Proof that God does not exist...

[iahag]

Quote by: StrongHeartsWin Infinity exists within the finite. There are an infinite number of points within a 12 inch ruler because division can continue within the confines of space to smaller and smaller units that are sliced.

I Suppose, but this infinity has limits and it is theoretical. Its similar to the question of whether we can represent the irrational number (2)^(1/2). Root 2 has an infinite number of decimal points, yet geometrically (and theoretically) we can represent it on a number line using a right angled triangle of base 1, height 1. (pythag - 1^2 + 1^2 = H^2 = 2 => H=2^(1/2)). Yet practically, an infinite amount of decimals implies an infinite precision is required of the measurer. This is not possible, infinity does not exist. Similarly, an infinite number of points on a line requires infinite precision of the measurer. Effectively your trying to measure a set of irrational distances which just isnt possible.

But back to the argument - Any theists care to share with me the answer to my original argument?

edit: Id like to rename my title. Far too blunt and its not a proof at all

[Nathan Struth]

Sure, I'm an aethist but, I guess something had to be there to cause the big bang. Or we could have the possibility of time in our perception of being wrong. Something always had to be there. If mass can't be created or destroyed; how'd it get here? I think there was always mass and energy. I think our perception of time is flawed. You can analosize this to god being always there; nothing HAD to create him...due to Conservation laws.

I still don't believe in god though. He's too human concept

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: weasel You cannot define "God"; you can't put him in a box and say "you are this and not that." If that were the case, the common concept of God as all knowing and all powerful would be made invalid. Most importantly, I believe that logic doesn't apply when one is questioning about the Almighty; I feel it is beyond our understanding and is therefore a matter of faith that science has no business to intrude upon.

It is obvious you are in lack of comprehension when it comes to the bible. God is defined, measured, weighed and catagorized. Did you create the God concept? If not, let it be then, to the reference of all, the bible.

And it says right in the beginning, his spirit hovered over the waters or sea. Pretty small God. God is in heaven....heaven must be huge, God small. What is it again we should have problems imagining when it comes to God? How incomprehensable should he be again???

[Fonceai]

@zauhiyg

It's obvious you are guilty of automatically associating God with the Bible.

Only 33% of the world puts any faith in the Bible.

And 8% of the world is Atheist.

That means you are misrepresenting the 59% of the world that doesn't care about the Bible.

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: Nathan Struth Sure, I'm an aethist but, I guess something had to be there to cause the big bang. Or we could have the possibility of time in our perception of being wrong. Something always had to be there. If mass can't be created or destroyed; how'd it get here? I think there was always mass and energy. I think our perception of time is flawed. You can analosize this to god being always there; nothing HAD to create him...due to Conservation laws. I still don't believe in god though. He's too human concept

Sounds like a more mature thought expression to me. Everyone is always saying we did we come from? or where did it all come from? How did God get here? If we speak of a source that had something to do with everyone and everything being here, then it is an ingredient of life.

When you ask yourself what ingredient was needed so that the ingredient of salt cam come into existance...........you'll soon have to realize that salt doesn't care for or love humans, nor does space and time or even the earth. What is the source's purpose? How many sources are there? What would be mans God? Why not a man?

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: Fonceai @zauhiyg It's obvious you are guilty of automatically associating God with the Bible. Only 33% of the world puts any faith in the Bible. And 8% of the world is Atheist. That means you are misrepresenting the 59% of the world that doesn't care about the Bible.

Why would anyone care about people who doesn't care about the bible when it comes to a conversation about beinging in God?

People who don't believe in God, don't believe in god because of the bible. Thank you very much.

Yes I am guilty of associating God with the bible. It's all over and inside the bible, lol, foreal though. Care to explain?

[Fonceai]

Sure, I'll explain.

In Posts #23 and #24 in this very thread, you disagreed with someone by citing that the Bible has the answers.

There are approximately 3 1/2 billion people on this planet who would just as soon wipe their asses with the Bible but who also believe in God.

By citing the Bible, you've answered 41% of the question. You know what teachers call 41%? Failure.

