does god exist?

[roadtochang123]

why is this pointless?

son

 

[Gaygymmaxx]

god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

I thought what if God was like a human junky

And he's just like using human bodies to have fun

God is the one who fucked the snake in the garden

And now he just down here, that's what them niggas meant by the spirit of God dwells within you

Freaky nigga split his consciousness into all humans and had sex with himself, incestnaxxed

 

[theRetard]

I’m not claiming the universe caused itself I’m pointing out we don’t know yet. That’s not a metaphysical claim, it’s a suspension of judgment. Meanwhile, you're asserting a specific cause without evidence. If you want to claim that God caused the universe, then you bear the burden of proof not me.

didn't you told first is that we can't if he exists or not? the burden of proof is on you, you must proof that we cant know if there's a god or not

 

[theRetard]

@Vazelrr don't you think arguing with them is boring asf, they are so weak at this

 

[theRetard]

I thought what if God was like a human junky

And he's just like using human bodies to have fun

God is the one who fucked the snake in the garden

And now he just down here, that's what them niggas meant by the spirit of God dwells within you

Freaky nigga split his consciousness into all humans and had sex with himself, incestnaxxed

get out of here, pervert

 

[SilvioMoltisantiDan]

didn't you told first is that we can't if he exists or not? the burden of proof is on you, you must proof that we cant know if there's a god or not

Saying ‘we don’t or can’t know if God exists’ isn’t a claim about reality it’s a lack of belief due to lack of evidence. The burden of proof still lies with whoever makes a positive claim. I’m not required to prove ignorance you’re required to prove your assertion

 

[theRetard]

Saying ‘we don’t or can’t know if God exists’ isn’t a claim about reality it’s a lack of belief due to lack of evidence. The burden of proof still lies with whoever makes a positive claim. I’m not required to prove ignorance you’re required to prove your assertion

no you didn't just said "i don't know", you actually said "we can't know if there's a god or not", it is already a positive claim so you must prove that we can't know.
And yeah as for myself, I already proved his existence, my naughty boy, I can get tired of repeating it again and again, it's the last time:
god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

 

[SilvioMoltisantiDan]

no you didn't just said "i don't know", you actually said "we can't know if there's a god or not", it is already a positive claim so you must prove that we can't know.
And yeah as for myself, I already proved his existence, my naughty boy, I can get tired of repeating it again and again, it's the last time:
god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

You're misrepresenting my position. I didn’t make a positive claim I suspended judgment due to lack of evidence. That doesn’t shift the burden of proof to me. And your ontological argument only plays with definitions it doesn’t demonstrate existence in reality. Imagination is not evidence

 

[Vazelrr]

@Vazelrr don't you think arguing with them is boring asf, they are so weak at this

I literally already made a thread about atheism and I've debunked it and proved God's existence,has like 150+ comments;these dudes just make the same shitty arguments

 

[2vi]

god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

yeah im right here

 

[theRetard]

yeah im right here

what do you mean

 

[2vi]

what do you mean

im god

 

[theRetard]

im god

nice to meet you

 

[thepathsdontremembe]

he’s probably 8.5 psl and gatekeeping his genetics for true goddess

 

[theRetard]

You're misrepresenting my position. I didn’t make a positive claim I suspended judgment due to lack of evidence. That doesn’t shift the burden of proof to me. And your ontological argument only plays with definitions it doesn’t demonstrate existence in reality. Imagination is not evidence

you literally said " "we can't know if there's a god or not" which is positive claim, that shifts the burden of proof to you.
>And your ontological argument only plays with definitions it doesn’t demonstrate existence in reality. Imagination is not evidence
so what do you mean by reality? literally everything you can think about ALREADY EXISTS. Reality is not limited to the empirical, if you don't know

 

[puggysub5]

god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

I think the feeling of love, reasoning, thinking and etc has more to do than science, There is also proof of Jesus resurrecting called the shroud of Toren no matter your opinion your cool

 

[theRetard]

I think the feeling of love, reasoning, thinking and etc has more to do than science

those cool things are called qualia and yeah i think there's something divine in it

 

[SilvioMoltisantiDan]

you literally said " "we can't know if there's a god or not" which is positive claim, that shifts the burden of proof to you.
>And your ontological argument only plays with definitions it doesn’t demonstrate existence in reality. Imagination is not evidence
so what do you mean by reality? literally everything you can think about ALREADY EXISTS. Reality is not limited to the empirical, if you don't know

No. Saying ‘we can’t know’ is not a claim about the world; it’s a statement about the current limits of human knowledge. That’s an epistemic position, not a metaphysical one. I’m not claiming God doesnt exist or that knowledge of God is impossible only that I don’t currently know whether such knowledge is possible. That doesn’t shift the burden of proof to me it means I withhold judgment until someone presents a convincing reason to believe and Thinking of something doesn’t make it real. If it did, every fictional character and every fantasy would exist. Reality isn’t defined by imagination or definition it requires evidence. Until you provide it, defining God as ‘the greatest being’ doesnt prove anything beyond the concept itself

 

[theRetard]

No. Saying ‘we can’t know’ is not a claim about the world; it’s a statement about the current limits of human knowledge. That’s an epistemic position, not a metaphysical one.

it's both epistemological and metaphysical argument because it's what he can and can't know (epistemology) and about god (which is metaphysical)

I’m not claiming God doesnt exist or that knowledge of God is impossible only that I don’t currently know whether such knowledge is possible. That doesn’t shift the burden of proof to me it means I withhold judgment until someone presents a convincing reason to believe and Thinking of something doesn’t make it real. If it did, every fictional character and every fantasy would exist. Reality isn’t defined by imagination or definition it requires evidence. Until you provide it, defining God as ‘the greatest being’ doesnt prove anything beyond the concept itself

it's just some positivism/empiricist claim lmfao. if we need to prove god empirically then can you, my naughty boy, prove empirically that god even needs to be proven empirically? i'm waiting.
yeah every fictional character and fantasies exist, just not materially. Everything you can think of exists because existance meaning being an idea or matter (or both together which is called SUBSTANCE)

 

[Mogger2000]

god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

 

[SilvioMoltisantiDan]

it's both epistemological and metaphysical argument because it's what he can and can't know (epistemology) and about god (which is metaphysical)

it's just some positivism/empiricist claim lmfao. if we need to prove god empirically then can you, my naughty boy, prove empirically that god even needs to be proven empirically? i'm waiting.
yeah every fictional character and fantasies exist, just not materially. Everything you can think of exists because existance meaning being an idea or matter (or both together which is called SUBSTANCE)

1.Confusing the object of the discussion (God, which is a metaphysical question) with the speaker's position (agnosticism, which is an epistemological position) is a category error. Talking about what we can or cannot know is a strictly epistemological matter. I am not asserting anything about the nature of God, but bout our capacity to know. The fact that the subject is metaphysical does not make my position a metaphysical claim. 2.Demanding empirical evidence for a claim about reality isn't dogmatic 'positivism,' it's simply applying the principle of proportionality of evidence: extraordinary claims require proportional evidence. If you claim that God exists and has effects on reality, the burden is on you. I don't have to empirically demonstrate that empirical evidence is needed; that's a logical trap fallacy. The demand for evidence is based on rational principles, not dogma, 3.Here you're redefining 'existence' to include everything imaginable, but that definition doesn't distinguish between the real and the fictional. Just because something exists as an idea doesn't mean it exists in external reality. If we don't make that distinction, then, goku, dragons, and Pikachu 'exist' just as much as gravity or atoms, which is absurd. Conceptual existence is not the same as ontological existence.

 

[theRetard]

View attachment 4224148View attachment 4224151

what it has to do with my claim

 

[theRetard]

1.Confusing the object of the discussion (God, which is a metaphysical question) with the speaker's position (agnosticism, which is an epistemological position) is a category error. Talking about what we can or cannot know is a strictly epistemological matter. I am not asserting anything about the nature of God, but bout our capacity to know. The fact that the subject is metaphysical does not make my position a metaphysical claim. 2.Demanding empirical evidence for a claim about reality isn't dogmatic 'positivism,' it's simply applying the principle of proportionality of evidence: extraordinary claims require proportional evidence. If you claim that God exists and has effects on reality, the burden is on you. I don't have to empirically demonstrate that empirical evidence is needed; that's a logical trap fallacy. The demand for evidence is based on rational principles, not dogma, 3.Here you're redefining 'existence' to include everything imaginable, but that definition doesn't distinguish between the real and the fictional. Just because something exists as an idea doesn't mean it exists in external reality. If we don't make that distinction, then, goku, dragons, and Pikachu 'exist' just as much as gravity or atoms, which is absurd. Conceptual existence is not the same as ontological existence.

dude, you haven't even gave the context to chatgpt so he wrote you nonsense

 

[theRetard]

1.Confusing the object of the discussion (God, which is a metaphysical question) with the speaker's position (agnosticism, which is an epistemological position) is a category error. Talking about what we can or cannot know is a strictly epistemological matter. I am not asserting anything about the nature of God, but bout our capacity to know. The fact that the subject is metaphysical does not make my position a metaphysical claim. 2.Demanding empirical evidence for a claim about reality isn't dogmatic 'positivism,' it's simply applying the principle of proportionality of evidence: extraordinary claims require proportional evidence. If you claim that God exists and has effects on reality, the burden is on you. I don't have to empirically demonstrate that empirical evidence is needed; that's a logical trap fallacy. The demand for evidence is based on rational principles, not dogma, 3.Here you're redefining 'existence' to include everything imaginable, but that definition doesn't distinguish between the real and the fictional. Just because something exists as an idea doesn't mean it exists in external reality. If we don't make that distinction, then, goku, dragons, and Pikachu 'exist' just as much as gravity or atoms, which is absurd. Conceptual existence is not the same as ontological existence.

@Vazelrr just look at that jfl

 

[King_Schnitzel]

god is a being which nothing greater can be imagined
non-existence is not greatness
and therefore he exists

Only lizard cucks, their extrateresstrialal beings such as Dracos, Archons or Serpent Gods and their distractions to the excluded people exist in answer to your question in the title.

 

[theRetard]

Only lizard cucks, their extrateresstrialal beings such as Dracos, Archons or Serpent Gods and their distractions to the excluded people.

archons exist

 

[King_Schnitzel]

archons exist

I have said so.
You may read again.

 

[theRetard]

I have said so.
You may read again.

what means lizard cucks

 

[Vazelrr]

what means lizard cucks

Reptilian beings or something

 

[Vazelrr]

@Vazelrr just look at that jfl

DNR

 

[hunnidrounds]

The true answer is we don’t know and it can’t be proved until after death.

I don't know. Back in 2007 my friends and I were goofing off on this spirit engine website called Peter Answers and ended up talking to a real ghost. A spirit. I became really religious after that.

Here is a piece on ghosts from the Urantia Book:

The Urantia Book

Paper 87

The Ghost Cults​

87:0.1 (958.1)THE ghost cult evolved as an offset to the hazards of bad luck; its primitive religious observances were the outgrowth of anxiety about bad luck and of the inordinate fear of the dead. None of these early religions had much to do with the recognition of Deity or with reverence for the superhuman; their rites were mostly negative, designed to avoid, expel, or coerce ghosts. The ghost cult was nothing more nor less than insurance against disaster; it had nothing to do with investment for higher and future returns.

87:0.2 (958.2)Man has had a long and bitter struggle with the ghost cult. Nothing in human history is designed to excite more pity than this picture of man’s abject slavery to ghost-spirit fear. With the birth of this very fear mankind started on the upgrade of religious evolution. Human imagination cast off from the shores of self and will not again find anchor until it arrives at the concept of a true Deity, a real God.

 

[King_Schnitzel]

what means lizard cucks

Elites consisting of reptilian beings, feeding of negative emotions, especially fear of children, being cucks as they're obviously operating in the background.

 

[theRetard]

Elites consisting of reptilian beings, feeding of negative emotions, especially fear of children, being cucks as they're obviously operating in the background.

what elites

 

[King_Schnitzel]

what elites

What do you mean what elites?
Nigga do you think the world is a construct of different democracies?

 

[theRetard]

What do you mean what elites?
Nigga do you think the world is a construct f different democracies?

there's no democracies in modern world, there's either tyrranies, electoral democracies or oligarchies. elites rarely cooperate with each other, the world is pretty decentralized

 

[King_Schnitzel]

there's no democracies in modern world, there's either tyrranies, electoral democracies or oligarchies. elites rarely cooperate with each other, the world is pretty decentralized

Are you familiar with the Dunning-Kruger-Effect?
You learning that there is no democracy leads you to some knowledge.
You thinking it's as you described leads you to expect more of you than you actually do know.

I will not rank you and put you on there, I'm just saying that most people can be described through such.
Nothing hard work can't change, whether you want it or not, it's irrelevant in itself though.
Everything will be as it is.

 

[hunnidrounds]

I don't know. Back in 2007 my friends and I were goofing off on this spirit engine website called Peter Answers and ended up talking to a real ghost. A spirit. I became really religious after that.

Here is a piece on ghosts from the Urantia Book:

The Urantia Book

Paper 87

The Ghost Cults​

87:0.1 (958.1)THE ghost cult evolved as an offset to the hazards of bad luck; its primitive religious observances were the outgrowth of anxiety about bad luck and of the inordinate fear of the dead. None of these early religions had much to do with the recognition of Deity or with reverence for the superhuman; their rites were mostly negative, designed to avoid, expel, or coerce ghosts. The ghost cult was nothing more nor less than insurance against disaster; it had nothing to do with investment for higher and future returns.

87:0.2 (958.2)Man has had a long and bitter struggle with the ghost cult. Nothing in human history is designed to excite more pity than this picture of man’s abject slavery to ghost-spirit fear. With the birth of this very fear mankind started on the upgrade of religious evolution. Human imagination cast off from the shores of self and will not again find anchor until it arrives at the concept of a true Deity, a real God.

I even abstained from porn all throughout high school. One time during Spanish class there were two of my classmates sitting at a table I was at. It was me and those two and we were talking about smoking weed. I was telling them that reading the Bible was better than smoking weed and one of the guys had a confused look on his face and motioned towards the other guy saying "What would you rather do? Get high or read a fucking book?" He then proceeded to call me a "fucking virgin" afterwards but I didn't trip, I am glad that happened. Because peep this scripture:

Matthew 5:11-12

11 Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets before you.

So I know I'll be blessed greatly in Heaven for sticking up for God.

1 Peter 5:8

Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

 

[theRetard]

.

 

[theRetard]

@PrinceLuenLeoncur thoughts

 

[optimisticzoomer]

You should be asking “do you think a god/gods exist?”
Anyone who states god exists as though it’s fact is a moron

 

[theRetard]

Anyone who states god exists as though it’s fact is a moron

why? didn't i just proved that he exists?

 

[theRetard]

.

 

[trashbinxoxo]

51

 

[theRetard]

@Klasik616