• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

There is no afterlife - its just woo peddler's fantasy

ChristianProgressive said:
......

There is a great deal of convincing secondary or indirect evidence, such as the statistical impossibility of abiogenesis, the finely tuned engineering of the universe, etc.

........
Click to expand...


Yes well like Loss Leader said ^ and also who made God ..... who made the one who made God ...... who made the one who made the one who made God.

The further back we go the more complex the entity must be. Occam would not be impressed.

What you must accept is we don't know all of the answers but we are still looking and trying to find them. Those who say "God did it" stop looking. It's the easy way out.
 
abaddon said:
Strawman. That is not the atheist position.

The atheist position is that there is no reason to believe in any deity.

In fact, this is a position that you, TBD also take. Do you believe in Thor? Zeus? Coazetcoatal? Vishnu? And so on.

Of course you don't. Those would be stupid. right?
Click to expand...


Thor is my dad.:)
 
The Big Dog said:
I am quite certain that you are not purporting to speak on behalf of all atheists, and certainly not the poster in this thread said that atheists "hold the opposite" position.
Click to expand...

How odd. No I certainly cannot claim to speak for all atheists. That would be stupid. Atheists are a diverse group. However, Atheists have one thing in common. They lack a belief in any deity.

If it gives you your jolly to hold that as an "opposite position" that is your right, even though it is utterly wrong.

It is actually much more simple than that.

Demonstrate that god exists. Any god. I care not which one. Any of the countless thousands of claimed gods.

Nobody has ever done that. Perhaps you will be the first.

Were any deity demonstrated to exist, then sure, I would believe in whatever deity that was.

But the theists seem to be unable to do so.

Why is that?
 
Darat said:
Nope. Zeus as he is described has certain attributes if those can't be found then he cannot exist. If you want to change the definition of Zeus you are no longer actually talking about the existence of Zeus.
Click to expand...

Your idea of those certain attributes of Zeus seems to be based on the assumption that the ancient Greeks believed that if you were to climb Olympus you would literally find the gods living there, or that Zeus was literally throwing lightning bolts from the sky and, indeed, that that is the only legitimate conception of him.
 
Darat said:
The problem with this is you have to use a definition of God that is not what those professing a belief in a god or gods believe exists. Therefore you are in fact talking about something quite different when you use the word god. In other words your word god means "something may exist that we don't know about", but says nothing about what that thing is. Whereas when a Roman Catholic priest says God exists he has an actual definition of the thing he believes exist (the RC doctrine).
Click to expand...

Can you be more specific about this definition?
 
Last edited:
All of us have already spent WAY too much time pondering questions we have no ability to answer.

I would rather spend time arguing about my favorite Muppet, than bother worrying about an imaginary afterlife.

"Animal" is the best muppet, BTW.
 
theprestige said:
smartcooky, you know evidence doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

True. But lack of evidence sure helps us in life. Crossing my local highway while walking, I look right, I look left. There is a .00000001 percent chance something will fall on me from the sky, but I don't divert my attention from the obvious possibilities.
 
Loss Leader said:
No. You've got all the same things happening with a god and without one. With a god, you have to explain how the things happened and then add god's will on top of that. How does gravity work without a god? It's a property of mass. How does gravity work with a god? It's a property of mass AND god's will. The god hypothesis is more complex every single time.
Click to expand...

Without God, you have one statistically improbable even compounding upon another improbable event compounding upon another and on and on and on, on and on and on with the total probability against growing exponentially each time until it runs up on Borel's Limit for effective probability beyond which the probability is theoretical only and cannot be realized in the material universe.

A creative God reduces those elements to effectively1 each time.

That's not even remotely what Occam's Razor says. Witness:

Occam's razor says that the simplest explanation that fully accounts for all observations without contradiction should be preferred over the more complex one.
Click to expand...

There is nothing contradictory about the God hypothesis. It perfectly explains with the fewest assumptions how the one particular universe that we have came to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom