DisIllusion
2nd December 2005, 04:33
Well, if he's going to go straight for the jugular by talking about hot button topics like abortion, death penalty etc. Just stick with your Marxist opinions. It's probably safer to basically go one way, (i.e. don't go from uber conservative on one topic and then go to liberal on another) otherwise they will definitely capitalize on those inconsistencies.
If you're serious about debating them, then just read up a bit, refresh your memory on whwat you believe, and go out there and show them what you've got comrade.
redstar2000
2nd December 2005, 09:26
May I suggest that you could surely find more enjoyable ways to waste your time than attending a superstitious "discussion group"?
Unless, of course, they are discussing the "best way to burn a witch", "stone an adulteress", or "kill a disobedient child".
You know, the real stuff. :lol:
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif
Publius
3rd December 2005, 18:03
I would reccomend these as well: http://www.infidelguy.com/article313.html
Start off by asking them for their assumptions, for example, for the first argument, ask them if God is perfect. They say yes. Ask them if he created the Universe. They say yes, then unleash the rest of the argument.
These will aboslutely kill them.
A collection of arguments challenging God belief and other unproven concepts.
THE PERFECTION-vs.-CREATION ARGUMENT
1.) If God exists, then he is perfect..
2.) If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3.) A perfect being can have no needs or wants.
4.) If any being created the universe, then he must have had some need or want.
5.) Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe (from 3 and 4).
6.) Hence, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5). - Theodore M. Drange
ON GOD'S JUSTICE AND MERCY
1.) If God exists, then he is an all-just judge.
2.) If God exists, then he is an all-merciful judge.
3.) An all-just judge treats every offender with exactly the severity that he/she deserves.
4.) An all-merciful judge treats every offender with less severity than he/she deserves.
5.) It is impossible to treat an offender both with exactly the severity that he/she deserves and also with less severity than he/she deserves.
6.) Hence, it is impossible for an all-just judge to be an all-merciful judge (from 3-5).
7.) Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 6). - A construct of one of Dan Barker's arguments. Rewritten by Theodore M. Drange.
ON GOD'S IMMUTABILITY - Unchangingness
1.) If God exists, then he is immutable.
2.) If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3.) An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4.) For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5.) Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6.) Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5) - Theodore M. Drange
PERFECTION/CREATION INCOHERENCE ARGUMENT
1.) God, by definition, is a perfect being.
2.) God, by definition, deliberately created the universe.
3.) So, if God were to exist, then he would be a perfect being who deliberately created something.
4.) To be perfect, one cannot have any needs or wants.
5.) To deliberately create something, one must have at least one need or want.
6.) Thus, it is impossible for a perfect being to deliberately create anything.
7.) Therefore, God cannot exist. - Theodore M. Drange
(Comments: P4 could be denied, however once we look at what the definition of what perfection is the argument holds: Perfection: 'The quality or state of being perfect or complete, so that nothing requisite is wanting.. entire development, consummate culture, skill, or moral excellence...' - Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.)
ON GOD`S JEALOUSY
1.) "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2.) "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3.) "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
4.) The Christian god cannot logically exist. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
Comments: You see, this is the problem, God cannot be jealous. Be he is. Yahweh cannot possibly exist if he has both the attributes of love and jealousy.)
ON THE BODY OF CHRIST
1.) God’s flesh was known as Jesus.
2.) Jesus, God's Flesh, died at the cross.
2.) Flesh & Blood cannot enter into Heaven per (1 Cor. 15:50-56)
3.) Jesus was Flesh.
4.) Jesus no longer exists. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
(Many at this point will state that the spirit lives on so therefore Jesus lives. This really depends on what you believe about Jesus. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh? If Jesus is merely the son there is no problem. However, if Jesus “is” God himself, we do. You see, Jesus is called Jesus because of the attribute of Flesh. If Jesus = God (who is spirit) then the entity known as Jesus ceases to exist. The flesh/body of Jesus, no longer exists and the spirit of God is still the unchanging spirit of God. No Jesus at that point. The Flesh, called Jesus, is dead. - IG
And for those that don't believe Paul was talking about Flesh & Blood literally (Fallen Man) please refer to the Greek meaning of Flesh.)
