Dinowhat?

[VehementiDominus]

My, my -- you must deal only in extremes then.

With that attitude, no one would have went looking for Amelia Earhart or Judge Crater.

In both cases, was there not a reasonable chance they were still alive?

People have gone missing and been found before. Equally, there was no conclusive evidence that they were dead, so there was still reasonable doubt that they were dead. Either way, I don't see what that has to do with anything...

 

[VehementiDominus]

Can you prove God does not exist?

Fail.

Can you prove Allah does not exist? Can you prove Quetzalcoatl does not exist? Can you prove Brahman does not exist? Can you prove Zeus does not exist? Can you prove Ra does not exist? Can you prove the dragon in my garden does not exist?

Of course not. If I made the claim that they do exist, you'd expect me to provide evidence to support it. You'd be under no obligation to prove they don't.

The burden of proof lays on your shoulders, it's you making the positive claim that God does not exist. Your position requires evidence, not mine. My position is the rejection of your position, the default position.

If you believe in God simply because you can't prove he doesn't exist, then why don't you believe in the infinate possibilities of things that can't be proven to not exist? Elves? Orcs? The Death Star? Tyranids? The one horned, one eyed, flying purple people eater? The tentacled horror with 15 eyes that devours planets whole that I just made up?

You can't prove any of them don't exist, yet to claim they do would be utter stupidity, with a pinch of gulliability and a modicum of mental illness. Why is your God any different?

 

[Doveaman]

Can you prove God does not exist?

Of course not.

So you don't know for a fact that He doesn't exist.

 

[VehementiDominus]

So you don't know for a fact that He doesn't exist.

No, nor do I don't know for a fact Cthulu doesn't exist. I don't know for a fact the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. I don't know for a fact that the Millenium Falcon doesn't exist. I don't know for a fact Quetzalcoatl doesn't exist. I don't know for a fact that Odin doesn't exist.

I have no more reason to believe in the existence of your God than I have to believe in the existence of anything mentioned above and neither do you.

I'm just a lot less gulliable.

 

[Zalman]

Do you believe in eternal life after death for the faithful?

Sure. But I'm not sure that involves striding up to some old dude in a white beard, shaking his hand and saying, "nice to see ya, Lord!" I don't think the King of the Universe is quite so... "3-d".

 

[Doveaman]

I have no more reason to believe in the existence of your God than I have to believe in the existene of anything mentioned above

Fair enough. I have no reason to believe you are correct about my God since you have no proof He doesn't exist.

and neither do you.

How can you know that?

 

[Zalman]

Well, then, proving the "human soul" exists, beyond reasonable doubt, would be a good first step towards proving God exists.

To paraphrase the Lubavitcher Rebbe, belief in God involves recognizing that "inner spark" within you, that exists on a plane above time and space, which cannot bear to be severed from its Source for even a moment, as the threat of separation from God is always utter and absolute, which threat inspires repentance.

If you don't believe you have a soul, there's nothing I can do to convince you.

 

[Zalman]

Have a good day.

Didn't mean to offend, just pointing out what seems to me to be the logical conclusion of this way of thinking. If I'm wrong, I'll gladly accept correction.

 

[Doveaman]

Sure. But I'm not sure that involves striding up to some old dude in a white beard

Does it involve urinating? Will you need to use a urinal for eternity?

 

[Zalman]

Does it involve urinating? Will you need to use a urinal for eternity?

I'm quite certain that the World to Come does not involve micturation. That's really my point.

 

[VehementiDominus]

Fair enough. I have no reason to believe you are correct about my God since you have no proof He doesn't exist.

I think you misunderstand.

Your position is "I believe God exists!", correct?

My position is a rejection of that position. "I do not believe that God exists." not "I believe God does not exist.".

Your position is the positive one; you're making the positive claim. I'm rejecting that claim on the grounds that there's absolutely no logical or rational reason to accept that God exists.

And stop saying "You have no proof he doesn't exist." I've JUST shown you how ridiculous that is. Of course I don't have evidence he doesn't exist, but if you're going to use that as a reason to believe he does exist, then, well, you'd best start believing in the one horned, one eyed, flying purple people eater, too, because I don't have any evidence that it doesn't exist, either.

How can you know that?

You may have a reason to believe in God, but it's not rational, it's not reasonable and it certainly isn't evidence-based. It's most likely the result of gulliability, delusion or the inability to think critically and rationalise.

 

[Doveaman]

I'm quite certain that the World to Come does not involve micturation. That's really my point.

Will you still have a urinary bladder, hands, fingers, a back, a face, etc?

 

[Zalman]

You may have a reason to believe in God, but it's not rational, it's not reasonable and it certainly isn't evidence-based. It's most likely the result of gulliability, delusion or the inability to think critically and rationalise.

Well, what you have come to know as "rational" is really no more than a way of thinking developed during the Enlightenment, which is an empiricist, positivist, reductionist philosophy. Not even Newton applied the "scientific method" to every facet of human existence. If you limit the sphere of human experience to what can be seen under a microscope, and reproduced experimentally, sure, that's going to be your Weltanschauung.

But you have to ask yourself, why is that your world view to begin with? Why did you choose to structure your perception that way?

Let's start with the mere fact of your own consciousness. Is there anything empirical about that?

 

[Zalman]

Will you still have a urinary bladder, hands, fingers, a back, a face, etc?

Nope.

 

[Doveaman]

My position is a rejection of that position. "I do not believe that God exists." not "I believe God does not exist.".

So you have no reason to believe God exist and you have no reason to believe He does not exist.

You may have a reason to believe in God, but it's not rational, it's not reasonable and it certainly isn't evidence-based.

How can you know that?

 

[Doveaman]

Nope.

What will you be then? A cloud of eternal smoke?

 

[VehementiDominus]

But you have to ask yourself, why is that your world view to begin with? Why did you choose to structure your perception that way?

Because it's the best and most efficient way we currently have to know the accuracy of a statement.

Let's start with the mere fact of your own consciousness. Is there anything empirical about that?

Electrical impulses passing through synaptic pathways resulting in - and caused by - chemical reactions.

 

[Doveaman]

Electrical impulses passing through synaptic pathways resulting in - and caused by - chemical reactions.

Can you demonstrate consciousness being produced this way? And intelligence?

 

[VehementiDominus]

Can you demonstrate consciousness being produced this way? And intelligence?

Brain scan allows unconscious patient to communicate : Nature News

Even when the body is unresponsive, the brain can process thought and respond to stimuli.

As soon as the brain dies, their consciousness goes with it.

 

[VehementiDominus]

So you have no reason to believe God exist and you have no reason to believe He does not exist.
How can you know that?

I already answered this.

Post has been deleted for some reason (I'm willing to bet because you flagged it.), not that it matters, because I was basically repeating myself for the 8th time, because you seem incapable of comprehending what I'm saying. Whether that's voluntary or not remains to be seen.