| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Open Forums for ExChristian.Net > Old Board > Proof of Gods Existence |
| Posted by: sexkitten Oct 12 2004, 12:18 PM |
| Printable Version of Topic Click here to view this topic in its original format ExChristian.Net Open Forums > Debating with Christians > Proof Of Gods Existance Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 20 2003, 08:22 PM Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God Posted by: Redshift Nov 20 2003, 11:32 PM You're going to wait a long time. I doubt that anyone here is interested in disproving god. It's impossible to prove a universal negative. I do however think that the Christian bible does a pretty good job of disproving itself. Posted by: SuicydeAlley Nov 20 2003, 11:49 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 20 2003, 09:22 PM) Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God It is ironic, I have never met anyone online or in real life that ever believed they could disprove the christian god. I have met a lot who believe they prove it all the time. Still have not seen their proof though. IXOYE777: How about you take a stab at it. Hell, I'll even make you a deal. You prove there is a christian god.... beyond that shadow of doubt and the "Well... I just know that I know that I know it" routine, and I will personally carve a tunnel thru my chest cavity with a spork and pull out my ever so beating heart and feed it to the dogs. lmfao....now isn't that a paradox for a christian...... "If I prove there is god beyond a doubt, I personally commit manslaughter...." Posted by: _Abe Froman Nov 21 2003, 01:49 AM I can tell you about one of the more recent proofs against any god I have heard recently. I can tell you right now that the Christian God is fairly easy to disprove, as long as one accepts that the Christian God follows logic (ie. it cannot simultaneously have mutually exclusive attributes, example: a married bachelor). You want to disprove the Christian God? Ask me how in 10 easy steps! Anyways, the proof I heard recently works against a deistic god or intelligent designer type god, not necessarily the ridiculous and impossible Christian God. Basically you can work a creationists reasoning against them: Creationists/Intelligent design Advocate will bring up the old argument that when you find a wrist watch in the desert, there must be a designer. Such complicated structures could not come from chance. Of course they are right. Complicated structures do not arise from chance and they do need a designer. What creationists do not understand that complex design does not require intelligence. Natural selection is an extremely powerful designer, probably the most powerful designer of all. Today, evolutionary algorithms are used for many projects. I should know, I am a computer programmer, and I have worked with programs that use evolution and genetic algorithms to produce EXTREMELY powerful solutions. As powerful or more powerful than human beings could think of on their own with all of our brain power. Natural selection is not random chance, not even close. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, is 'smarter' than we are. Where is this all going? Well creationists claim that complex structures require a designer. Evolutionary scientist agree. But God, as a powerful and omnipotent being is about as complex of a structure as is imaginable. So lets see what is more likely: - The uninverse started naturally with extremely simple structures (helium and hydrogen atoms) and slowly, with the help of natural selection and other natural factors created the complexity we see today. The big bang theory says this almost exactly. - Somehow, an extremely powerful and complex being came into existence, with no designer, from absolutely nothing, to create the universe. Well we all know that a watch in the desert requires a designer. Who the hell designed God??? How can a complex structure such as God just appear? What is a more reasonable hypothesis: The universe started in a simple manner and slowly gained complexity through KNOWN and REPRODUCABLE processes. or An extremely complex being who either sprang into existence or always existed, created the universe for some reason known only to itself. We all know that complex structures just do not spring into existence.... I cannot even think of any ways that would make the God hypothesis reasonable. It just does not fly. Can anyone see how the God hypothesis could be more likely than the naturally explanation for the beginning of the universe? I sure cannot... Posted by: Redshift Nov 21 2003, 02:10 AM Here's a fairly simple challenge for you: If God is good and God created everything, why is there such a thing as evil? Posted by: Consummate Deist Nov 21 2003, 08:20 AM QUOTE Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God Why should I wish to disprove the existence of God, I am a Deist (oh sorry, I forgot you're a Christ Cultist - that word means that I believe in a God) and believe in the Creator. I just find your mythology to be stupid, unbelieveable, ludicrous, and false! Before you challenge a debate do the following: 1. Learn to spell 2. Learn sentence structure 3. Study Logic and Philosophy 4. Study the total history of the Christ Cult. 5. Get refresher courses at Apologetics U. After you do those (and grow up a little) come back and maybe we will talk to you..... Posted by: AggieNostic Nov 21 2003, 08:29 AM God is not a testable hypothesis, so one cannot go about trying to prove it, let alone disprove it. You might as well be asking someone to disprove Zeus. Posted by: AggieNostic Nov 21 2003, 08:36 AM Such a debate has to start with a concrete and inclusive definition of "God," describing any and all attributes that can be tested. Otherwise, the debate is pointless and you'll get frustrated as the God Theorist re-defines their deity on-the-fly, making it an elusive subject to verify. I have found most debates on the existence of a deity to be a waste of time. Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 21 2003, 08:47 AM Challenge: Disprove that Allah isn't the true god. Posted by: pitchu Nov 21 2003, 10:28 AM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 20 2003, 08:22 PM) Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God Challenge anyone who believes they can prove that Ixoye 777 believes in a god-concept. Faith and proof are mutually exclusive. Posted by: SuicydeAlley Nov 21 2003, 10:30 AM QUOTE (AggieNostic @ Nov 21 2003, 09:36 AM) Such a debate has to start with a concrete and inclusive definition of "God," describing any and all attributes that can be tested. Otherwise, the debate is pointless and you'll get frustrated as the God Theorist re-defines their deity on-the-fly, making it an elusive subject to verify. I have found most debates on the existence of a deity to be a waste of time. Aggie, I agree. The hardest thing debating god is that no one will define who god is to them before the debate. I have found myself debating people who are talking about the xtian god while I am referring to a deistic one. Or visa versa. The ambiguous lable of simply 'God' does not cover it. So many 'others' can be wrapped up in that lable. It is frustrating to say the least. Takes a person half an hour agreeing on what fucking god they're talking about before you can even begin to argue your point. Alley PS. (A little ego boost) I love reading your posts. Posted by: fortunehooks Nov 21 2003, 06:40 PM QUOTE (Consummate Deist @ Nov 21 2003, 10:20 AM) QUOTE Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God Why should I wish to disprove the existence of God, I am a Deist (oh sorry, I forgot you're a Christ Cultist - that word means that I believe in a