Bye Bye Ape Man!!!

[Brennin]

Well you work hard at giving the impression that you are ignorant,
most people here agree that the very idea of a God is ridiculous,
so for you to continue to argue that there is a God watching over
you is just asking to be called a fool.

The story of a God is just that, a story, it is not to be taken seriously,
try and imagine what you sound like to someone who thinks about things,
someone in the real world where things exist or don't exist,
fantasy land is for people with problems, people trying to escape from reality,
you sound like one of those people, you have accepted a story without really thinking about it,
I say that because that is the impression you give,
try saying the things you believe out load and see how ridiculous they sound,
these are not the thoughts and beliefs of a person with their feet on the ground are they?
they are the thoughts and beliefs of someone who lives in a dream world,
a world they would like to live in, and not the real world where they actually live.

There is no after life, no matter how much you hope there is,
we all wish things were better for us and it would be nice to think that this life is not all there is,
but unfortunately we live in the real world and we know things are not like that.

Like the other animals, we are born, we live and we die,
accept it and get on with your life, life is too short to spend it dreaming and wishing.

Just because we can imagine a thing, does not make it real, I imagine I'm good looking.

αφρων εν καρδια αυτου ουκ εστιν θεος

For those who can't display Greek letters:

Aphron en kardia autou ouk estin THEOS

 

[sfs]

Yeah, it's important that you support and protect your up-and-coming atheists. Coddle him, pamper him, lick his wounds. Show him the correct way to be arrogant and call people ignorant if they dont accept your implausible idea that the universe "popped" out of nothingness.

So? He's still right, you're still wrong, and he still knows more about science than you do. (Also, the idea that I would support an atheist just because he's an atheist is pretty funny.)

 

[Gracchus]

αφρων εν καρδια αυτου ουκ εστιν θεος

For those who can't display Greek letters:

Aphron en kardia autou ouk estin THEOS

Stultior stulto fuisti, qui tabellis crederes!

 

[MarcusHill]

The other flaw with the ontological argument is that the property "God-like" is not well-defined.

Since some people here seem to place undue weight on people unzipping their flies so they can argue from their own authority, perhaps I should mention my PhD in mathematical logic. And the fact that I used the "God-like" property as part of a reductio ad absurdum argument in my thesis and in this paper.

 

[Tomk80]

No, and I suggest spending less time under the fume hood.

Your dismissive answer is a sure sign that you know he is correct.

Face it, if you would thought you had an argument you would actually present it.

 

[monkeypsycho62]

I learned it from atheists who simply tell me I'm ignorant instead of answering my question.

Well? Could you not find any questions that we have not answered? Do you now realize that we have, in fact, been answering your questions while you continue attempting to avoid answering ours?

 

[TheGnome]

Here's what I gathered so far:

The OP creator ignores posts that actually answer his questions.

The OP creator insults those who disagrees with him not by their arguments, but by stupid things like age.

The OP is then appalled if anyone points out his ignorance, and claims how it is such a grave injustice that people call him ignorant. Then he insults people some more without ever having to address an argument presented to him.

This guy's a liar and a jerk. He only came in here to proselytize, not to actually learn anything. I think it's best not to continue with this nonsense.

 

[Loudmouth]

And rightfully so. I think the concept of a contingent God is prima facie absurd.

Logical proofs are not about what YOU think is or is not absurd. You need to establish, without a priori assumptions, that God exists before it can be accepted as axiomic.

I dispute this. No ontological argument I am familiar with requires the existence of unicorns or perfect islands.

Sadly, if you replace the word "God" with "Unicorns" the proof is unaffected. Any imagined entity can replace God in the proof and the proof is unaffected.

It serves as a foundation.

Foundation for what? Self deception?

 

[MarcusHill]

Sadly, if you replace the word "God" with "Unicorns" the proof is unaffected. Any imagined entity can replace God in the proof and the proof is unaffected.

As long as the entity is regarded as "positive", that is. Which is exactly what I meant by saying "God-like" isn't well-defined.

 

[Logic_Fault]

Yeah, it's important that you support and protect your up-and-coming atheists. Coddle him, pamper him, lick his wounds. Show him the correct way to be arrogant and call people ignorant if they dont accept your implausible idea that the universe "popped" out of nothingness.

Arrogant? How? As I said, if you'd rather not be considered ignorant of a subject then you should educate yourself on it and that wont happen any longer.

I learned it from atheists who simply tell me I'm ignorant instead of answering my question.

Stop making posts that are obviously wrong and then refusing to learn why and correct your misunderstandings and people wont see you as ignorant of the subject.

Now then, what question is it that we haven't answered?

 

[Loudmouth]

I learned it from atheists who simply tell me I'm ignorant instead of answering my question.

Until you understand a subject you can not ask pointed questions. That's the point. You have demonstrated that you do not understand the theories that you are questioning. This is not our fault. It is yours. Your knowledge and education is YOUR responsibility, not ours. Luckily, ignorance is curable if you choose to do so.

If you still feel that some of your questions have been ignored please ask them again. I would be happy to answer them for you in a non-confrontational and polite manner.

 

[Brennin]

The other flaw with the ontological argument is that the property "God-like" is not well-defined.

Since some people here seem to place undue weight on people unzipping their flies so they can argue from their own authority, perhaps I should mention my PhD in mathematical logic. And the fact that I used the "God-like" property as part of a reductio ad absurdum argument in my thesis and in this paper.

I will take a look at your paper; I should have access to it through my university.

 

[Brennin]

Logical proofs are not about what YOU think is or is not absurd. You need to establish, without a priori assumptions, that God exists before it can be accepted as axiomic[sic].

Axioms can't be proved, only shown to be reasonable and consistent. (Although, an axiom in one system might be a theorem in another.)

Sadly, if you replace the word "God" with "Unicorns" the proof is unaffected. Any imagined entity can replace God in the proof and the proof is unaffected.

Stick to microbes, dude. That criticism has no teeth.

 

[Loudmouth]

Axioms can't be proved, only shown to be reasonable and consistent. (Although, an axiom in one system might be a theorem in another.)

Where have you shown that the existence of God is reasonable and consistent?

Stick to microbes, dude. That criticism has no teeth.

Yes it does. I can make up any imagined entity I want and prove it's necessity in the same way. If the proof produces conclusions that you both agree with and disagree with then the proof should not be used.

 

[mpok1519]

So let's see... if I stated that my honest opinion of you was that you are an egotistical, self-important, know-it-all, arrogant, pompous blow hole, I guess you wouldn't think I was trying to insult you because it was just my honest opinion?

of course not. =)

Because, if thats how YOU feel, then by all means, tell us how YOU feel. Thats why this country is so great. One can express their opinions without fear of repercussion. Besides, I've never been called a pompous know-it-all blowhole before so in a way I slightly welcome the opinion. What better way to better myself than to listen to constructive criticism? =)

also, that was his opinion of RELIGION, not people. Talking trash on ideas is MUCH different than talking trash on people.

Ideas don't have souls or minds. People do. =)

So, all is in accord here everyone, correct? Fossil records indicate that species of hominids did coexist with each other while certain ones died out and others continued to adapt and evolve. In my mind this exemplefies God's creativity and mysterious and ultimate plan in a much more exalted way than the story of creastionism, although, I believe the story of creationism much better explains humans' relationship with God in the light of love, obedience and temptation.

 

[MarcusHill]

I will take a look at your paper; I should have access to it through my university.

Go for it, but if I recall correctly the property is only mentioned tangentially - the thrust of the paper is nothing to do with theological arguments!

 

[KCfromNC]

As long as the entity is regarded as "positive", that is. Which is exactly what I meant by saying "God-like" isn't well-defined.

Is "conclusive proof that the ontological argument is wrong" a positive entity? I've seen this dropped in place of god in the argument and it sounds just as valid (i.e. not very). It's good for a few laughs, though.

 

[DMagoh]

Well you work hard at giving the impression that you are ignorant,
most people here agree that the very idea of a God is ridiculous,
so for you to continue to argue that there is a God watching over
you is just asking to be called a fool.

The story of a God is just that, a story, it is not to be taken seriously,
try and imagine what you sound like to someone who thinks about things,
someone in the real world where things exist or don't exist,
fantasy land is for people with problems, people trying to escape from reality,
you sound like one of those people, you have accepted a story without really thinking about it,
I say that because that is the impression you give,
try saying the things you believe out load and see how ridiculous they sound,
these are not the thoughts and beliefs of a person with their feet on the ground are they?
they are the thoughts and beliefs of someone who lives in a dream world,
a world they would like to live in, and not the real world where they actually live.

There is no after life, no matter how much you hope there is,
we all wish things were better for us and it would be nice to think that this life is not all there is,
but unfortunately we live in the real world and we know things are not like that.

Like the other animals, we are born, we live and we die,
accept it and get on with your life, life is too short to spend it dreaming and wishing.

Just because we can imagine a thing, does not make it real, I imagine I'm good looking.

I really do feel sorry for you. You really think you are intelligent. Making fun of me makes you temporarily feel good. Makes you forget for a moment you have NO idea how the original matter/energy in the universe appeared. No clue. Not even a hint. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch. You are betting your whole eternity on what you DONT know. And yet you are so confident and arrogant about it.

 

[DMagoh]

So? He's still right, you're still wrong, and he still knows more about science than you do.

In your opinion. Which might make me sad if I really cared what you thought.

 

[TheGnome]

I really do feel sorry for you. You really think you are intelligent. Making fun of me makes you temporarily feel good. Makes you forget for a moment you have NO idea how the original matter/energy in the universe appeared. No clue. Not even a hint. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch. You are betting your whole eternity on what you DONT know. And yet you are so confident and arrogant about it.

The entire idea of an life after death is a baseless claim. What if God reward skepticism? Then you're screwed. You're so damn arrogant because somehow you chose the belief system that you didn't make up yourself, but you have no guarantee that someone else didn't make it up. It's equally plausible that you're going to hell because God punishes those who don't use the brain he gave them. What next? Your betting your eternity on empty claims, and that's probably making the real god very angry.