ATHEISTS GTFIH

[muhajudin21]

Yeah I'm making baseless assumptions aswell just as he is

Truth is nobody knows

But atleast my assumptions revolve around something we know for sure exists (naturalism), whereas his assumptions rest on something we do not know exists (god)

did you read what I said? naturalism is premise and can't be proven and never will be because of underdetermination same with god
because you can experience something that doesn't prove the premise because an assumption must be made
you simply think your somehow smart for not believing in god when in reality your retarded

 

[Mogger]

Ok anyone can make assumptions

Now prove them

“Prove them” isn’t an argument. I already gave my argument so you should actually refute it

 

[Turkic Albanian]

“Prove them” isn’t an argument. I already gave my argument so you should actually refute it

Because an infinite chain of movers is impossible, there must be a First Unmoved Mover, which is the flying spaghetti monster of the 12th dimension.

Refute this

 

[Mogger]

Because an infinite chain of movers is impossible, there must be a First Unmoved Mover, which is the flying spaghetti monster of the 12th dimension.

Refute this

That doesn’t refute the First Way. You’ve just replaced its conclusion with an arbitrary alternative. If you think an infinite regress of essentially ordered movers is possible, argue for that instead.

 

[Turkic Albanian]

did you read what I said? naturalism is premise and can't be proven and never will be because of underdetermination same with god
because you can experience something that doesn't prove the premise because an assumption must be made
you simply think your somehow smart for not believing in god when in reality your retarded

"because you can experience something that doesn't prove the premise because an assumption must be made"

I think therefore I am/10

 

[Turkic Albanian]

That doesn’t refute the First Way. You’ve just replaced its conclusion with an arbitrary alternative. If you think an infinite regress of essentially ordered movers is possible, argue for that instead.

"If you think an infinite regress of essentially ordered movers is possible, argue for that instead."

I did, I can't prove it tho so it means nothing

Same way you can't prove the opposite to be true

 

[Mogger]

"If you think an infinite regress of essentially ordered movers is possible, argue for that instead."

I did, I can't prove it tho so it means nothing

Same way you can't prove the opposite to be true

You’re basically admitting you have no argument against the premise and then acting like that somehow makes your position equally justified.

 

[Turkic Albanian]

You’re basically admitting you have no argument against the premise and then acting like that somehow makes your position equally justified.

You just said it yourself what my argument is- infinite regression as a brute fact

And you rejected my "premise" just as I rejected yours

 

[muhajudin21]

Ok anyone can make assumptions

Now prove them

you think your a genius huhany data we gather will always fit multiple theories making naturalism impossible god on the other hand is falsifiable/provable in theory because its a positive claim

Because an infinite chain of movers is impossible, there must be a First Unmoved Mover, which is the flying spaghetti monster of the 12th dimension.

Refute this

god is a force anyone can come to the conclusion of
you simply renamed it retard

"because you can experience something that doesn't prove the premise because an assumption must be made"

I think therefore I am/10

I think your confused as I said experience ≠ empirical

You just said it yourself what my argument is- infinite regression as a brute fact

And you rejected my "premise" just as I rejected yours

this goes back to god being a positive claim retard

 

[Daddy's Home]

 

[Turkic Albanian]

you think your a genius huhany data we gather will always fit multiple theories making naturalism impossible god on the other hand is falsifiable/provable in theory because its a positive claim

god is a force anyone can come to the conclusion of
you simply renamed it retard

I think your confused as I said experience ≠ empirical

this goes back to god being a positive claim retard

"theories making naturalism impossible"
naturalism has not been proven to be impossible, niggas just making shit up

"god on the other hand is falsifiable/provable in theory because its a positive claim"
So prove it then.
Btw God is unfalsifiable

"god being a positive claim retard"
Indeed it us, now please prove this positive claim

 

[SpanishManlett]

If you are atheist, prove these arguments (three of the five ways) of Aquinas wrong:

• The First Way
  Things in the universe undergo change or motion. Anything that moves is set in motion by something else. Because an infinite chain of movers is impossible, there must be a First Unmoved Mover, which is God.
  
  
• The Second Way
  Everything in existence has an efficient cause that brought it about. Nothing can cause its own existence. Rejecting an infinite regress of causes, there must be a First Uncaused Cause.
  
  
• The Third Way
  Things in nature are contingent - they can either exist or not exist, meaning they depend on something else to exist. If everything were merely contingent, nothing would exist now. Therefore, there must be a Necessary Being that brings other things into being

First, the motion could be created be the universe it self because the universe has things that genenarate energy and thing that generate energy generate movement, like stars or the gravity of a planet. And the first movement of the universe was generated by heat.

second, we don't truthly know how the universe was created, not a single serious scientific belives on the big bang and the true "big ban" is more complex than the simple one that your teachers teach you. so the universe could be just infinite, it never started, it just was there. Because of nothingess and something. you can't have something if it doesn't have and end and that end is nothingness, and you can't have nothing because nothing is not even an empty space (the western explication of nothing) but true nothingness cannot exist because even an empty spot is something, that is why the universe never started, it was allways there because you can't have nothingness.


There are some things that doen't exist because the core elements of the universe where hydrogen, helium, and small traces of lithium. So the things that can exist are limited because the things that generated the universe where limited.


The literal definition of god is a consciousness who exists because it decided it but for that it would need a consciousness who thought about crearing itseft and that's imposible.

 

[muhajudin21]

"theories making naturalism impossible"
naturalism has not been proven to be impossible, niggas just making shit up

"god on the other hand is falsifiable/provable in theory because its a positive claim"
So prove it then.
Btw God is unfalsifiable

"god being a positive claim retard"
Indeed it us, now please prove this positive claim

naturalism is a negative claim god is a positive claim underdetermisnion makes it so there are infinite amount of explanations that equally reasonable to stem from the same data this makes naturalism impossible to ever be proven

god can hypothetically be proven because its all-powerful
no equivalent hypothetical event that could ever prove naturalism is true

 

[Turkic Albanian]

naturalism is a negative claim god is a positive claim underdetermisnion makes it so there are infinite amount of explanations that equally reasonable to stem from the same data this makes naturalism impossible to ever be proven

god can hypothetically be proven because its all-powerful
no equivalent hypothetical event that could ever prove naturalism is true

"naturalism impossible to ever be proven"
Probably, doesn't mean it's not true tho


"god can hypothetically be proven"
So prove it then

 

[Turkic Albanian]

Just read this properly for the first time today:

"Everything has an efficient cause; nothing can cause itself. An infinite chain of causes is impossible, so there must be a First Uncaused Cause."

complete ass pull of baseless assumptions

>everything has an efficient cause
Reality itself doesn't

>an infinite chain of causes is impossible
No it's not, it stretches back for ever

>so there must be a First Uncaused Cause
completely baseless, and even if this were true that first uncaused cause need not be God. It could be a simulation or simply naturalism itself

 

[muhajudin21]

"naturalism impossible to ever be proven"
Probably, doesn't mean it's not true tho


"god can hypothetically be proven"
So prove it then

omg your so dumb "god can hypothetically be proven because its all-powerful"

"no equivalent hypothetical event that could ever prove naturalism is true"
reason being "underdetermisnion makes it so there are infinite amount of explanations that are equally reasonable to stem from the same data this makes naturalism impossible to ever be proven"

do simply not understand what I type? I can try to dumb it down further and stop nitpicking

First, the motion could be created be the universe it self because the universe has things that genenarate energy and thing that generate energy generate movement, like stars or the gravity of a planet. And the first movement of the universe was generated by heat.

second, we don't truthly know how the universe was created, not a single serious scientific belives on the big bang and the true "big ban" is more complex than the simple one that your teachers teach you. so the universe could be just infinite, it never started, it just was there. Because of nothingess and something. you can't have something if it doesn't have and end and that end is nothingness, and you can't have nothing because nothing is not even an empty space (the western explication of nothing) but true nothingness cannot exist because even an empty spot is something, that is why the universe never started, it was allways there because you can't have nothingness.


There are some things that doen't exist because the core elements of the universe where hydrogen, helium, and small traces of lithium. So the things that can exist are limited because the things that generated the universe where limited.


The literal definition of god is a consciousness who exists because it decided it but for that it would need a consciousness who thought about crearing itseft and that's imposible.

what are you even talking abt?

 

[Turkic Albanian]

omg your so dumb "god can hypothetically be proven because its all-powerful"

"no equivalent hypothetical event that could ever prove naturalism is true"
reason being "underdetermisnion makes it so there are infinite amount of explanations that are equally reasonable to stem from the same data this makes naturalism impossible to ever be proven"

do simply not understand what I type? I can try to dumb it down further and stop nitpicking

what are you even talking abt?

Yeah, I understand completely

Still doesn't prove God exists tho

All it means is that his existence is potentially provable in theory (although it could also be unprovable if his existence is a metaphysical one we would never be able to verify it)

 

[muhajudin21]

Yeah, I understand completely

Still doesn't prove God exists tho

All it means is that his existence is potentially provable in theory (although it could also be unprovable if his existence is a metaphysical one we would never be able to verify it)

wallahi billah you are the most retarded nigga I ever had the displeasure of typing to

underdetermination makes it so any human reasoning of existence will forever be flawed

but god the concept of an all-powerful all-knowing force wouldn't suffer from it

 

[Turkic Albanian]

wallahi billah you are the most retarded nigga I ever had the displeasure of typing to

underdetermination makes it so any human reasoning of existence will forever be flawed

but god the concept of an all-powerful all-knowing force wouldn't suffer from it

even an all-knowing god doesn't escape underdetermination

sure, it might know literally everything about our universe, but how does it prove it isn't just stuck in a simulation run by some even higher creator? or that its own mind isn't being tricked by a grander illusion?

knowing everything inside your own bubble doesn't mean you know what's outside it. perfect certainty is a trap even for a god lol.

 

[muhajudin21]

even an all-knowing god doesn't escape underdetermination

sure, it might know literally everything about our universe, but how does it prove it isn't just stuck in a simulation run by some even higher creator? or that its own mind isn't being tricked by a grander illusion?

knowing everything inside your own bubble doesn't mean you know what's outside it. perfect certainty is a trap even for a god lol.

wow man you amaze how stupid you are

all-powerful you understanding of words is so shit

this is why atheist are so retarded if it doesn't know something its not all-knowing and if It can't do something then its not all-powerful

the only legitimate arguments against the god concept are "idk" or the critique of a specific being

 

[SpanishManlett]

what are you even talking abt?

What a FUCKING RETARD, don't you even text me to say something like that

 

[Turkic Albanian]

wow man you amaze how stupid you are

all-powerful you understanding of words is so shit

this is why atheist are so retarded if it doesn't know something its not all-knowing and if It can't do something then its not all-powerful

the only legitimate arguments against the god concept are "idk" or the critique of a specific being

Your basically cheating by doing this

I cant refute anything because you just make the baseless assertion that your God is ALL POWERFUL and trumps any counter argument against him because he's ALL POWERFUL

Pre school logic

It's like cheating, lol, not to mention a complete ass pull with not even a shred of proof

 

[Mogger]

Your basically cheating by doing this

I cant refute anything because you just make the baseless assertion that your God is ALL POWERFUL and trumps any counter argument against him because he's ALL POWERFUL

Pre school logic

It's like cheating, lol, not to mention a complete ass pull with not even a shred of proof

You don’t even understand the argument dude

 

[Turkic Albanian]

You don’t even understand the argument dude

For an argument to be logically tested there has to be some hypothetical evidence that could prove it wrong... If "He is ALL POWERFUL" is the answer to every contradiction then the claim can never be tested, proven, or disproven

 

[muhajudin21]

Your basically cheating by doing this

I cant refute anything because you just make the baseless assertion that your God is ALL POWERFUL and trumps any counter argument against him because he's ALL POWERFUL

Pre school logic

It's like cheating, lol, not to mention a complete ass pull with not even a shred of proof

no you just have a hard time understand as I already said the concept of god is a logical conclusion anybody can make

god must be all powerful or he isn't god

now as I said human understanding will always be subjective but the god concept isn't

now I think you mean "where does god come from" or "how does god work"
both of these criticism are valid but dont apply to creations

 

[Turkic Albanian]

no you just have a hard time understand as I already said the concept of god is a logical conclusion anybody can make

god must be all powerful or he isn't god

now as I said human understanding will always be subjective but the god concept isn't

now I think you mean "where does god come from" or "how does god work"
both of these criticism are valid but dont apply to creations

no, lol

What I mean is prove to me that your God actually exists. We can discuss semantics until dawn, I'm not too interested in how God works tbh...first I want to know if he even exists or not...and none of you retards here can prove it so this is all a complete waste of time

 

[muhajudin21]

no, lol

What I mean is prove to me that your God actually exists. We can discuss semantics until dawn, I'm not too interested in how God works tbh...first I want to know if he even exists or not...and none of you retards here can prove it so this is all a complete waste of time

are you special ed the god concept is a positive claim
and doesn't suffer from underdetermination making its a completely logical conclusion with no drawbacks
im not saying I can prove it but it hypothetically can and is completely probable

unlike a simulation, trick, illusion, naturalism or any other human claim which is subjected to underdetermination

making god the logical and ultimate also only exception to that

 

[truefoidslayerpqoqo]

If you are atheist, prove these arguments (three of the five ways) of Aquinas wrong:

• The First Way
  Things in the universe undergo change or motion. Anything that moves is set in motion by something else. Because an infinite chain of movers is impossible, there must be a First Unmoved Mover, which is God.
  
  
• The Second Way
  Everything in existence has an efficient cause that brought it about. Nothing can cause its own existence. Rejecting an infinite regress of causes, there must be a First Uncaused Cause.
  
  
• The Third Way
  Things in nature are contingent - they can either exist or not exist, meaning they depend on something else to exist. If everything were merely contingent, nothing would exist now. Therefore, there must be a Necessary Being that brings other things into being

 

[Turkic Albanian]

are you special ed the god concept is a positive claim
and doesn't suffer from underdetermination making its a completely logical conclusion with no drawbacks
im not saying I can prove it but it hypothetically can and is completely probable

unlike a simulation, trick, illusion, naturalism or any other human claim which is subjected to underdetermination

making god the logical and ultimate exception to that

"completely probable"

tell me how it's prob

are you special ed the god concept is a positive claim
and doesn't suffer from underdetermination making its a completely logical conclusion with no drawbacks
im not saying I can prove it but it hypothetically can and is completely probable

unlike a simulation, trick, illusion, naturalism or any other human claim which is subjected to underdetermination

making god the logical and ultimate also only exception to that

Saying God is "completely probable" isn't a logical deduction, it’s just an assumption.... if a claim can't be tested or falsified, you can't actually calculate its probability..... Because of that the God hypothesis has the exact same scientific and epistemic backing as the simulation theory. Neither has proof.

As for your god being an exception that's just pure special pleading bullshit

underdetermination means we don't have enough proof to 100% lock in one theory over another. It's why people write off naturalism, simulation theory, or the idea that reality is a simulation. The evidence just isn't there to prove it for sure.

But then people like you turn around and act like God gets a free pass from this exact same rule....

that’s textbook special pleading fallacy.... You can't just say every human theory is flawed because of lack of proof, but your specific idea of God is somehow magic and immune to the exact same hurdle.... If the rule applies to our concepts of reality, it applies to divinity too.

The reason the God concept seems to dodge the problem of underdetermination is because it’s basically an ad hoc explanation by design....

If you define a cause as completely all-powerful and uncaused, you’ve built an explanation that can account for literally any outcome....Saying God is ALL POWERFUL and His ways are mysterious isn't a perfect logical conclusion....it’s just an unfalsifiable claim.

 

[muhajudin21]

"completely probable"

tell me how it's prob

Saying God is "completely probable" isn't a logical deduction, it’s just an assumption.... if a claim can't be tested or falsified, you can't actually calculate its probability..... Because of that the God hypothesis has the exact same scientific and epistemic backing as the simulation theory. Neither has proof.

As for your god being an exception that's just pure special pleading bullshit

underdetermination means we don't have enough proof to 100% lock in one theory over another. It's why people write off naturalism, simulation theory, or the idea that reality is a simulation. The evidence just isn't there to prove it for sure.

But then people like you turn around and act like God gets a free pass from this exact same rule....

that’s textbook special pleading fallacy.... You can't just say every human theory is flawed because of lack of proof, but your specific idea of God is somehow magic and immune to the exact same hurdle.... If the rule applies to our concepts of reality, it applies to divinity too.

The reason the God concept seems to dodge the problem of underdetermination is because it’s basically an ad hoc explanation by design....

If you define a cause as completely all-powerful and uncaused, you’ve built an explanation that can account for literally any outcome....Saying God is ALL POWERFUL and His ways are mysterious isn't a perfect logical conclusion....it’s just an unfalsifiable claim.

pls read what I say carefully and its entirety moron
your problem is you dont understand underdetermination
your straight up retarded I will dumb it down for you
underdetermination makes it so empirical evidence and data can point to infinite probable conclusion making it so there is no one definitive proof

the rules and data that point to naturalism can also point to the matrix or simulation theory all human understanding is limited and subject to underdetermination

god is exempt because he is all powerful and all knowing if your all knowing and all powerful your god

its probable because god can hypothetically be proven because god is all-powerful
and something subject to underdetermination can never be proven true even hypothetically because there would be an infinite chain of higher possibilities. that are equally probable

pls read it twice if you have to

 

[Turkic Albanian]

pls read what I say carefully and its entirety moron
your problem is you dont understand underdetermination
your straight up retarded I will dumb it down for you
underdetermination makes it so empirical evidence and data can point to infinite probable conclusion making it so there is no one definitive proof

the rules and data that point to naturalism can also point to the matrix or simulation theory all human understanding is limited and subject to underdetermination

god is exempt because he is all powerful and all knowing if your all knowing and all powerful your god

its probable because god can hypothetically be proven because god is all-powerful
and something subject to underdetermination can never be proven true even hypothetically because there would be an infinite chain of higher possibilities. that are equally probable

pls read it twice if you have to

"its probable because god can hypothetically be proven because god is all-powerful"

This ragebait right

 

[sie]

agnosticism is the most rational position to take
-sie

 

[volo]

Fuck u muslim piece of shit, go fuck another like u love

 

[africel]

the existence of a creator can't be proven or disproven with human logic, every major religious text has contradictions and there are certain things that occur that can't be explained with science, there's nothing anyone can say that hasn't already been said by countless philosophers, it truly just comes down to what interpretation of the uncertainty you can personally tolerate because you will never truly know.

 

[muhajudin21]

"its probable because god can hypothetically be proven because god is all-powerful"

This ragebait right

god could reveal himself if he's all powerful do I heave to spell everything out br