God) and believe in the Creator. I just find your mythology to be stupid, unbelieveable, ludicrous, and false! Before you challenge a debate do the following: 1. Learn to spell 2. Learn sentence structure 3. Study Logic and Philosophy 4. Study the total history of the Christ Cult. 5. Get refresher courses at Apologetics U. After you do those (and grow up a little) come back and maybe we will talk to you..... cd: thank you. i don't have to make a comment early in this talk. i consider it a talk because i doubt that this person will stick around and actually follow the rules of logic. you are right the xtian god is so obscured, how could anyone think of it as the creator. i'm not a deist,but i consider what you say valuable to me. hooks has left the forum Posted by: ~Josalo~ Nov 21 2003, 08:06 PM Why would you even want the christian god to exist, or any god for that matter. The way I look at it is if there is a god or gods theres no point to anything because the bible says god will destroy the earth and defeat the anti-christ and sinners will pay and blah blah blah. In conclusion if there is a god or gods no matter how technologically advanced we become, no matter how long we live, no matter what great feats we will accomplish as humans it will all be in vain, I might as well kill myself right now, just my opinion.......... Posted by: chefranden Nov 21 2003, 08:10 PM Dear IXOYE777, You're on by God. I'll give you the first blow. Which God are we going to fight about? Chef Posted by: ~Josalo~ Nov 21 2003, 08:20 PM We are debating about the sadistic, evil, sexually tensioned, who watches boys when they take a shower(ages 4-8 only!)xtian cultish freak biotch "god", I think xtians have "god" and satan mixed up Posted by: TruthWarrior Nov 21 2003, 08:44 PM I work it all at a different angle. Rather then just saying god doesn't exist, I reason with what does exist. I really study why people believe what they believe. By doing that I get to the root of things. I end up understanding the real truth behind things and don't get so much a headache over it all. It's a much slower process, but so far I've only seen that what does exist with much of religion is man duping man into following non-existant gods that they purposely designed for comfort and control. To put it simply, man created god in his image. Posted by: Matthew Nov 21 2003, 09:50 PM QUOTE Where is this all going? Well creationists claim that complex structures require a designer. Evolutionary scientist agree. But God, as a powerful and omnipotent being is about as complex of a structure as is imaginable. So lets see what is more likely: - The uninverse started naturally with extremely simple structures (helium and hydrogen atoms) and slowly, with the help of natural selection and other natural factors created the complexity we see today. The big bang theory says this almost exactly. - Somehow, an extremely powerful and complex being came into existence, with no designer, from absolutely nothing, to create the universe. Well we all know that a watch in the desert requires a designer. Who the hell designed God??? How can a complex structure such as God just appear? What is a more reasonable hypothesis: The universe started in a simple manner and slowly gained complexity through KNOWN and REPRODUCABLE processes. or An extremely complex being who either sprang into existence or always existed, created the universe for some reason known only to itself. We all know that complex structures just do not spring into existence.... I cannot even think of any ways that would make the God hypothesis reasonable. It just does not fly. Can anyone see how the God hypothesis could be more likely than the naturally explanation for the beginning of the universe? I sure cannot... As a Deist, allow me to play devil's advocate here. As of now..I am not a more radical Deist who believes that a Creator just created the prime matter of the universe and its laws and just let nature unfold on its own but rather in the direction of a classical Deist, mostly in line with that of Thomas Paine, Elihu Palmer, and Ethan Allen. This criticism of the design argument is attacking the design argument in the form of an analogy. Hume showed that when the design argument was formulated as an analogy as with the watch and a complex organ, the design argument destroyed itself on inductive grounds and proved the exact opposite of what it intended to argue for. However, when the design argument as proposed by William Paley is reformulated, not as an analogy, but as an inference-to-the-best explanation, Hume's inductive criticism evaporates. The problem is the criticism assumes that any Creator or Designer would have to be a complex being in itself. Complexity would have to be defined and elaborated on with examples. If the complexity is the complexity that we observe in the real world as in the case of watches, living cells,..etc..then the criticism destroys itself on inductive grounds because the Creator is held to be an inmaterial Being and to my knowledge no inmaterial object has any kind of complexity that is pertinent to the design argument. In fact..I think that only material objects can be in any real sense complex. Let's tackle your two options that I quoted above. The first isn't incompatible with any theistic/deistic hypothesis. The Big Bang theory, to my knowledge, is for the large part compatible with theism/deism. The Big Bang might need a cause or initial cause to get the process going. If the Big Bang was an explosion in which a 10-dimensional universe gave birth two a 4-dimensional universe with the rest of the 6 dimensions curling up, as some modern theoretical physicists propose, then it could be argued that the act of creation by any Creator would've been the origin of the 10-dimensional universe or whatever kind of pre-universe structure. Some Deists believe that after the Big Bang, nature more or less took its course and evolution of all types produced the universe that we see here today. As for your second option, I don't see why any Creator needs to come into existence. Why can't a Creator simply exist? Why does any Creator have to have a special explanation for Its existence? I am not saying that non-theists owe an explanation for the universe. Either the universe or the Creator simply exists and has a necessary existence in itself and doens't require a special explanation for its existence. Who the hell designed God? Why does God have to be designed? Once again..my critique above applies. Why does God, an inmaterial being by definition, need to be complex? I defy design critics to explain how something can simultaneously be inmaterial and complex. Ball is in your court Matthew Posted by: Redshift Nov 22 2003, 02:20 AM QUOTE Why does God, an inmaterial being by definition, need to be complex? Of course, since we actually know nothing about the hypothetical construct we call "God" we cannot be certain that it is either inmaterial or a being. 