Dear Atheists/Non-Believers

He is fully interested in doing something that has already been done in a massive thread which covers this exact topic in extreme depth.

You are wrong on this. It is no more possible to falsify the statement of “God exists” than it is to falsify the statement of “Sorcerers exist” or “All light bulbs will burn out.”

Ding ding ding.

It’s possible to falsify the arguments. This is not a statement fallacy, the arguments are falsifiable.

Your welcome to not respond if you don’t want to talk about it. I had this conversation a million times on this forum. Many before the last one. Go look at those too…
And you cannot defend anything yourself, you need other people to do it for you.
You don’t know the difference between an argument for God’s existence and an argument for PSR you think they are the same and they are not.
At least twomajorslave is actually making claims and using his own mind.

So you’re telling me that the arguments supporting an unfalsifiable statement are falsifiable? Interesting…

I am not making a statement. I am saying there exists arguments, with premises which lead to a conclusion. If I were to simply say either “God exists” or “God does not exist”, then I have an unfalsifiable statement. If I say, If X is true, and Y is true, therefore Z is true, then you have a falsifiable argument. There are premises to the arguments that are falsifiable. Again, if you prove the premises false, then the argument is false and the conclusion is false.

Again, not stating a unfalsifiable statement but a falsifiable argument.

I understand what you’re saying.

1 Like

I appreciate that. I prefer friendly discussions if possible.

I’m merely pointing out that the forum has done this already the forum has done this with you being a huge part in it. You were wrong then and you couldn’t handle it. You have been pointed out as wrong in this thread when you claimed the existence of God has been proven.

You are adept at ignoring statements and arguments. We can see that from the thread I linked.

I have ZERO desire to walk the path of something we have already done because it is PLAINLY obvious nothing has changed in your arguments and you retain the inability to accept their logical holes.

It’s really not about defending anything. I cannot prove God doesn’t exist no one can.

And you beyond a shadow of a doubt as has already been shown by the thread I linked cannot prove his existence. You tried hard, you wouldn’t take no for an answer, you ducked dodged and changed the question but you COULD NOT DO IT. And everyone pointed it out to you that you could not.

You said the existence of God has been proven in this thread which is absolutely 100 percent bullshit as we have said in this thread. You walked it back of course and manipulated the statement but doesn’t make it any less false.

I’d like to add that your understanding of falsifiability is incorrect.

This is a falsifiable statement.

This is not.

Thats a pretty interesting question. I would say most of the time no, I don’t hope I am wrong. To put that in context no I have never hoped any one religion was true. I have at times hoped that our understanding of realty is so limited that there is meaning to life beyond what we see and some kind of adventure, existence or evolution beyond my death.

Yes this does mean that I largely expect my consciousness will end at death, and never exist in the future. And yes that is a sad and scary thought sometimes.

It also opens up the horrible possibility, given the inherent unfairness of life, that a person could experience nothing but pain and horror in a brief or long life, and that is all they will ever know…

But I also cannot see the upside to hoping my consciousnesses goes on and becomes eternal. That is such an incomprehensible existence for a human that I couldn’t honestly say if it is good or bad. We are inherently temporary and limited in our view of reality.

Just look at our best understanding of the universe and time as it stands. From a human perspective there is no such thing as the present. We are actually perpetually living in the past as we process reality slower than information feed into our brains.

We always experience things moving forward or one direction in time. But from a physical perspective, there is no reason to prefer one direction over the other. All time and space simply exists.

In that scenario you need only accept that a human consciousness is finite, but in a way we are eternal, because we always will exist in a given series of space-time locations, and taken as a finite lifetime within the bounds of the universe we will and always have existed as a part of that universe. Outside of the universe there would be no time and as a part of it we just exist within a portion of it. Accepting that I am finite is no harder than accepting that I occupy less physical space than a mountain.

When you pull back and realize that the way we experience time is limited you realize that eternity is fully removed from the concept of time. And all of time are just locations in the universe as part of space-time.

This is the kind of crazy rabbit hole the reality of our world sends you down once you know our modern understanding of physics.

It doesn’t make it any easier to accept that a loved one could be taken form me at any minute, and there is no getting them back. I sometimes envy those who are able to live in the comfort of knowing that is not the case. But at this point in life with what I think I know, I am incapable of accepting such a belief as an absolute as any religion would encourage me to do.

If I were to one day adopt a more hopeful or spiritual view that would maybe reunite me in death with a lost loved one, it wouldn’t come from any existing religion. I think every religion created by man is inherently flawed. The concept of offering fealty to an omnipotent being in exchange for access to a heavenly afterlife I think is wrong.

I will always think this idea is crazy. I may one day accept that our understanding of reality could be completely flawed and death doesn’t mean what we think it does.

Will I think all governments and religions are flawed I don’t discount that many have done a host of good things for us. I also see the harm they can cause. I also don’t discount that religion has saved a lot of people, some of whom are friends, from falling into complete despair and hopelessness trying to find a meaning to life.

2 Likes

I’m a believer, but I just wanted to let you know that I enjoyed reading your thoughtful post. The part about time and eternity particularly. Everything in our human experience is so very finite and temporary.

I liked the way you put this.

1 Like

Which you were wrong about. You confused an argument about causation (a.k.a. PSR) to be one about God and it wasn’t. And if you don’t want to talk about it, then quit talking about it. You want to point out I screwed up an argument about PSR 3-4 years ago and I conceded that I screwed it up. So you have made your point, but you cannot tell the difference between an argument for PSR and an argument for the existence of God. So I have to posit that you are not capable of thinking for yourself.

You certainly wouldn’t know, you don’t understand the topic at all even at a basic level. Second, I never made that claim, I the claim I made is that the arguments for God’s existence have never been refuted. That IS 100% true. That doesn’t mean that people haven’t tried nor that their is a consensus about God’s existence, but the arguments remain unrefuted. People have objected, but that does not equal refutation. But clearly you cannot understand the difference between a potential objection and a refutation.

If you don’t want to talk about it, then quit wasting my time with something that happen 3-4 years ago about something that is not what you think or said it was. You even pasted the actual argument and you could not recognize that there was not the slightest mention about God in that. It was a poor argument, so what? I messed one up in 17 years… Whooptie do.

If it were a statement alone, then that be would be problem. Again, it’s a falsifiable argument, not a statement. Either statement is falsifiable in the context of an argument.
However, if we were dealing with statements, yes you are right, the prior is falsifiable that latter is not.

I don’t think that’s scary at all. If there be nothing beyond, then nothing really matters. You will not suffer nor be joyful, you won’t be at all. To me, that’s escape velocity for morality. I can be completely selfish and it won’t matter in the end. Does that mean I think I would be a worse person if I thought the way you do? I cannot say. I can say sustainable goodness vs. immediate gratification would be a much closer contest. I think nothingness in the beyond is an attractive position. I can do what I want and it won’t matter in the end, if the end be the absolute end.

No you said in this thread the existence of God has been proven. You deleted it apparently but you said it. Multiple people responded to it. As usual when called out on your bullshit you change the subject or in this case hide the evidence.

You backed off the claim after you said it. You tend to do that when you say something and then get proven wrong. Then you change the discussion.

So really it’s not messing up one argument in 17 years (that is an insanely egotistical statement but we have to consider who said it). It’s messing up the same thing over and over and over again. And then presenting the same thing. Maybe changing some words. And saying still right.

And already going down the path of not having a clue what you’re talking about as two jar pointed out.

If you don’t want to waste time with what happened in that thread stop trying to say the same thing here.

But no Pat said the existence of God has been proven and then said I never said that. Actually you did sir and I would think a holy wannabe Christian wouldn’t be such an out and out liar. You deleting it and then pretending it wasn’t a statement you made is ludicrous. You haven’t changed one bit is the reason to bring up that massive thread.

Unreal. No wonder SMH had to say about 4,000 times in that thread he was done with you unless you would discuss his argument. You ran and danced away just like deleting your words in this thread. Because once again you said something realized you couldn’t possibly defend it and then said something else. (In this case pretended you didn’t say it).

This thread is a joke.

LOL! You think I went deleted a post?? To “cover my tracks”? You can search the thread. Ask the moderator if I deleted any posts… Now that’s just desperate, dude.

No, all I did was clarify people’s confusion on what I was saying. That philosophical arguments, or proofs does not mean a consensus, meaning that everybody agrees.

That the arguments for God’s existence are in fact proofs. Separating the idea that there is a consensus on the existence of God vs. philosophical proofs. I call them “proofs” because that’s what they happen to be called. A valid, solid logical argument is a proof.

So actually, yes in one sense God existence has been proven in the sense that proofs, valid of God’s existence exist. That doesn’t mean that everybody agrees. I guessing you don’t understand the difference, but go nuts. Search the thread, because you will see I used the word ‘proven’, meaning in the philosophical sense.

And yet your still here and all your posts are to me and about me and not about the topic… I think deep down inside, you actually love me, or lust me. :wink:

You deleted a statement. Now you are changing one. Walking that one back now as well. Not sure if you deleted a full post but you deleted what you said that people replied to.

And actually as proven BY THE THREAD THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LINKED your arguments haven’t ever been sound logically. Unreal.

“The existence of God has been proven.”

Everyone else- No it hasn’t.

“What no I didn’t mean proven as in we can prove that God’s exists!”

Your ability to say something completely wrong and then try to walk it back as something else is uncanny. I DOUBT you can make it as many times as you did in the SMH thread because you had thousands of words of that but you are good at it.

You aren’t good at making arguments. You are good at dodging them, shifting the burden of proof, and manipulating them. 17 years of experience or something. And you are good at deleting something you’ve said so you don’t have to defend it.

And you are right the issue is with me. I have a problem that when I see complete bullshit being repeated I usually can’t just ignore it. I need to do better as you will continue doing what you always have and thinking you will change is really dumb. I’ve become SMH in that thread begging you to actually respond to his posts when you wouldn’t. He was wasting his time and so am I.

I have not deleted anything nor have I manipulated a thing, period. I have only edited typos when I have made them. If you continue to accuse me of deleting or hiding posts I will flag yours.
You can call me names, make fun of my mom, or whatever other middle school activity you may be into. I won’t stand for being libelously accused of lying about my postings.

And wasting mine (and that’s my fault). Again, you haven’t spent a second on the topic, all you have done is talk about me. Don’t tell me I am wasting your time, your the one who chose to spend all your time on me. Anytime wasted on me is your own fault, nobody else has their panties in a bunch about me. And they actually talk about the topic being discussed, not the people discussing it.