a god.

Jesus fuck, if you haven't been paying attention to anything, pay close attention to this:


I have been arguing for Logic, not for the logical evidence of the inexistence of a God.

Tell me this; do you believe this statement is true?
"There is no evidence that God does NOT exist, therefore he must exist"

That's the peace of idiocy I've been addressing. Can you see why it's idiotic or not?
Whether you believe in God or not, I will argue against you about it; but don't try to stupidly mesh all conflicts into one because you find them affronting.

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by MollyMac

And yet arguing Einstein's lack of a more traditional type of deity only points out your desperation in the opposite direction.

You are yet to explain me a reason why you try to use logic and then suddenly discard it when it didn't work. Until you do that, try not to jump into someone else's argument.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

Jesus fuck, if you haven't been paying attention to anything, pay close attention to this:


I have been arguing for Logic, not for the logical evidence of the inexistence of a God.

Tell me this; do you believe this statement is true?
"There is no evidence that God does NOT exist, therefore he must exist"

That's the peace of idiocy I've been addressing. Can you see why it's idiotic or not?
Whether you believe in God or not, I will argue against you about it; but don't try to stupidly mesh all conflicts into one because you find them affronting.

I have already stated my logical reasons for believing in god.

What is so logical about atheism? What has it gotten you? What's so logical about it?

[Godslayer Jillian]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

I have already stated my logical reasons for believing in god.

What is so logical about atheism? What has it gotten you? What's so logical about it?

I don't see positive evidence to the existence of god, nor a desirable reason to want the existence of a god. There's then no reason for me to believe in a god anymore than there's reason for me to believe in soulmates.

But then you say that you believe in God because of experience, right?
You don't believe in god because you're demanding negative evidence. You believe in god because you believe you have found positive evidence. Am I right?

Therefore you can agree that the line "there's no evidence for X, therefore X must be real" is bullshit.
Believe in God because you think you have a reason to believe in God, not because you don't have a reason not to believe in him.

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by Godslayer Jillian

I don't see positive evidence to the existence of god, nor a desirable reason to want the existence of a god. There's then no reason for me to believe in a god anymore than there's reason for me to believe in soulmates.

Believers would tell you different. Maybe one day you'll be open minded enough to give belief a chance.

But then you say that you believe in God because of experience, right?
You don't believe in god because you're demanding negative evidence. You believe in god because you believe you have found positive evidence. Am I right?

How do you explain the taste of salt to somebody who has never tasted it? It's something you'll have to explore on your own. Which is why you should stop being so offended by my evidence and advice.

Therefore you can agree that the line "there's no evidence for X, therefore X must be real" is bullshit.
Believe in God because you think you have a reason to believe in God, not because you don't have a reason not to believe in him.

Would you mind telling me the difference between the two?

I don't agree with your equation or think it presents anything pertaining to discussion. It's more like "When I didn't believe in x life was a lot more confusing and full of worries and enemies than now that I do believe in x. Therefore x is that answer to a puzzle I was struggling with".

You will probably say that I am settling for less and that I am filling an inability to deal with the irrationality of the world. That's what I would have said at your age. The truth is that now I realize that there's a lot more that makes sense about existence of God then there is sense found in god's absence.

I believe in god because I see no reason not to. I have seen plenty of evidence that has come from life experience. A friend recovering from cancer when everyone said he would die. The millions of things in my past that could have left me dead and yet what should have happened didn't without explanation. These are my own experiences. Eventually they built up to the point that I could not ignore them anymore.

You will continue to make lame insults and assumptions on my logic because you are afraid to entertain the idea that god exists. Your antagonism and angst stems from fear and doubt.

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Eclipsing the Son

A friend recovering from cancer when everyone said he would die.

So everyone who does die of cancer just wasn't good enough? Didn't make enough of an impact for God to care?

[Eclipsing the Son]

Originally Posted by JCC

So everyone who does die of cancer just wasn't good enough? Didn't make enough of an impact for God to care?

That's not what I said and you know it. That sort of cynicism isn't worth exploring for me.

Instead of being glad someone survived you point fun and make insults. Good job.

I believe what happens has to be accepted because it serves a greater good.

[JCC]

Doesn't that unconditional subservience depress you just a little bit?