'Tis a mystery indeed... Posted by: Guest Nov 22 2003, 09:23 AM As a computer programmer, I have a hard time believing my code could be improved through random changes. Let's say I created a basic program, every once in awhile a random change was made in it's code. It could be a harmless character inserted into a string...it wouldn't break the program, just insert an extra character where it's not intended. If it were done in the right place however, it could obviously wreck the program. Each time my system changes, it creates a new branch of itself, and users use the one that works the best. Now my system is on a large network, and each time a user uses it, it gets a 'vote'. Periodically, the best system is selected and the older ones die off(or do they become OTHER applications). I don't believe that in 100 trillion years of this, a better program would ever be made. In fact, the whole thing would collapse in a few days. Also imagine the idea of consciousness. Our eyes take in light and create a neural firing pattern in our brain. Are these neurons "us". How is a pattern of neurons firing different from a computer which represents data as bits? We know the computer has no consciousness. So it's as if we are watching our own movies in our heads. When you watch TV, the picture is the patttern of lighted pixels, but you are experiancing the consciousness of watching the TV screen. Also, what instigates an action in the brain? We are a vastly complex biological machine, but what triggers actions? If I want to reach my hand over and pick up an object, something has to trigger the initial nueron to fire, I believe that is the human spirit interacting with the body. Well, that's just an example of why I reason there is more to this world that flesh and matter. Posted by: jjacksonRIAB Nov 22 2003, 09:46 AM Guest: You may have a point, but life is not a computer program. Even still, random functions are quite useful within programs and are used every day. Look into fractals and procedural programming. Based off of a seed, some very interesting patterns and effects can be modeled using explicit and implicit models. A noise function, based off of random terms, for example, can be used to create surface perturbations. Random functions are quite useful in designing artificial intelligence systems. Indeed, we do not yet have a complete grasp of how DNA is programmed, or if it even follows a grammar or syntax. A program is simply an interface to the computer. It must be syntatically correct to work. For you to use the analogy of a computer, first you must demonstrate some similarities between a compiler and DNA, starting with a grammar, syntax and lexical model. You'll probably find that DNA changes aren't so random. Good luck! Posted by: chefranden Nov 22 2003, 10:21 AM QUOTE As for your second option, I don't see why any Creator needs to come into existence. Why can't a Creator simply exist? Why does any Creator have to have a special explanation for Its existence? Then why can't the universe just exist? The idea of the eternally evolving universe has some good logic behind it :see http://www.geocities.com/kingvegeta80/BBT.html But even if the big bang happened there is no reason to add a superhuman to the equation. That smacks of ad hoc like epicircles or dark matter. I would rather go along with David Chalmer's ideas that there is a 5th force of matter besides the strong and weak nuclear forces, gravity, and electormagnetic forces already known. The unknown force, which he calls "mental but not consiousness" would have the property of organization. he also thinks that it may instead of energy turn out to be a basic property of matter like mass is. More simplely put inteligence (ability to organize) is basic to the universe. As Alan Watts said, "the universe peoples like a tree leaves." Posted by: vugizoview Nov 22 2003, 11:05 AM Guest, QUOTE Well, that's just an example of why I reason there is more to this world that flesh and matter. I just know there is. And this is such a great mystery. I love it that we're coaxing life to yield up her secrets to us .... Or maybe we're giving life life's own experience. Maybe we are the self of life itself and we are now the conscious creators of how the rest of evolution is going to occur. I love it that I am a prime mover, an active participant in evolution. I have another book by Antonio Damasio: Looking for Spinoza. Joh, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain I've only just started it. He's apparently THE brain man in science at present. On the back of the book it says, "In clear, accessible and at times eloquent prose, Damasio is outlining nothing less than a new vision of the human soul, integrating body and mind, thought and feeling, individual survival and altruism, humanity and nature, ethics and evolution." San Francisco Chronicle Rather astounding sounding, don't you think? I wish I were smart enough to do science, but I'm not. So I read these kinds of "this is what we're discovering" books. I'm still working my way through the introduction of his other BRAIN book, The Feeling Of What Happens. It seems like we're all in a pitch dark room, feeling around for each other and for what the landscape is, what it feels like, so we can figure this thing out. And, I wonder whether we're the dreamer doing this, or the dream living. Wow. I LOVE this discussion. Guest, I need someone to help me design the most awesom website I have in mind. I haven't a foggy clue about any of this. I have ideas, I've got vision, and I've got understanding. I'm a visionary. That's my role in life. I know it. Listen to this: I went to our future when I was psychotic. I know our future. But I'm not nuts. I simply know this. Anyway, I LOVE it that we're discussing this. At least you are. I read and synthesize. You're all so smart. ------------- Pursuing the Mystery with my hair on fire. At our essence we are energy expressed as LOVE. And love expresses itself as an urge towards UNITY. Collin Tipping Life is alive. Posted by: Matthew Nov 22 2003, 11:07 AM QUOTE Then why can't the universe just exist? The idea of the eternally evolving universe has some good logic behind it :see The Case Against the Big Bang But even if the big bang happened there is no reason to add a superhuman to the equation. That smacks of ad hoc like epicircles or dark matter. You have brought up an excellent point. I have addressed this on another thread. I stated that theists/deists have no business asking non-theists where the universe came from and non-theists have no business asking theists/deists where did the Creator come from. The fact is that both a Creator and the universe could very well have necessary existence. The Creator or the universe can "just exist". I am not sure that there is no reason to add a Creator to the equation of a universe that has its beginning, in, say, a Big Bang. I know that there are scientists like Vic Stinger or philosophers like Quentin Smith who argue against such an idea, but I am still to a large extent convinced that no matter how the universe or the prime matter begin to exist, that there may very well be a Creator to have began it all. I am no expert in cosmology or astrophysics and therefore I cannot argue with authority or cite evidence to support my case which is the reason why I state here as I have done so in the past..that this is a preliminary conclusion. My advocacy of Deism may not survive: I could very well go into pantheism, agnosticism, or atheism. But right now, I am tentatively at Deism and I am going to be testing Deism to see if it survives the test of reason. Matthew Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 24 2003, 03:18 PM Sorry i haven't been keeping up. but dang i never said prove Gods existence i posted [proof} of Gods existence. i understand that No one beyond a reasonable doubt can prove either side, however there is just as much evidence for one side as the other, and anyone who was willing to discuss them without getting butt hurt over the subject i was inviting. so everyone needs to chill. Posted by: chefranden Nov 24 2003, 03:52 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 24 2003, 03:18 PM) Sorry i haven't been keeping up. but dang i never said prove Gods existence i posted [proof} of Gods existence. i understand that No one beyond a reasonable doubt can prove either side, however there is just as much evidence for one side as the other, and anyone who was willing to discuss them without getting butt hurt over the subject i was inviting. so everyone needs to chill. While it is true that a deistic sort of god may be unprovable either way, it is not difficult at all to disprove the fundamentalist All Mighty old Guy in the Sky/Magical Child/Holy Breath all rolled into one god, God. It does not exist simply by definition, in the same manner that a round square does not exist. God: the all powerful, all knowing, all good being. 