[iahag]

Quote by: zauhiyq It is obvious you are in lack of comprehension when it comes to the bible. God is defined, measured, weighed and catagorized. Did you create the God concept? If not, let it be then, to the reference of all, the bible. And it says right in the beginning, his spirit hovered over the waters or sea. Pretty small God. God is in heaven....heaven must be huge, God small. What is it again we should have problems imagining when it comes to God? How incomprehensable should he be again???

Hmm, what precisely have we measured about god? Ill let you answer that.

But onto the next fallacious statement. You say god has been weighed. The definition of weight: 'the magnitude of the force exerted on a mass by gravity'. In your statement, your implying that god is a mass of some sorts and that he experiences gravity also.

And it says right in the beginning, his spirit hovered over the waters or sea.

I see now... So what is a spirit? Why is this 'hovering' over gods apparent creation significant? Why does he not 'hover' over land? Does he not 'hover' on over gaseous stars or planets with no liquid? 'Hover over' implies 'above something with respect to the direction of gravity, yet exempt from the force of gravity itself. Heh, you managed to contradict yourself in 2 paragraphs.

God is in heaven....heaven must be huge

I assume by 'huge' you mean 'relatively large within the three spacial dimensions' (relative to what is up to you). And so by this statement, your implying that - god and heaven both exist within the 3 spacial dimensions -. Thus, your implying that god and heaven exists in that which we can see, interpret ... etc. Yet this is in contradiction to the modern theists view that god is in no way associated with our reality other than 'a mysterious guiding force'. I believe this is 2nd contradiction. (Hell, if the word 'other than' wasnt so damn specific the statement would contradict itself.)

What is it again we should have problems imagining when it comes to God?

Perhaps its graphs like these.

religion and IQ are strongly negatively correlated (-.886)

Perhaps its statements like these.

*edited by Chris the chees*

Graphic image: may cause distress

http://www.betar.co.uk/articles/pict..._jews_cart.jpg
images like these

655,000 Iraqi war deaths

And stats like these that makes it hard to imagine the almighty fuzzbot.

But Im becoming heavily deviated in my rantings.

[dthmstr254]

I read the first post of this thing and found that it had more assumptions than it said it had. assuming that nothing is infinite is assuming the God is mortal. This can't be possible because a mortal could not create something. A mortal can only build with resources that are already there. It is a contradiction to assume that God is a creator and that he was created. This makes God a builder and not a creator. A creator takes nothing and makes it into something.

I also take a logical stand on the title. There is no such thing as proof. There can only be evidence.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: iahag Hmm, what precisely have we measured about god? Ill let you answer that. But onto the next fallacious statement. You say god has been weighed. The definition of weight: 'the magnitude of the force exerted on a mass by gravity'. In your statement, your implying that god is a mass of some sorts and that he experiences gravity also. I see now... So what is a spirit? Why is this 'hovering' over gods apparent creation significant? Why does he not 'hover' over land? Does he not 'hover' on over gaseous stars or planets with no liquid? 'Hover over' implies 'above something with respect to the direction of gravity, yet exempt from the force of gravity itself. Heh, you managed to contradict yourself in 2 paragraphs. I assume by 'huge' you mean 'relatively large within the three spacial dimensions' (relative to what is up to you). And so by this statement, your implying that - god and heaven both exist within the 3 spacial dimensions -. Thus, your implying that god and heaven exists in that which we can see, interpret ... etc. Yet this is in contradiction to the modern theists view that god is in no way associated with our reality other than 'a mysterious guiding force'. I believe this is 2nd contradiction. (Hell, if the word 'other than' wasnt so damn specific the statement would contradict itself.) Perhaps its graphs like these. Perhaps its statements like these. Graphic image warning http://www.betar.co.uk/articles/pict..._jews_cart.jpg images like these And stats like these that makes it hard to imagine the almighty fuzzbot. But Im becoming heavily deviated in my rantings.

Perhaps I am going a tad off topic with this reply, but I couldn't help it.
Perhaps God is allowing the short term sufferings in order to allow a longer-term good to occur. Think about this. How do we learn? We learn through difficulty and challenge. We learned how to walk by trying and falling all the time. Some people learn how to thread a needle, in the process poking themselves and drawing blood. We learn how to cook and a lot of the time end up burning ourselves in the process. A child gets a bad grade on a homework assignment. The parent knew how to do the work, but didn't. Does that make the parent a bad person? Of course it doesn't. Humans are inherently hard headed.

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: Fonceai Sure, I'll explain. In Posts #23 and #24 in this very thread, you disagreed with someone by citing that the Bible has the answers. There are approximately 3 1/2 billion people on this planet who would just as soon wipe their asses with the Bible but who also believe in God. By citing the Bible, you've answered 41% of the question. You know what teachers call 41%? Failure.

It's all in your head. I was not nor intended to cite that the bible has the answers. what I am citing is that people who feel the bible has the answers should look again. How did you miss this?

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: iahag Hmm, what precisely have we measured about god? Ill let you answer that. But onto the next fallacious statement. You say god has been weighed. The definition of weight: 'the magnitude of the force exerted on a mass by gravity'. In your statement, your implying that god is a mass of some sorts and that he experiences gravity also. I see now... So what is a spirit? Why is this 'hovering' over gods apparent creation significant? Why does he not 'hover' over land? Does he not 'hover' on over gaseous stars or planets with no liquid? 'Hover over' implies 'above something with respect to the direction of gravity, yet exempt from the force of gravity itself. Heh, you managed to contradict yourself in 2 paragraphs. I assume by 'huge' you mean 'relatively large within the three spacial dimensions' (relative to what is up to you). And so by this statement, your implying that - god and heaven both exist within the 3 spacial dimensions -. Thus, your implying that god and heaven exists in that which we can see, interpret ... etc. Yet this is in contradiction to the modern theists view that god is in no way associated with our reality other than 'a mysterious guiding force'. I believe this is 2nd contradiction. (Hell, if the word 'other than' wasnt so damn specific the statement would contradict itself.) Perhaps its graphs like these. Perhaps its statements like these. Graphic image warning http://www.betar.co.uk/articles/pict..._jews_cart.jpg images like these And stats like these that makes it hard to imagine the almighty fuzzbot. But Im becoming heavily deviated in my rantings

Wow, I think you are Sooo away out of your league here with me. First it would be a good start to know your bible if you want to know what I am talking about.

God has been refered to as a man in the bible. Man can be weighed. There are many more human attributes attributed to God and so forth, God can be weighed. That's 1 (Gods has been measured in the same way - That's 2)

By your statement I guess you're saying God can't experience gravity. In the bible (and I don't know where else you can find the topic of God spelled, "God", so much) God is on earth, he eats, he smells, he sits, he falls of his chariot, he gets angry, his made up mind to kill is changed by Moses. I'd say, based on the way people love to glorify God, being subjected to gravity is the least of his problems if he is supposed to be nothing like man. -That's 3

Then we come to another part where you can't comprehend. God hovering over the sea or waters. Who saw it? If I was to see God's spirit or what ever form he wanted to be in, hover over anything, be it the stars or a million universes, I would know he isn't larger than his creation. That's the point dude. That's 4

Quote by: iahag Thus, your implying that god and heaven exists in that which we can see, interpret ... etc. Yet this is in contradiction to the modern theists view that god is in no way associated with our reality other than 'a mysterious guiding force'. I believe this is 2nd contradiction.

Are you atheists? It only means that you don't believe in Greek Gods = Theos. A - theos. If you depend on scholars for king James and others who still so called translate the word Elohim into a German word like God then you are still lost. You only think you know what you are talking about when you say either of, "There is a God," or "There is not a God." You haven't a clue as to what to do to get pass such influences. And you are going to tell me about a contradiction you see based on what you alone have been duped about. How can anyone have a belief concerning, "God?" There are references. Things you should know! Especially if you're going to have a sincere attempt to debate about it. Where can I find reference that God is in no way associated with our reality. Notice in my question I did not say, "Elohim." Who are all these people that don't believe in God? lol.
Or is it that they don't believe in the God spoken about in the bible?

Pretty stupid to think the God spoken of in the bible is a mysterious guiding force. God in the bible sounds pretty ignorant. And if you've experienced a miracle why would you attribute it to a name associated with the bible like God? That's a question for you, so called atheist!!

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: dthmstr254 I read the first post of this thing and found that it had more assumptions than it said it had. assuming that nothing is infinite is assuming the God is mortal. This can't be possible because a mortal could not create something. A mortal can only build with resources that are already there. It is a contradiction to assume that God is a creator and that he was created. This makes God a builder and not a creator. A creator takes nothing and makes it into something. I also take a logical stand on the title. There is no such thing as proof. There can only be evidence.

Wow, I can tell you haven't been in the water about this. Get your feet wet will ya? In your statement, it is clear you have no confidence in yourself.

Try this, we are all screwed up. Yep, all screwed up, but somebody will figure this out for a way out. Never try and state or point out what you believe to be a persons assumptions. Simply communicate, or you will find the assumption is your own. Always start off thinking in terms to support the others views, if you trust yourself to find flaws, if there are any. By the time you are ready to debate, 5 years should have passed.

So you are the only one who has assumed god was mortal. Check his point. His point is more so for those who assume. And you fell into it.
It's easy to tell that you believe in God. And you think man can not create. To believe is to assume. Try this for assumption.....unless you've seen what it takes to create a sun or universe for that matter (I won't even talk about test tubbing) you will have no idea what man can create. Perhaps God was indeed created.

[Agnos]

Why have you been reduced to insults, zauhiyq?

[iahag]

Pretty stupid to think the God spoken of in the bible is a mysterious guiding force. God in the bible sounds pretty ignorant. And if you've experienced a miracle why would you attribute it to a name associated with the bible like God? That's a question for you, so called atheist!!

Who said I experienced a miracle? Who said I was an atheist? I cant really answer that considering I dont precisely know what a miracle is and thus dont know whether I have experienced one in any way, shape or form.

As for the so-called atheist bit. I dont refute the idea of a creator of our universe at all, I just dont consider it. Why? Its an unfalsifiable idea where the very notion of such a concept is determined completely by the individual maintaining the belief.

As for the other stuff, Im no expert on the bible and dont intend nor want to be. I explicitly said that Ill leave such postulations to the theists. I was wrong to even try to comprehend the god figure. Its completely impossible. I was merely trying to use the common reasoning behind the figure of god to show the consequences of such thinking. I assumed that god had limits and thus, exists in a world of his own. Such statements are completely wrong, you can quite easily refute this by saying 'he doesnt have limits'. And Id be in no position to contend with you because as I said before. The notion of god is determined by the individual.

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: Agnos Why have you been reduced to insults, zauhiyq?

Please point out the insults sir?

[zauhiyq]

Quote by: iahag I was wrong to even try to comprehend the god figure. Its completely impossible.

Such as you think would really mean what? You CAN read right? What is it that YOU know about God or believe that makes you think that comprehending the god figure is completely impossible? I'm willing to bet that most who speak of God whether they believe or not get their information about God from the bible. Great grounds for comprehending the god figure. In fact, if you have good comprehensive skills, you can tell when someone else has poor comprehensive skills when refering to god as written about in the bible. And remember, individuals use reference.

Quote by: iahag I was merely trying to use the common reasoning behind the figure of god to show the consequences of such thinking. I assumed that god had limits and thus, exists in a world of his own. Such statements are completely wrong, you can quite easily refute this by saying 'he doesnt have limits'. And Id be in no position to contend with you because as I said before. The notion of god is determined by the individual

The consequences of accepting contradicting ideas is that you may need to simply provide reason why you have. Not that you are right. I can tell that you are sincere. While you struggle with ideas on whether god has limits or not, you should be investigating why you ever had the thought. *wink* Since you are not expert on the bible nor do you intend or want to be. *smile*

Quote by: iahag As for the so-called atheist bit. I dont refute the idea of a creator of our universe at all, I just dont consider it. Why? Its an unfalsifiable idea where the very notion of such a concept is determined completely by the individual maintaining the belief.

I see how hard you are trying. And I see the excuses for not doing your homework as well. You don't consider it cause why?

It's an _____ idea ___ notion of such a concept ______determined _____ by the individual maintaining the belief.