EVIL IS GOOD?
1.) God is good all of the time.
2.) Everything that God creates is good. Amen?
3.) God created evil according to Isaiah 45:7. (look it up)
4.) Evil is good. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
ARGUMENT FROM THE SELF
1.) If God exists, he is omnipresent (occupying all space).
2.) Since God occupies all space, past, present, and future, there is nothing that is NOT God.
3.) God therefore, cannot have a sense of the independent self.
4.) Since God has no sense of the self or non-self, he cannot have a consciousness.
5.) In conclusion, God cannot have a mind and would resemble nothing more than the non-conscious Universe. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
Comments: Of course P3 could be denied if one believes the human mind is somehow not part of Gods. This argument is more designed for those that believe that God is ALL things.(Which is the typical theist I encounter).
ON GOD BEING ATEMPORAL
1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.
2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.
3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.
4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator the Universe. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
Comments: (This is explained and discussed more HERE.)
ON LOVE & HELL
1.) God's love is superlative.
2.) God's love of man exceeds man's love of self.
3.) Man's love of self prohibits torture.
4.) Considering God's greater love for us, Hell (eternal torture) is illogical. - Hank & Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
ON HELL
1.) God is all-knowing.
2.) Before I was born God knew I wouldn’t believe in him.
3.) I was born to go to Hell. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
Comments: (Sure you may say I have a choice, but I think I`ve proven already that I really don`t. I`m simply fulfilling the will of God by being an atheist aren`t I? If I`m not, I shouldn`t exist: For God would have known that before I was created that I wouldn`t believe in him.)
ON THE GARDEN OF EDEN
1.) God is omniscient (all knowing)
2.) God knew that before he created man that they would eat of the tree of knowledge.
3.) God placed the tree of knowledge in the Garden anyway.
4.) God wanted sin to enter the world. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
Comments: (If God didn`t want sin to enter the world, why create Adam and Eve at all? He knew what would happen. Why place the forbidden trees in the Garden in the first place?)
ANOTHER ATEMPORAL ARGUMENT
1.) God is an atemporal being.
2.) God is all aware.
3.) God then would be aware of the passage of time.
4.) The passage of anything is change from one instance to another.
5.) God is not an a temporal being. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
ON MAN'S FREEWILL
1.) God has an unchangeable plan for everything past, present & future.
2.) Everything that occurs past, present and future will be part of God's unchanging plan.
3.) Thoughts and actions occur and are part of God's unchanging plan.
4.) Thoughts and actions cannot be anything other than what God has planned.
5.) Free-will doesn't exist. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
FREEWILL ARGUMENT FOR THE NONEXISTENCE OF GOD
1.) The Christian God is a personal being and is omniscient.
2.) Personal beings have free will.(according to most Christians)
3.) To have freewill, a personal being must be able to make a choice.
4.) A being who knows everything can have no "state of uncertainty". It knows its choices in advance.
5.) God has no potential to avoid its choices, and therefore has no free will.
6.) Since a being that lacks free will is not a personal being, a personal being who knows everything cannot exist.
7.) Therefore, the Christian God does not exist. - a syllogistic view of Dan Barker's F.A.N.G
INFALLIBLE KNOWLEDGE / FREEWILL ARGUMENT
1.) God knows infallibly what will occur in the Universe before it occurs.
2.) God can’t change the future because he knows everything absolutely.
3.) God has no Free-will. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
ON PRAYER
1.) Prayer is sometimes used to ask God to change a situation in one's life or anothers.
2.) God has a divine plan that cannot be changed.
3.) Prayer cannot be used to change any situation. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
(Prayer may make you feel better emotionally, but it doesn`t change God`s mind.)
THE MORAL-KNOWLEGDE ARGUMENT FOR ATHEISM
1.) If God exists, then he is a being who is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent.
2.) If God exists, it would be in God's interest and within his capacity for all human beings to know his ethics perfectly.
3.) All human beings do not know God's ethics perfectly, which is shown by their disagreeing about many moral values.
4.) Probably, God does not exist. - Niclas Berggren
(If one disagrees with P2, why would God NOT realize this option? "We could imagine two scenarios. First, a God which shows favoritism in the sense that he reveals his ethics only to some, or in the sense that he reveals it to a higher extent to some than to others. But this would be inconsistent with our assumption of benevolence, since such favoritism would imply that God cares more about some than about others (where knowledge of God's ethics must be considered a good, from the point of view of a benevolent God). (And in the Christian case, it is explicitly stated in Acts 10:34: "Then Peter began to speak: 'I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism'." (NIV)) Second, we could imagine God spreading a limited knowledge of his ethics in equal proportions to all of humanity. But (i) what could possibly be the point in such a self-imposed limitation of spreading something which, from the point of view of the benevolent God, must be considered a good? and (ii) this can hardly be the case, since not all people agree normatively on any issue of ethics (and if my point (ii) is disputed, the burden of proof is on the person claiming that there is such agreement - and this has not been shown)." - Niclas Berggren
ARGUMENT FROM MORAL IGNORANCE
1.) If God exists, it is probably the case that all sentient beings whose behavior God considers morally significant have extremely good knowledge of correct moral judgments.
2.) If God exists, he considers humans' behavior morally significant.
3.) Humans are sentient beings.
4.) If God exists, it is probably the case that humans have extremely good knowledge of correct moral judgments.
5.) Humans do not have extremely good knowledge of correct moral judgments.
6.) Probably, God does not exist.- Cole Mitchell: Adapted from Niclas Berggren's "On the Nature of Morality".
ARGUMENT FROM MORAL PARITY
1.) If God exists, rational theists are probably noticeably morally superior to rational atheists, on average.
2.) Rational theists are not noticeably morally superior to rational atheists, on average.
3.) Probably, God does not exist. - Paul Draper
ARGUMENT FOR NON-BELIEF ASSUMING THE CHRISTIAN GOD EXISTS
1.) The Christian God wants all men to know he exists so that they can be saved and go to Heaven.
2.) The Christian God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and omnibenevolent.
3.) The Christian God knows what sufficient evidences he can provide to convince all men of his existence.
4.) Not all men are convinced of God's existence.
5.) The Christian God chooses to not provide sufficient evidence to convince all men that he exists.
6.) Therefore, The Christian God wants non-believers to exist.
NOTE: Atheists are non-Christians so this argument can be used to argue for atheism as well. [1] can be argued against on the outset, however, if one argues against this position, this would mean that God creates people just to go to hell. Doesn't sound like an all-good God to me. Most Calvinists will not have a problem with this or JW's, however, many Christians will find this disturbing. A typical rebuttle would be that God wishes for you to choose him freely. So he wants you to believe, but providing incontrovertible evidence would negate faith. Which God requires. The problem with this argument of course is that all religions have faith. So faith alone cannot lead people to the "right" God. Surely a God would know this. If so, he wants atheists to exist.
ARGUMENT FOR ATHEISM ASSUMING GOD EXISTS
1.) If the Christian God exists, everything that exists is part of his perfect, divine plan.
2.) Atheists exist.
3.) So, atheists are a part of God's perfect plan.
4.) Therefore, God wants atheists to exist. - Moloth
ARGUMENT FROM JUDGEMENT
1.) If the Christian God exists, he will judge all men one day.
2.) At judgement, atheists will learn the truth, that there is a God.
3.) It follows then that God has the power to reveal himself to atheists in a manner of which they cannot deny his existence.
4.) It follows from that, that God hasn't revealed himself to current atheists in a manner of which they cannot deny his existence, yet.
5.) Atheism is a tenable position. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
(A counter argument is to state that God requires that we have faith. One would think that surely God would be intelligent enough to know that faith would not be a viable option to the atheist or even the non-christian to believe in him (Yahweh). He would therefore have to provide evidence if he wants us to accept him as a reality. If he doesn't, then it's on God, right?)
ON SPIRITS
1.) Spirits are not physical entities.
2.) Brains are physical entities.
3.) Past experiences are stored in our physical brains, we call that, Memory..
4.) Injury can damage portions of the physical brain that store memory and can alter or erase memories completely.
5.) If human spirits exist... after death, spirits can have no memory. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
[Note: Some will say the spirit stores physical memories as well, but if true, the spirit would have to be physical at least to a degree. How could a non-physical spirit store, physical memories?]
ON SATAN FOOLING US - Evidence of Evolution
1.) God is omniscient (all knowing).
2.) God knew that before Creating Satan, that Satan would trick people with fossils and other evidence for evolution.
3.) God created Satan anyway.
4.) God wants, at least some, people to be tricked into believing in the evidences for evolution.
5.) It's logical to not believe in "divine creation". - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
(This is a response to those that seriously believe Satan created fossils and that all of the sciences that support evolution are twisted by Satan. In regards to Divine Creation I am responding to the story of Adam and Eve.)
OMNISCIENCE-HUMAN EXPERIENCE INCOMPATIBILITY ARGUMENT
1.) Fear is a feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger. (The American Heritage® Dictionary: 2000)
2.) If God exists, God cannot feel agitated, anxious or feel endangered.
3.) Since God cannot experience fear, he cannot know what it's like to fear, therefore not all-knowing. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr.
(Some would claim that it is against God's nature to be afraid. Exactly, then he cannot be omniscient. There are at least some things for which he is completely ignorant of. Stating that it's against his nature is a cop-out and a concession simultaneously.)
ON FAITH
1.) A prerequisite to believe in a Faith is faith.
2.) Having faith is all that is required to accept a Faith (belief) as true.
3.) All Faiths are true. - Reginald V. Finley, Sr
(Of course all Faiths aren`t true, but this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from a person that states that, 'Through faith one can know God.')
And one of my own creation:
1. God is perfect.
2. A perfect being can only create perfect things (If the perfect being created something that wasn't perfect, he then wouldn't be perfect. For example, a perfect writer has to write perfect stories. If he wrote one that wasn't perfect, he wouldn't be a perfect author).
3. God created humans
4. Humans aren't perfect.
5. Therefore, a perfect God doesn't exist.
6. If God isn't perfect, why than believe in him? Does he even exist? Can he even exist?
This is sort of an amalgamation of a few of the others.
Basically, how can a perfect God do imperfect things? God has contradicted himself in the Bible, reversed his own actions and actually made mistakes.
Ownthink
3rd December 2005, 18:52
1. God is perfect.
2. A perfect being can only create perfect things (If the perfect being created something that wasn't perfect, he then wouldn't be perfect. For example, a perfect writer has to write perfect stories. If he wrote one that wasn't perfect, he wouldn't be a perfect author).
3. God created humans
4. Humans aren't perfect.
5. Therefore, a perfect God doesn't exist.
6. If God isn't perfect, why than believe in him? Does he even exist? Can he even exist?
I use these all the time! I didn't know other people used the exact same arguments, like the "God can't be perfect because he created an imperfect thing - humans."
Such a shame though, they will just belt out some shit about "free will" and ignore the question.
Intifada
3rd December 2005, 20:13
Much, too much mental masturbation.
No.
Either you are reluctant for your views to be challenged, or you are too ignorant to engage your brain - if, of course, you possess one.
Go to church and have fun
You can only have fun in church if you are challenging the views of it's superstitious followers.
It beats sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games which is what the majority of the people on this board here do with their Sunday mornings.
Church is not better than sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games.
Capitalist Lawyer
3rd December 2005, 20:40
You can only have fun in church if you are challenging the views of it's superstitious followers.
Nobody likes to be around a boorish, loud-mouth, know-it-all...so sit down and shut up.
Church is not better than sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games.
Maybe in the eyes of degenerate, adolescent pot heads like yourself.
When you reach adulthood, you might see things in a different perspective.
Ownthink
3rd December 2005, 20:51
Originally posted by Capitalist
[email protected] 3 2005, 03:51 PM
You can only have fun in church if you are challenging the views of it's superstitious followers.
Nobody likes to be around a boorish, loud-mouth, know-it-all...so sit down and shut up.
Church is not better than sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games.
Maybe in the eyes of degenerate, adolescent pot heads like yourself.
When you reach adulthood, you might see things in a different perspective.
You sound like a grumpy discontent middle aged prick who is jealous that kids get to smoke pot and play video games.
Go tell it to your priest.
Intifada
3rd December 2005, 21:08
Nobody likes to be around a boorish, loud-mouth, know-it-all
I suppose you must be a lonely little man then?
Maybe in the eyes of degenerate, adolescent pot heads like yourself.
Hmm.
Quite obviously you know nothing of me as a person.
When you reach adulthood, you might see things in a different perspective.
Dude, any sane and rational person would see that religion is for dumbasses... like yourself.
Amusing Scrotum
3rd December 2005, 22:40
Go to church and have fun. It beats sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games which is what the majority of the people on this board here do with their Sunday mornings.
Do we sit, play video games and smoke pot all at the same time.
It is actually quite hard to smoke substances while using your hands for other things. The smoke goes in your eyes, you burn your chair etc.
Anyway, what is so fun about Church?
When you reach adulthood, you might see things in a different perspective.
How do you define adulthood? ....I am 18, which means in the eyes of the law I am an adult and I don't want to spend my Sunday mornings in Church.
STI
6th December 2005, 21:31
Originally posted by Capitalist
[email protected] 3 2005, 08:51 PM
Maybe in the eyes of degenerate, adolescent pot heads like yourself.
When you reach adulthood, you might see things in a different perspective.
Tell that to all the adults who don't go to church because....
.... here it comes...
they don't believe in it!
Yes, it's possible! Tough to believe, I know, but some full-grown adults are atheists, and most of them would probably have a much better time smoking pot and playing videogames than going to church.
I wonder if you've had enough experience of either to make a fair assessment. I know I have, and the choice is clear.
Getting stoned and saving the world from aliens is way more fun than sitting in an uncomfortable pew and singing lousy songs.
STI
8th December 2005, 20:31
Originally posted by Capitalist
[email protected] 8 2005, 06:51 PM
Church is fucking boring.
Sitting around, smoking pot and playing video games is boring.
Perhaps some Ritalin can help you with your little attention problem.
If you don't like it, I don't really care. That's the thing: I'm so overflowing with complete uncaring for what you do or don't enjoy that I'd never seriously comment on any aspect of your personal life.
I guess the feeling isn't mutual, though. :wub:
Let's marry and have crazy gay sex just to piss off Capitalist Lawyer, as he is an idiot who probably doesn't like gays too much. We can then smoke some pot and play some video games on a Sunday while he is in church and he can get angry at us.
Come on, itt'l be great.
No need to "Come on" me, I've already filled out my half of the marriage license application.
You can move up here with me, it's legal now. Nya Nya CL!
We win and you lose!'
Eat it.
Ownthink
8th December 2005, 20:38
Originally posted by
[email protected] 8 2005, 03:31 PM
Let's marry and have crazy gay sex just to piss off Capitalist Lawyer, as he is an idiot who probably doesn't like gays too much. We can then smoke some pot and play some video games on a Sunday while he is in church and he can get angry at us.
Come on, itt'l be great.
No need to "Come on" me, I've already filled out my half of the marriage license application.
You can move up here with me, it's legal now. Nya Nya CL!
We win and you lose!'
Eat it.
So, when does the sex, pot smoking, and blatant disregard for churches and CL pissing off start?
:lol:
STI
8th December 2005, 21:36
Originally posted by Ownthink+Dec 8 2005, 08:38 PM--> (Ownthink @ Dec 8 2005, 08:38 PM)
[email protected] 8 2005, 03:31 PM
Let's marry and have crazy gay sex just to piss off Capitalist Lawyer, as he is an idiot who probably doesn't like gays too much. We can then smoke some pot and play some video games on a Sunday while he is in church and he can get angry at us.
Come on, itt'l be great.
No need to "Come on" me, I've already filled out my half of the marriage license application.
You can move up here with me, it's legal now. Nya Nya CL!
We win and you lose!'
Eat it.
So, when does the sex, pot smoking, and blatant disregard for churches and CL pissing off start?
:lol: [/b]
How long will it take you to get to my place?
Make sure you bring 25 bucks to throw down for a quarter :P
PS: Maybe we should pop some Ritalin like CL suggested. It's like a softer version of speed for adults!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.