1. The Christian definition of god requires all these attributes. 2. The existence of gratuitous evil is incompatible with at least one of these attributes of God. 3. gratuitous evil exists. Therefore, the Christian God Does not exist. Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 24 2003, 06:31 PM Sorry dude But your argument plainly sucks. First OFF your assuming that Evil is a created thing. Is there light? Yes. Is there an Opposite of light like Darkness? No. Darkness is just the lack of light, for if darkness was in and of itself then we could make darkness, but we can't we make darkness by taking away light. So evil like darkness is not thing in and of itself rather EVIL is just the Absence of GOOD. So no God did not create Evil. Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 06:49 PM Then why did God says he created evil in his own book hmm? Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 06:50 PM You talking about Isaiah 45? Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 07:10 PM God never said he created Evil in the way you are thinking about Evil. It was a metaphor being used by the prophet, Isaiah to say that yes God creates disasters, and you shouldn't credit them to an another evil type god. However, just because there are tornadoes and fires doesn't mean that it is evil. God uses tools that to the individual may seem evil at the time but have loving implications. Posted by: chefranden Nov 24 2003, 07:23 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 24 2003, 06:31 PM) Sorry dude But your argument plainly sucks. First OFF your assuming that Evil is a created thing. Is there light? Yes. Is there an Opposite of light like Darkness? No. Darkness is just the lack of light, for if darkness was in and of itself then we could make darkness, but we can't we make darkness by taking away light. So evil like darkness is not thing in and of itself rather EVIL is just the Absence of GOOD. So no God did not create Evil. It is too bad that you made the assumption that I am assuming something that I'm not. For example: I'm not assuming anything concerning the source of evil. It is not wise in appologetics. to assume about the enemy. You must know. You are wrong thinking that evil is merely the absence of good. Evil is not nothingness as is darkness. Evil has content whether natural or human. Examples: the Holocaust, Sariavo, Cambodia. So you are wrong since your analogy doesn't hold by logic, but unfortunately it does not hold by scripture either. Isaiah 45 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (kjv) You will notice that Yahweh thinks darkness is a "created" thing, and Yahweh thinks evil is a "created" thing contrary to your assertion. But just because Yahweh says so doesn't make it so I suppose. Don't feel bad about not knowing this. Not many average christians know scripture as well as I. But if you really want to be an apologetic it wouldn't hurt you to spend 10 years studying scripture as I did. You would do well to study logic and critical thinking as well. How to Think about Weird Things, by Shcick and Vaughn would be an easy and fun place to start. You have lost the challange. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 07:34 PM That passage is also known as .."I bring prosperity and create disaster." so if you studied the scripture you would know you always can't take the english translatedversions verbatom due to the translation errors. further evil has no content. Can you rank evil as one thing being worst than another. is the Holocaust worst than sariavo. Where due you go about ranking evil. the content of evil is simply evil. No good Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 07:38 PM Gawd's holy book has translation errors! Say it isn't sooooo! Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 07:39 PM YEAH HUMAN i can't emphasize enough HUMAN translation error Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 07:42 PM Yet that doesn't mean the content has error Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 07:43 PM Damn...be a real shame if all these people done going to hell becuase of a translation or typogrpahical error. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 07:51 PM The GOOD news is is that there is no error in salvation it's very clear and distinct in the text. Accept Jesus with all your heart and poof your saved. as simple as that. Typographical errors strangly enough do not occur where the most important questions lie. SORRY Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 07:53 PM Really....? Why are their so many different versions of what you must do to be saved and what makes your version correct hmmm? Posted by: I LOVE YOU ATHEIST Nov 24 2003, 08:00 PM hey~ it's okay if you are a little weak. I mean, you are one of the types of people that give up so easily. Just cuz things don't go ur way, you turn from God, sayin it's his fault and crying about. Atheist people are just weaker than others.. and itz okay. We, christians are here to help you, and bring you back up. you gave up so easily on God. Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 24 2003, 08:01 PM Sorry but there is only one version in the Holy bible. ..."Men are only saved by Grace..i.e. Jesus" If your talking about numerous sects of christianity, some of which shouldn't even be considered a sect b/c they don't follow the bible or believe that jesus is GOD i.e MORMONS, they interpret the bible to there own liking, historically speaking to gain power, however thats HUMAN error. Strictly speaking you can't find in the bible where it says your saved by good deeds or acts. As far as salvation goes the Bible only says your saved by GRACE. Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 08:16 PM Funny how being a Xtian for 15 years is giving up easy. Funny how you need a gawd as a crutch to help you out and I don't... Posted by: I LOVE YOU ATHEIST Nov 24 2003, 08:29 PM hey you are still in the darkness foo.. you don't see dat? what is so great bout ur life? you having fun and living it up? wow 15 years put to waste.. itz okay ur not late.. u are never too late. just give it up to God. Posted by: Mystagogue Nov 24 2003, 08:29 PM QUOTE You are wrong thinking that evil is merely the absence of good. Evil is not nothingness as is darkness. Evil has content whether natural or human. Examples: the Holocaust, Sariavo, Cambodia. So you are wrong since your analogy doesn't hold by logic, but unfortunately it does not hold by scripture either. Wait. When the lights are off, you get stubbed toes, traffic accidents, even death from inadvertantly walking off a cliff. But that does not mean that darkness actually has content even if we can fill an obituary page with its consequences. Ergo, you cannot assert that "evil is the absence of good" is illogical as a proposition unto itself. As for your Isaiah 45:7 Scripture reference, your literal reading begs the question of interpretation (and you should already know my perspective on that). Now as for this next comment to an atheist from a True Christian (www.landoverbaptist.com) - I wish to comment: QUOTE hey~ it's okay if you are a little weak. I mean, you are one of the types of people that give up so easily. Just cuz things don't go ur way, you turn from God, sayin it's his fault and crying about. Atheist people are just weaker than others.. and itz okay. We, christians are here to help you, and bring you back up. you gave up so easily on God. What the hell were you thinking when you posted those words? This Prima Donna dance of arrogance, especially unmerited, is precisely how True Christians ™ make folks here say "thank God I'm an atheist." Don't do that again. Posted by: I Love YOu Atheist Nov 24 2003, 08:34 PM you say u have been an "xtian" for 15 years. i believe taht you weren't even a christian in the first place. I think this because if you were a christian, you wouldn't have turned away. Once a child of God, you're always a Child of God. So if u are saying u are and "xtain", which sounds very stupid, you were never a christian to start w/. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 08:40 PM hey if u don't like it, don't comment aiite? all this prima donna, and ergo crap makes me glad that i'm not an atheist. all you do is sit at home on a computer and try to prove christians wrong. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 08:42 PM and another thing.. you ahve been watching too much matrix. Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 24 2003, 08:45 PM QUOTE (I LOVE YOU ATHEIST @ Nov 24 2003, 09:29 PM) hey you are still in the darkness foo.. you don't see dat? what is so great bout ur life? you having fun and living it up? wow 15 years put to waste.. itz okay ur not late.. u are never too late. just give it up to God. 15+ years put to waste. You got that right...they were wasted in trying to appease a demonic beast called jesus. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 08:48 PM so you believe in spirits now? Posted by: chefranden Nov 24 2003, 08:54 PM QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 24 2003, 07:34 PM) That passage is also known as .."I bring prosperity and create disaster." so if you studied the scripture you would know you always can't take the english translatedversions verbatom due to the translation errors. further evil has no content. Can you rank evil as one thing being worst than another. is the Holocaust worst than sariavo. Where due you go about ranking evil. the content of evil is simply evil. No good Sorry the hebrew is word is evil it is translated disaster by the NIV to help soften the contradiction with the New testament. So if you studied scripture you would know that you can't trust the english translation. In any case it is decidedly weak defense. Whether or not the Isaiah passage is real or not does not weaken my argument. If you wish to defeat the argument you must show that one of the premises on which it rests is false. 1. The Christian God has by definition the attributes of being all knowing, All powerful, and all good. 2. These attributes are incompatible with gratuitous evil. 3. Gratuitous evil exists. Therefore, the Christian God does not exist. In the argument it does not matter what the source of gratuitous evil is. What ever gratuitous evil is the Christian God is required by Christian definition to prevent it. Even puny christian humans are required to do the same or go to hell. (cf Matt.25:31ff). By evidence of scripture the Christian God not only fails to prevent gratuitous evil but actively participates in it. I think that we can agree that genocide is evil, especially when it includes the murder of children and infants. God orders genocide in 1st Samuel 15:1-3 including the murder of children and infants and presumably pregnant women. So the Biblical god is personally involved in evil in the same way that Milosevic is involved in evil in the Balkans. Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 24 2003, 09:12 PM Dude agian your wrong. If you read the full passage Isaiah is trying to show that there is one GOD. People thought that earthquakes floods tornadoes and such where evil things that an evil God created. Isaiah is saying no God is responsible for these things but we know natural disasters aren't really evil.THATS THE POINT TRYING TO BE MADE MISTER SCHOLAR, yeah right. Secondly yes genoicide such as the holocaust are evil. But as far as God know how do you know its not justified, and if its justified than its not neccesarily evil. Being a scholar im sure you've heard the bear in the woods metaphor if not i will be happy to explain. Also you do have a valid argument but as you obviously know not all valid arguments have true conclusions. Gratuitius evil can't go hand in hand with God thats why there Is Jesus. But how exactley are you defining evil then. it seems to me like you are saying there are levels of evil. but isn't that just in the mind of man. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 09:13 PM so you can't discredit me saying evil is the abbsence of Good . Posted by: chefranden Nov 24 2003, 10:43 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 24 2003, 09:12 PM) Dude agian your wrong. If you read the full passage Isaiah is trying to show that there is one GOD. People thought that earthquakes floods tornadoes and such where evil things that an evil God created. Isaiah is saying no God is responsible for these things but we know natural disasters aren't really evil.THATS THE POINT TRYING TO BE MADE MISTER SCHOLAR, yeah right. Secondly yes genoicide such as the holocaust are evil. But as far as God know how do you know its not justified, and if its justified than its not neccesarily evil. Being a scholar im sure you've heard the bear in the woods metaphor if not i will be happy to explain. Also you do have a valid argument but as you obviously know not all valid arguments have true conclusions. Gratuitius evil can't go hand in hand with God thats why there Is Jesus. But how exactley are you defining evil then. it seems to me like you are saying there are levels of evil. but isn't that just in the mind of man. I see that you are unable to answer the actual argument even in part. But I'm not surprized because it is unanswerable if you are going to insist your god is what you say it is. You are perhaps frightened that God will send you to hell if you were to admit there is no excuse for God's behavior as recorded by The Samuel passage. Genocide is evil. You know of no justification that would make it a good. Your plea for an unknown justification does not defeat the argument. Unless you come up with an actual justification, my argument stands. There are many other simular incidents in scripture, all of which you must defend in the same manner. What ever excuse you may invent to protect god's honor in this case genocide is evil. But you don't need to look for high esoteric god is smarter then us excuse because the excuse of god is given in the passage. These people were to be rubbed out because their ancestors had resisted the invasion of their land by Israel some 400 years before. That is like deciding to exterminate the Soux today because their ancestors resisted our theft of their land in the 19th century. Natural disasters are not evil of them selves, but they cause evil to happen to people evil that an all powerful god could stop if he had the loving kindness to do so. In all probability the evil happens because the all powerful, all knowing, all good god does not exist. Yes I have a valid argument it is also sound unless you can show one of the premises to be false. Merely assuming they are false does not make them false. Jesus is not the answer to gratuitous evil. According to the story he has come and gone and still there is gratuitous evil of which christians themselves have participated in. I would think that if Jesus was the answer to gratuitous evil that at the very least his people would not participate. I'm defining gratuitous evil as that sort of evil for which there is no need or excuse. I will grant God if he exists the use of pain as a teaching tool. I saw a film of the Rwandan genocide recently. There was a scene of a girl, about 8 I would guess, who had both legs and one arm hacked off. The nurse caring for her said that she had to watch people hack her parents and bothers to death, before she herself was hacked apart and left for dead. That is gratuitous evil of the sort God ordered upon the Amalikites. Posted by: IXOYE777 Nov 24 2003, 11:17 PM Your argument breaks down at needless evil: If 7 jews die in the holocaust instead of 8. 599,999 instead of 600,000. you are creating a dividing line, where then is it needless there can't be a dividing line. secondly justice delayed is not justice denied. criticizing GOD for not intervening now is like reading half a novel and criticizing the author for not finishing the plot Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 11:21 PM God will bring justice at the right time. Thirdley if God intervened everytime there was so called Evil he would be taking away free will. to prevent all evil you prevent all freedom. Posted by: Guest Nov 24 2003, 11:35 PM Lastley God knows what it is like to suffer. Jesus dove right into and was nailed to the cross. He took on every sin every suffering evr endured by man. He felt and dealt with the pain of the African women he payed for the holocaust, and the genocide in russia. he felt it all. Posted by: Redshift Nov 25 2003, 12:04 AM QUOTE No. Darkness is just the lack of light, for if darkness was in and of itself then we could make darkness, but we can't we make darkness by taking away light. So evil like darkness is not thing in and of itself rather EVIL is just the Absence of GOOD. So no God did not create Evil. You don't need to be a scholar of anything to see how logically flawed the above statement is. According to the Bible God is: 1. Good 2. Everywhere (omnipresent) If evil is the absence of good, then it is also the absence of God. This would mean that He is not omnipresent and that would contradict the bible. QUOTE Thirdley if God intervened everytime there was so called Evil he would be taking away free will. to prevent all evil you prevent all freedom. This 'free will' bullshit does not stand up to the scrutiny of simple logic and reason. When God created Adam and Eve, he created the without knowledge of Good and Evil. In order for them to gain that, they would have to eat from that magical forbidden tree. When the snake convinced Eve to eat the fruit, she was still without this knowledge, ergo she could not tell the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. God knew this. According to the bible, God knows everything. For an eternity before he created Man, he knew that there was going to be a snake in his garden who would convince the woman to eat the forbidden fruits placed there by God. He knew this. So why put the tree there? Why let the snake in? Why condemn millions of souls to hell? Why allow hell to exist in the first place? This God of yours sounds to me like a mean spirited child. The kind that torches ants under a magnifying glass. The bible-god contradicts himself. Thus, He cannot exist. There may well be a creator. It's just not this guy. Posted by: Guest Nov 25 2003, 12:38 AM NO If Eve didn't have free will she never would have bit into the apple because God wouldn't of allowed it. free will is not right or wrong. free will is choice. Eve knew it would be wrong to bite into the apple. Just because there yet was no such thing as wrong doesn't mean there wasn't the potential for it. Secondly HELL provides evidence of God being Just and loving. It would be less loving for God to simply make people who should go to hell rather go out of existence, because it would be destroying his creation. instead he allows people to go on in hell. Why are you so worried any way, hell is just not being with God you're doing that right now Gods just allowing you to proceed in the afterlife what you're doing now. just in hell you know with supreme truth that God does exist. But why do you want to be with a God who burns ants under a magnifying glass any way right. who cares if he's God. Posted by: Redshift Nov 25 2003, 12:51 AM The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Knowledge of Good and Evil. Eve did not have that knowledge. Eve could not know that her choice to disobey God was wrong. God knew this when he put her in that garden, when he put the tree there, when he put the snake there. QUOTE hell is just not being with God you're doing that right now Gods just allowing you to proceed in the afterlife what you're doing now. just in hell you know with supreme truth that God does exist. Please enlighten me, oh great guest of biblical scholarship, as to how you know that Hell is being away from God while possessing knowledge of his existence? Where in the bible does it say that? Posted by: Vixentrox Nov 25 2003, 05:42 AM QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 25 2003, 12:35 AM) Lastley God knows what it is like to suffer. Jesus dove right into and was nailed to the cross. He took on every sin every suffering evr endured by man. He felt and dealt with the pain of the African women he payed for the holocaust, and the genocide in russia. he felt it all. God knew what it was like to suffer without nailing himself to a cross. He is supposedly all-knowing isn't he? He also knew that he was going to have the joy of killing his creation before the flood ever happend...yet he did act kind of suprised at the way they turned out.... He also has the joy of knowing the majority of children will be tortured forever and ever amen. Nice benelvolent monster. Posted by: GodzillaBless Nov 25 2003, 06:10 AM I'm having a problem here. Please hear me out. You challenge Christians to prove there is a God. If you are honest, and atheist, then you would admit to yourself and everyone else that while Christians cannot prove the existence of God, you also cannot DISPROVE the existence of God, using incontrovertible evidence. Incontrovertible springs from the root word "controversy" meaning to argue back and forth. Incontrovertible means undeniable or inarguable. The fact of the matter is that this is an affair of the heart and soul. One's love for one's parents for example cannot be measured in any scientific terms like grams or liters, for example. Neither can the existence or non existence of God. If there is a God, and if indeed he IS good, then I would like to get to know him. I know I leave myself open to criticism and backlash of all kinds on this here board and that's ok. It's just that I have been wearing myself awfully thin. I take care of a handicapped woman on the weekends and then I go right back into another situation where I take care of my mentally disturbed boyfriend. I cannot do this forever and I cannot do this alone. I need strength for this job. If that strength comes from a God who I don't know whether or not He truly exists, then so be it. I cannot try to be all things to all people. I'm quickly going to go to pot that way. I'm also sick and tired of feeling bitter stemming from the fact that I take care of two people yet if something happened to me there's no one who cares about me. Bitterness is a luxury I can no longer afford. It's craziness, really. Anyway, that's my two cents.... Conster Posted by: Redshift Nov 25 2003, 06:37 AM QUOTE You challenge Christians to prove there is a God. Actually, IXOYE777 started the thread by challenging us to prove that there isn't a god. The general tone of the replies has been very much along the lines of what you just said ~ not our intention, not possible etc. Yahwe and Jesus on the other hand... Posted by: MalaInSe Nov 25 2003, 10:10 AM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 24 2003, 08:01 PM) Sorry but there is only one version in the Holy bible. ..."Men are only saved by Grace..i.e. Jesus" If your talking about numerous sects of christianity, some of which shouldn't even be considered a sect b/c they don't follow the bible or believe that jesus is GOD i.e MORMONS, they interpret the bible to there own liking, historically speaking to gain power, however thats HUMAN error. Strictly speaking you can't find in the bible where it says your saved by good deeds or acts. As far as salvation goes the Bible only says your saved by GRACE. The word that means "grace" is "charis." Charis can also be translated as "by the kindness of." In other words, you are only saved by God's affirmative desire to save you, NOT necessarily through anything you do. So, how do you know you're saved, Fishman? It does not say ONLY by grace, btw. It says by the kindness of God, not by anything man does or creates. It does not say that you don't have to do something to get God to decide to save you (save = "sozo," which actually means "to heal" and "make whole" or "to rescue" -- nothing about going to heaven [ouranos - which means "sky" or something more along the lines of "the heavens"-- not some specific place]). It essentially just says that its his decision, not yours. Ummm, so I guess that you are asserting that you know Greek? Renee Posted by: MalaInSe Nov 25 2003, 10:11 AM QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 24 2003, 07:51 PM) Accept Jesus with all your heart and poof your saved. as simple as that. Where does it say that? Posted by: AggieNostic Nov 25 2003, 10:27 AM QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 24 2003, 07:51 PM) Accept Jesus with all your heart and poof your saved. as simple as that. Actually, it is not as simple as that. It is possible that one thinks one has accepted Christ into their heart, when in fact all they have done is accept him intellectually. There was a book in the 1980s called "Missing Heaven by 18 Inches" (there is approximately 18 inches from the head to the heart). In it, it makes the case that one can appear to be a born-again Christian (by their fruits ye shall know them) and yet still end up in hell. Unfortunately, the book provides little guidance on how one can possibly know for sure that "Jesus is in their heart." Not that one could gain assurance anyway, since we're talking about a non-verifiable claims. Posted by: chefranden Nov 25 2003, 12:03 PM QUOTE (GodzillaBless @ Nov 25 2003, 06:10 AM) You challenge Christians to prove there is a God. If you are honest, and atheist, then you would admit to yourself and everyone else that while Christians cannot prove the existence of God, you also cannot DISPROVE the existence of God, using incontrovertible evidence. Incontrovertible springs from the root word "controversy" meaning to argue back and forth. Incontrovertible means undeniable or inarguable. It is not about disproving the general concept of god. That I think cannot be done as you say. However a well defined god such as Yahweh/Magic Son/Holy Breath can be disproven by showing the definition to be self contradictory in the same fashion that one can disprove there is a round square. It is easy to see the indirect contortions the Christian believer must go though to maintain his/her belief as you read the replies to the argument from evil above. While the argument is simple, it can be a bit disconcerting to unravel the strings needed to support their unsupported skyhook. For example justice, delayed or otherwise, is seen as a remedy for gratuitous evil rather than a reaction to it. If they put the murderer of your loved one to death you still don't get your loved one back. Life is not made whole by justice. Even if the killers of the little girl's family and the mutilators of herself are punished for eternity she will not have her life made whole. And there is the possibility that these evil doers will not be punished at all if they should become Christians of the proper sect as is Guest. The only remedy for the little girl's plight is for it not to have happened at all. Yahweh/Magic Son/Holy Breath who is all knowing, all powerful, and all good, must by definition prevent this from happening to her since. Since this evil act was not prevented, god in the above formulation cannot exist. God in some other formulation that does not require all three of the above attributes could still exist. IMHO the problem of evil is the reason for the elevation Satan to almost but not quite bad godhood amongst evangelicals. Satan's existence seeks to let Yahweh/Magic Son/Holy Breath off the hook by curbing either Yahweh/Magic Son/Holy Breath's power or goodness. But it doesn't work because the Trio is still responsible for Satan and must restrain or destroy him by definition. Posted by: chefranden Nov 25 2003, 12:51 PM QUOTE (chefranden @ Nov 25 2003, 12:03 PM) For example justice, delayed or otherwise, is seen as a remedy for gratuitous evil rather than a reaction to it. If they put the murderer of your loved one to death you still don't get your loved one back. Life is not made whole by justice. Even if the killers of the little girl's family and the mutilators of herself are punished for eternity she will not have her life made whole. And there is the possibility that these evil doers will not be punished at all if they should become Christians of the proper sect as is Guest. I neglected to mention that the girl herself could and probably will (cf. Matt 7:14) be tortured in hell for eternity if she doesn't find her way into a sect acceptable to Trio such as Guest belongs to. Posted by: Guest Nov 25 2003, 03:22 PM I LOVE YOU ATHEIST........well I don't love you, and actually contrary to your beleifs I'm pretty sure atheists and ex-xtians are very happy with their life and have a lot more time for things that actually exist!!!!!glory!!!! Sometimes I wish there was a hell(which there isn't)so assholes like you and all the other "guests" could go burn there. Glory!!!! Praise the holy lard bajeezus!!!glory!!!! Posted by: ~Josalo~ Nov 25 2003, 03:23 PM I LOVE YOU ATHEIST........well I don't love you, and actually contrary to your beleifs I'm pretty sure atheists and ex-xtians are very happy with their life and have a lot more time for things that actually exist!!!!!glory!!!! Sometimes I wish there was a hell(which there isn't)so assholes like you and all the other "guests" could go burn there. Glory!!!! Praise the holy lard bajeezus!!!glory!!!! yeah this last one was me Posted by: fortunehooks Nov 25 2003, 04:21 PM QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 25 2003, 01:35 AM) Lastley God knows what it is like to suffer. Jesus dove right into and was nailed to the cross. He took on every sin every suffering evr endured by man. He felt and dealt with the pain of the African women he payed for the holocaust, and the genocide in russia. he felt it all. do you honestly think that in two days and a few hours that the prick you call jesus felt all that. come on you've got be smarter than that i would think. people in the world have suffered alot longer then two days and a few hours. i know people who have suffered from depression for 5 years, and you try to measure their suffering as not equal to the worst story ever told jesus on a cross. that jesus you so boldly proclaim didn't do anything to better the world, instead his story did alot to divide people on the planet. you logic is so flawed, how could an all everything ever feel anything. before anything it knew everything. the god concept you present to be taken as the best case has to many mistakes to ever be considered in my view. Posted by: chefranden Nov 25 2003, 05:57 PM QUOTE Your argument breaks down at needless evil: If 7 jews die in the holocaust instead of 8. 599,999 instead of 600,000. you are creating a dividing line, where then is it needless there can't be a dividing line. No, I'm not creating a dividing line. I am only conceding that there may be benevolent hurt or suffering: An injection for the flue; open heart surgery; killing the guy shooting up the customers at McDonald's and that these things may not count against an all good God. QUOTE secondly justice delayed is not justice denied. criticizing GOD for not intervening now is like reading half a novel and criticizing the author for not finishing the plot Justice is not the remedy for evil. If justice is needed evil has already happened, which is not allowed by your definition of God. QUOTE God will bring justice at the right time. So? Go offer that as comfort to the Rwandan child. Even if justice were the remedy for evil, which it is not, the time is well past for that girl and millions of others. QUOTE Thirdley if God intervened everytime there was so called Evil he would be taking away free will. to prevent all evil you prevent all freedom. So, if there is no evil, I won't be able to decide what flavor of ice cream to have? "Dad, who do you think should I marry Sarah or Jane." "Don't know son." "If only God would invent evil we could decide!" QUOTE Lastley God knows what it is like to suffer. Jesus dove right into and was nailed to the cross. He took on every sin every suffering evr endured by man. He felt and dealt with the pain of the African women he payed for the holocaust, and the genocide in russia. he felt it all. I could see some validity in this if God were paying for his own sin with which, according to your scripture, he is highly endowed, but only if the death were perminent and his suffering eternal. After all what is a few hours of torment and a couple of days of death to an eternal being? In terms of payment it's like Bill Gates paying a penny for a Rolls Royce. The last 2000 years of gratuitous evil is evidence enough that this episode, if it happened, has not made the slightest dent in the problem of evil, even among God's own people. Before you get all steaming mad at my words remember you are required to love your enemies. Posted by: AggieNostic Nov 25 2003, 06:04 PM QUOTE (fortunehooks @ Nov 25 2003, 07:21 PM) QUOTE (Guest @ Nov 25 2003, 01:35 AM) Lastley God knows what it is like to suffer. Jesus dove right into and was nailed to the cross. He took on every sin every suffering evr endured by man. He felt and dealt with the pain of the African women he payed for the holocaust, and the genocide in russia. he felt it all. do you honestly think that in two days and a few hours that the prick you call jesus felt all that. come on you've got be smarter than that i would think. A lot of infidels suffered for their (lack of) belief at the hands of Christians during the Dark Ages. And, they did so knowing full well that their death would be permanent. Jesus allegedly claimed he would rise again -- i.e. his death would not be permanent. What kind of sacrifice is that? Posted by: JezebelLeFey Nov 25 2003, 08:27 PM Exactly Aggie . Now, for an experiment, guest , don't eat any food on Thanksgiving. None at all. That includes water. Say you're doing it for a starving child in Zimbabwe or Guatemala or something. Will they get that food? No. Was it much of a sacrifice for you? No. Know why? Because that food you don't eat on Thursday will still be there on Friday. If for no other reason, your family will put a plate aside for you. Those kids got no such plate put aside for them, but, oh, thanks for the sacrifice. Posted by: chefranden Nov 25 2003, 09:18 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 24 2003, 08:01 PM) Sorry but there is only one version in the Holy bible. ..."Men are only saved by Grace..i.e. Jesus" If your talking about numerous sects of christianity, some of which shouldn't even be considered a sect b/c they don't follow the bible or believe that jesus is GOD i.e MORMONS, they interpret the bible to there own liking, historically speaking to gain power, however thats HUMAN error. Strictly speaking you can't find in the bible where it says your saved by good deeds or acts. As far as salvation goes the Bible only says your saved by GRACE. And out of the 1000s of available sects you just fell into the right one. How by the grace of god? If so why doesn't god have the grace to have that momon fellow fall in with you fellow of true religion? Perhaps you will let us know what sect you belong to so that we will know the place to go when we give up our foolishness. It is good to know that you at least live among infalluable preachers of the word. And that you have been guided by Trio to the correct reading. Perhaps you could tell us why the writing is so criptic, that you alone with your fellow comunicants have the only true reading. If you are saved by grace why is that jesus tell folks judgement will be based on how you treat poor folks? matt. 25:31ff Please I'm so confused. Posted by: MalaInSe Nov 26 2003, 10:14 AM QUOTE (chefranden @ Nov 25 2003, 09:18 PM) If you are saved by grace why is that jesus tell folks judgement will be based on how you treat poor folks? matt. 25:31ff Please I'm so confused. Me too. As it seems to say here that you must act: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Matt 7:21 It seems like this is saying that it is not God's grace, but that you do his will that gets you into heaven. Renee Posted by: Emperor Norton II Nov 30 2003, 12:42 PM Yeah- but it says over there that it's by grace alone that we're saved. Wait, that's a contradiction! Big suprise, the Bible has HUGE DOGMATIC MISTAKES!!! Posted by: Human1345KWTX5 Dec 5 2003, 03:30 PM QUOTE (IXOYE777 @ Nov 20 2003, 08:22 PM) Challange anyone who believes they can disprove God Hi, I had a rant at another topic somewhere, where I find no "Creator of the universe out of nothing". Basically, you have two sets containing all imaginable items. Set A you stick all those things that exist, like apples & pears, etc. Set B you stick all those that don't, like non-existent fruits, etc. So you sit & think about "nothing" or "nothingness". Define it? If you will accept that it is "anything that does not exist", then you find that you can't stick it into set A. So you stick it in set B. Now, you have to ask yourself how many non-existent fruits make up a full basket? So set B is "existence-wise" and empty set, not so? It essentially contains nothing. Since "nothing" is in that set, nothing does not exist. Also, us fallible humans have been searching for "nothing" for yonks. From before the times of "The Ether and the Phlegm", we had a small bit of existing things, surrounded by a whole lot of nothingness. Our surrounding nothingness has been shrinking over the ages, as we're finding smallr and smaller sub-atomic particles. We no longer believe there's nothingness (empty space) between us and the sun, etc. I suspect we'll one day have to abandon any notion of "nothing's" existence. Go look yourself in the mirror & state emphatically to yourself that, "Nothing exists!" Anyhow, the last sentence adds no weight to the argument, but was intended for a laugh. I'm happy with the notion that "nothing" or "nothingness" or "absolutely empty space" does not exist, for even through "empty space" light doth indeed travel! Once you're happy with that, then it's time to abandon the notion of a "God, the creator of the universe out of nothing." I mean, if he could make a whole universe out of nothing, then what the hell did he need dust for to make Adam? And why a spare-rib for Eve? If he did not then make it out of nothing, then what materials did he use? Surely those m |