A belief maintained by an individual, hmmm. Are you saying you don't consider the idea of a creator of our universe because you don't believe it or maintain the belief as you put it? What do you mean by not considering it? I mean what are you trying to say by saying you don't consider it? Seems you're saying a person who doesn't maintain the belief wouldn't consider it. lol, kind of tricky, huh? To me it's obvious that once a person has considered something enough to choose not to believe in it or maintain the belief, still places the realization that something has been considered. Do you mean you don't consider it any more? And if so, does it mean it's because you use to be the person maintaining the belief? I would want to know why the person was maintaining the belief in the first place. *wink*

Quote by: iahag Who said I experienced a miracle? Who said I was an atheist? I cant really answer that considering I dont precisely know what a miracle is and thus dont know whether I have experienced one in any way, shape or form.

You never said anything about experiencing a miracle. But you did make a comment regarding to what theist would believe or what they believe. How would you know? Your not even an expert on the bible. So called atheist might have a point to believe in such a way if they could come out on top in a biblical translational debate. Point out all the weak bricks and reasons not to believe and point out a more logical acceptance. Below is what you said....

Quote by: iahag I assume by 'huge' you mean 'relatively large within the three spacial dimensions' (relative to what is up to you). And so by this statement, your implying that - god and heaven both exist within the 3 spacial dimensions -. Thus, your implying that god and heaven exists in that which we can see, interpret ... etc. Yet this is in contradiction to the modern theists view that god is in no way associated with our reality other than 'a mysterious guiding force'.

Moses following lights in a cloud is a mysterious guiding force. So is Urum & Thurum which is like dice or taret card reading. Or a staff turning into a snake or being in fire or not being burned. All these things are in the bible and people call them miracles. Falling and not getting hurt, drinking poison and not dying and even being able to predict the future by vision or dream. Even if what you claim is a modern theist view was accurate (and I think not), how would you know the foundation (reference) for the idea was solid or at least logical? As you see, even if you use to be atheist, it wouldn't help. Because it doesn't imply what kind of atheist you were or would have been. But going through that school as a sincere individual would help a lot! I know. *wink*

[Agnos]

Quote by: zauhiyq In your statement, it is clear you have no confidence in yourself.

No matter how delicately you put it, this is an insult.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: zauhiyq Wow, I can tell you haven't been in the water about this. Get your feet wet will ya? In your statement, it is clear you have no confidence in yourself. Try this, we are all screwed up. Yep, all screwed up, but somebody will figure this out for a way out. Never try and state or point out what you believe to be a persons assumptions. Simply communicate, or you will find the assumption is your own. Always start off thinking in terms to support the others views, if you trust yourself to find flaws, if there are any. By the time you are ready to debate, 5 years should have passed. So you are the only one who has assumed god was mortal. Check his point. His point is more so for those who assume. And you fell into it. It's easy to tell that you believe in God. And you think man can not create. To believe is to assume. Try this for assumption.....unless you've seen what it takes to create a sun or universe for that matter (I won't even talk about test tubbing) you will have no idea what man can create. Perhaps God was indeed created.

Nope, by saying that God was created, the person who posted this thread implies that God has a beginning, and everything that begins will end. What it takes to create is to start out with absolutely nothing and come out with something. So, go create dirt out of a vacuum. Oh wait, laws of thermodynamics prevent you, who did not create the laws of science, from doing that. Man cannot create, because he is not able to make something out of nothing. At least, create is the closest word English has for it. A CreatOR cannot be creatED because he then has something there and thus is only building on his own creator's design. That is something from something, and not something from nothing.

Oh yeah, Zauhiyq, I don't need to know your opinions on how I post what I say. Everyone starts out stating their assumptions. Only when your assumptions are stated can one begin to support their views, which are assumptions, with evidence. I tire of people saying that I can't have assumptions, especially after they put their own out clear as day.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: zauhiyq It's all in your head. I was not nor intended to cite that the bible has the answers. what I am citing is that people who feel the bible has the answers should look again. How did you miss this?

Ok, you say this and in the next breath you start again citing the Bible, or some bastardization of it. I have read the Bible several times through and never seen the part where God falls off a chariot. Where is that, 1 Opinions 3:16?:eek: