Proving God does not exist using 'Math, Logic & Reasoning'

[LancasteR]

Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Quran, Kabalistic Books, All Nag Hamadi Scriptures and several other metaphysical/Philosophical books

All manufactured shit that was written later and has no direct correlation the biblical manuscripts.
But keep thinking ((YOU)) can save yourself.

 

[Gmogger]

Didn't even read a single molecule of your essays no need to read to tell its wrong

Nigga bailed out like a little bitch When asked to "Refute" responded with 'didn't read"

 

[Gaygymmaxx]

@Gmogger Do you not subscribe to the concept that God is an amalgamation of the universe?

All creatures believe the earth is round, belive their feet can be placed upon it, and they can interact with the environment

I'm my worldview there isn't any environment

The big started from nothing? Where did it all come from?

It never did, that's when the simulation started.

He's experiencing life through every human so the suffering applies to himself and all of us.

 

[ngannou]

Nigga bailed out like a little bitch When asked to "Refute" responded with 'didn't read"

Sir can I ask you a question are you covid 19 vaccinated?

 

[Gmogger]

All manufactured shit that was written later and has no direct correlation the biblical manuscripts.
But keep thinking ((YOU)) can save yourself.

I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. I never suggested a direct connection between the two. When asked if I'd read the Bible, I was simply sharing my broader knowledge of various cultures and holy scriptures, having read most of them

 

[Deleted member 115488]

No we don't agree, that's a flawed argument that you cannot defend if I ask you just one question, also since you said "Didn't said" I am gonna assume you agree with me

So how do you explain the thing that exist im curious

 

[ngannou]

All manufactured shit that was written later and has no direct correlation the biblical manuscripts.
But keep thinking ((YOU)) can save yourself.

Sir can I ask you a question are you covid 19 vaccinated?

Lancaster what you think of it do you think he is covid 19
vaccinated?

 

[Gmogger]

@Gmogger Do you not subscribe to the concept that God is an amalgamation of the universe?

All creatures believe the earth is round, belive their feet can be placed upon it, and they can interact with the environment

I'm my worldview there isn't any environment

The big started from nothing? Where did it all come from?

It never did, that's when the simulation started.

He's experiencing life through every human so the suffering applies to himself and all of us.

Exactly, The universe is God experiencing itself through itself, through humanity and all of existence. It's the divine exploring duality, finitude, mortality. God, being all-encompassing—an infinite, impersonal, all-perfect, and all-powerful energy—would have no need for external creation; existing eternally, it would foresee and have already experienced every possible creation. Thus, the "infinite urge to explore" is fulfilled through the exploration of the finite, hence this world. God isn't a creator in the traditional sense, but a molder, an impersonal energy flowing through all creation. When the Bible says "God created man in his own image," it's not simply about physical appearance. And when Jesus says "On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you" (John 14:20), it clarifies that individual consciousness is an illusion. The Hebrew name for God, Yahweh, meaning "I am," points to this oneness—there is only "I." There's no magical man in the sky; these are personifications of the human ego.

 

[Gmogger]

So how do you explain the thing that exist im curious

It's good you're curious. So We perceive things through the limited lens of "space, time, and matter." But in reality, time is an illusion, something science has recently started admitting (around 2022, I think). Past, present, and future all exist simultaneously on their own frequencies; there's only an eternal present with infinite possibilities unfolding every nanosecond, "Existence" or the "universe" has always existed in some shape or form and will continue to exist eternally, there was no 'True" beginning and there will no 'true' ending, the universe evolves and changes eternally. The idea of "Existence' coming into 'Existence' is simply illogical on it's own term, The "Nothingness" is an impossibility because "nothingness" by its own definition doesn't exist. The universe cannot "NOT" exist, Read the again, The universe cannot "NOT" exist, 0 cannot equal 1, and vice-versa, even given infinite time. Many use the "uncaused cause" argument as proof of God's existence, but it's just an assertion the argument demands it. Any theist would agree a conscious, theistic God is infinitely more complex than the existing universe. If a more complex being that you can't see, touch, experience, or comprehend can be the "first cause" or "uncaused cause," it it's even a thing, then the universe itself, which is simple, self-sufficient, observable, and experienceable, is a better candidate or explanation for that.

 

[LancasteR]

I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. I never suggested a direct connection between the two. When asked if I'd read the Bible, I was simply sharing my broader knowledge of various cultures and holy scriptures, having read most of them

Yet you quote the biblical scripts to
make your points while simultaneously using the other sources as cited to make your points.
While the biblical scripts contradict with those gnostic texts you spin them in a way to discredit God as a deity.
Also your babbling in this initial post has nothing do with mathematics or logical reasoning to discredit God.
Make up your mind.

 

[LancasteR]

Lancaster what you think of it do you think he is covid 19
vaccinated?

No clue.
I just hope he‘s not so brainwashed to take the VD soon.

 

[ngannou]

No clue.
I just hope he‘s not so brainwashed to take the VD soon.

Biggest brainwash te elites did was to make people deny God and especially the Christ

JFL why would those global elites illuminatis, Rothchild, freemasons, Kaballah jews which are definitely smart people in the world

spend their asses on child rape and sacrifice on satan ritual

If you go to official masonic books they literally says atheists are stupid.


Charles Darwin , Karl Marx , Fridere nietxchze all those denied the creation of God were actually Satanists not athiests

and those who believe in athiesm are fooled by those.

So anyone who believes in gnostic or athiest stuff like that are just brainwashed by bunch of Global elites which are Satanists

 

[LancasteR]

Biggest brainwash te elites did was to make people deny God and especially the Christ

JFL why would those global elites illuminatis, Rothchild, freemasons, Kaballah jews which are definitely smart people in the world

spend their asses on child rape and sacrifice on satan ritual

If you go to official masonic books they literally says atheists are stupid.


Charles Darwin , Karl Marx , Fridere nietxchze all those denied the creation of God were actually Satanists not athiests

and those who believe in athiesm are fooled by those.

So anyone who believes in gnostic or athiest stuff like that are just brainwashed by bunch of Global elites which are Satanists

View attachment 3391404View attachment 3391407View attachment 3391414View attachment 3391408View attachment 3391410View attachment 3391415

Exactly.
Look into "Thelema". Or "Do as Thoust Will" rhetoric of Satanists/Luciferians who use Satan as symbolical scapegoat (lol) to indulge of worship and pleasure of the/thy self.

It was always about magnifying themselves in their own hearts.

 

[Gmogger]

Yet you quote the biblical scripts to
make your points while simultaneously using the other sources as cited to make your points.
While the biblical scripts contradict with those gnostic texts you spin them in a way to discredit God as a deity.
Also your babbling in this initial post has nothing do with mathematics or logical reasoning to discredit God.
Make up your mind.

nigga what? I have not stated anything outside of Bible and the commonly accepted narrative to disprove existence of God, I've barely even used any Bibical verses to begin with

 

[Gmogger]

Lancaster what you think of it do you think he is covid 19
vaccinated?

Yo the wet bitch is back , Still waiting for you to refute. How does it feel to be wrong 3 times in a row and runaway like a bitch when asked to defend your own opinions

 

[Gmogger]

Charles Darwin , Karl Marx , Fridere nietxchze all those denied the creation of God were actually Satanists not athiests

Yeah they are all freemasons hiding the intelligent design, they are not satanists and I also do not believe in the theory of evolution, Also Intelligent design ≠ Theistic God

So anyone who believes in gnostic or athiest stuff like that are just brainwashed by bunch of Global elites which are Satanists

I am not gnostic nor an athiest, I don't believe in God as a deity

 

[Gmogger]

Exactly.
Look into "Thelema". Or "Do as Thoust Will" rhetoric of Satanists/Luciferians who use Satan as symbolical scapegoat (lol) to indulge of worship and pleasure of the/thy self.

It was always about magnifying themselves in their own hearts.

Worship thyself is not knowing thyself, Worshipping of any sort either thyself or an external deity is Satanic

 

[LancasteR]

nigga what? I have not stated anything outside of Bible and the commonly accepted narrative to disprove existence of God, I've barely even used any Bibical verses to begin with

As I said you twist it to make it fit your narrative by adding gnostic talking points or methods of reasoning.

 

[Gmogger]

Sir can I ask you a question are you covid 19 vaccinated?

Also to answer your question, I am not vaccinated, I have been aware of all the deceptions since 2015, I think we both agree that the NASA and Theory of Evolution is a big lie

 

[Gmogger]

As I said you twist it to make it fit your narrative by adding gnostic talking points or methods of reasoning.

quote me what are the gnostic talking points I used in this thread, I'll wait

 

[Gmogger]

As I said you twist it to make it fit your narrative by adding gnostic talking points or methods of reasoning.

Look up origin of 'Worship' it comes from the word 'Worth-Ship' meaning to transfer your worthiness, tell me why would a supposed infinitely powerful god require your worship or energy? it wouldn't, Jesus' teachings were always about "Ask and believe you have it, and you shall have it" that's the true methodology of a prayer, to be grateful and to ask as if you already have it, All modern Christian prayers are rooted in self lack as if don't really have it, it's essentially praying your own downfall and feeding the energy to demons, DE = negative, Mon = Moon (Meaning emotions)

 

[LancasteR]

Worship thyself is not knowing thyself, Worshipping of any sort either thyself or an external deity is Satanic

There is no "an deity" but just one deity and that is God. Satan is not a separate deity, more something like a intelligent force or system that orchestrates human wickedness and carnality. Something what is commonly misunderstood even amongst Christians.
Humanity is fallen.
You said "The universe is God experiencing itself through itself, through humanity and all of existence."
But worship isn’t merely reduced to praying or giving admiration unto something, but bowing down to it or moving according to it‘s will. Walking in it‘s footsteps or orders.

 

[LancasteR]

Jesus' teachings were always about "Ask and believe you have it, and you shall have it" that's the true methodology of a prayer, to be grateful and to ask as if you already have it

Modern age bullshit rhetoric. Manifestation manifestation something yada yada.
Praying can be seen similar to meditation. But it’s not exactly that.

 

[ngannou]

Yeah they are all freemasons hiding the intelligent design, they are not satanists and I also do not believe in the theory of evolution, Also Intelligent design ≠ Theistic God

I am not gnostic nor an athiest, I don't believe in God as a deity

@LancasteR
JFL at your low IQ

the official freemason book literally says they hate "atheist" JFL at your low iq and they support "satanism"

you can't join freemason if your an athiest and they are officially satanists can you even read english??

 

[Gmogger]

Modern age bullshit rhetoric. Manifestation manifestation something yada yada.

Literally quoted a Bible quote LMAO, didn't say anything about manifestation

 

[LancasteR]

Literally quoted a Bible quote LMAO, didn't say anything about manifestation

You said Jesus teaching were always about "asking and you shall receive". When that‘s not true at all.

 

[Gmogger]

There is no "an deity" but just one deity and that is God. Satan is not a separate deity, more something like a intelligent force or system that orchestrates human wickedness and carnality. Something what is commonly misunderstood even amongst Christians.
Humanity is fallen.
You said "The universe is God experiencing itself through itself, through humanity and all of existence."
But worship isn’t merely reduced to praying or giving admiration unto something, but bowing down to it or moving according to it‘s will. Walking in it‘s footsteps or orders.

Again God is not a deity, All in encompassing is God and it's an impersonal energy. You are right about the definition of Satan, it's the collective force that represents Human's negative emotions and animal nature

 

[Gmogger]

You said Jesus teaching were always about "asking and you shall receive". When that‘s not true at all.

In context of 'praying'

 

[ngannou]

Modern age bullshit rhetoric. Manifestation manifestation something yada yada.
Praying can be seen similar to meditation. But it’s not exactly that.

Again God is not a deity, All in encompassing is God and it's an impersonal energy. You are right about the definition of Satan, it's the collective force that represents Human's negative emotions and animal nature

Keep coping the global elites believe the God as personel entity and they believe as Satan I just literally attached you the book and its quotes

 

[Gmogger]

@LancasteR
JFL at your low IQ

the official freemason book literally says they hate "atheist" JFL at your low iq and they support "satanism"

you can't join freemason if your an athiest and they are officially satanists can you even read english??

wtf is wrong with you, when did I claim I am an athiest? I made it clear that I am neither an athiest nor an gnostic, My understanding of God is impersonal one not a separate deity, stop false labelling me

 

[ngannou]

wtf is wrong with you, when did I claim I am an athiest? I made it clear that I am neither an athiest nor an gnostic, My understanding of God is impersonal one not a separate deity, stop false labelling me

You said they are not satanits JFL when the high ranking masons officially claims their satanic ritual in their own moral and dogma

 

[Gmogger]

Keep coping the global elites believe the God as personel entity and they believe as Satan I just literally attached you the book and its quotes

Don't claim things, if you are uneducated on the very topic, They don't worship a personal diety, you moron, Freemasonry is about self mastery, they do not worship any sort of God

 

[LancasteR]

In context of 'praying'

Praying is more than that.
God is not a Genie.

 

[Gmogger]

You said they are not satanits JFL

Yeah they are not, they are Freemasons

 

[rul]

The Anti-dogmatic Gate

View attachment 3382930View attachment 3383062


The Concept of 'God' is a war on logic & rational mind, The most abstract concept the man has ever created is the concept "God" a supposed all knowing, all perfect, all powerful and all loving deity that you cannot see, touch, comprehend that somehow exists outside of space, time, matter who dictates human intervention, has a personality, hides his existence and relies on a 'beliefs' as metric that would determine whether you will end up in a pit of hell fire for eternity or an eternal state of Joy, All this with the existence of 'Free will' that supposedly grants humans the will to choose between Good & Bad, This thread is all you need to know that such being not only does not exist but also that he 'Cannot' exist fundamentally, all using logic, math and reasoning, Something that cannot be broken or subdued or agued against but can only be presented, Note that we are debunking the existence of an Theistic-Religious God to be more precise the Abrahamic/Biblical God (Abrahamic Theory) who is seen as an personal energy that is sentient, self aware and existing externally who determines human lives

Simplest Method
View attachment 3382940

A simple yet effective way to disprove any concept or idea is using the Modus Tollens methodology. This logical argument asserts that if certain conditions are necessary for a concept to be true, then disproving one or more of those conditions is sufficient to disprove the entire concept. A basic example is the definition of a human being: all human beings possess consciousness and are mortal. If someone does not have consciousness, is immortal, or possesses both or either of these characteristics, then that individual is, by definition, not human. A more precise example is a square, which requires all four sides to be of equal length and all four angles to be equal. If a quadrilateral does not have all sides equal, then it is, by definition, not a square. Extending this to the concept of God, as defined by religious adherents, God is considered a deity who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. Disproving any one or more of these conditions disproves the entire concept. Therefore, if a being possesses all other attributes but is not all-knowing, then that being is not God. Similarly, if a being is all-knowing but not all-powerful, that being is also not God. If a being is all-knowing and all-powerful but not all-loving, that being is again not God, as the very definition of God, according to believers, includes the attribute of being "all-loving."

Christianity Proves God Does Not Exist

View attachment 3382942View attachment 3382973
The whole Christian narrative is a big paradox-breeding machine when taken literally, to the extent that it seems unworthy of being presented even as a fictional story due to it's lack of logical coherency, let alone as eternal truth. It does, however, hold metaphorical meaning, which is rational and is supposed to be just that. But playing by the rules, the fact that God allows people to go to hell is proof that God cannot be "all-loving." Now, the common argument presented is that this is a consequence of "free will" granted by God, but the concept of "free will" itself is fundamentally and equally flawed when viewed with an open mind. We will delve into that later. But getting back to the point, if God cannot stop people from going to hell because of "free will"—a system he himself put in place—and somehow he cannot stop or rule against it to save his very own creations from the worst fate imaginable, eternal torment, then it would also mean God is not all-powerful. The whole Christian narrative is tied with a very thin string of "free will," a complex term that is maintained so people stop questioning. Once people break that string, it is impossible to revert back.

View attachment 3382945View attachment 3382964
Free will and God cannot coexist. The existence of one necessitates the non-existence of the other and creates another infinite paradox. The whole concept of "free will" is an impossibility with the existence of God. Free will states that God allows people to choose, and depending on their choices combined with chosen beliefs, they are either sent to suffer for eternity in hell or to enjoy in heaven. But there is a problem that can be addressed with an example. Since we believe "God is all-knowing," didn't God foresee Hitler causing mass genocides and eventually going to hell as per the rules? If God is all-knowing and did foresee Hitler's eventual sins, then he never actually had "free will"; everything was unfolding the way it was foreseen in the mind of God even before Hitler was born. So either free will is an illusion and everything is predetermined, and God is all-knowing, meaning you choose what was already foreknown and foreseen (but that would then mean God is not all-loving and all-powerful since those who will inevitably go to hell will do so, which defeats the purpose of Jesus and his own narrative, and that even God himself cannot stop the predetermined reality), or the alternative concept is that God is not all-knowing and does not know what humans will choose. Either way, it disproves the concept of God from every possible angle. Free will disproves the existence of God, and the non-existence of God disproves free will.

View attachment 3382949View attachment 3382954
Secondly, consider the flaws in the narrative: Lucifer grew in pride and rebelled against God in heaven. Again, hypocritically, God did not foresee that in the all-perfect heaven with all perfect angels. Secondly, placing a system where humans are born in a flawed world where God hides his nature and relies on beliefs as a metric of punishment or salvation—wouldn't an all-knowing God at least know that true belief comes from within? There is no reason why a human being would not choose heaven if it existed, an eternal world with no suffering. But what stops a man from even rejecting God and Heaven? The nonexistent evidence and irrational narrative surrounding it. Those who can see through the veil have no choice but to not "believe" in the narrative. True belief is not a choice; it comes from inner conviction. The only way is to deceive oneself and believe things one knows are not true, meaning to go against one's own rational mind and constantly lie in fear of a supposed hell. Is that what a God would want: compliance through fear and lies? Of course not. Such a god would perfectly describe "Satan," let alone an all-loving being. Also, let's not discuss his other immoral acts, like ordering Saul to annihilate the Amalekites, sparing no one, not even infants or livestock, or causing mass genocide with floods and killing everyone except for Noah and his family. To consider this archetype "all-loving" is a crime against the rational mind. Again, most people "believe" in God because of fear of hell or the temptation of heaven. Remove hell and heaven from the equation, and it would be ridiculed more than the flat-earth theory. The very word "belief" means that they are not convinced. You "know" the sun and the moon; you don't believe in the sun and moon. I don't believe in the non-existence of God; I know it.
View attachment 3382971View attachment 3382982View attachment 3383023
To conclude, the very own narrative of Christianity proves the non-existence of God more than anything else. God being all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving creates an infinite paradox. If the Christian narrative is true, then God truly cannot be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. But if God is actually all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving, then the narrative cannot be true. If the narrative cannot be true, then God cannot be real. Either way, it can be said with 100% certainty that the God described in Christianity or other Abrahamic religions does not and cannot fundamentally exist, no matter how you try to position it.

Reason & Logic Proves God Does Not Exist
View attachment 3383024View attachment 3383032

The principle of sufficient reason & Occom's razor
The principle of sufficient reason, states that everything must have a reason or cause for it be existing or unfolding. or in simple terms a creation must be a creator and reason for it to exist, If everything requires a cause or a creator, then God, as a being, must also require a cause or a creator. People often posit God as the uncaused first cause, an exception to this principle. However, asserting an exception without sufficient justification violates the principle itself. If we allow for one exception to the principle of sufficient reason, there is no logical basis for preventing further exceptions. This leads to an arbitrary and inconsistent application of causality, undermining the principle's explanatory power. Why should God be exempt from the need for a cause while everything else in the universe is subject to it? Simply declaring God as "uncaused" does not constitute a sufficient reason; it is an assertion without justification, if God a supernatural being that you cannot see, touch, comprehend can be uncaused without a creator then the Universe which is observable itself can be uncaused cause too, a simpler explanation is already present, hence there's no reason for a 'God' to exist as existence will always choose the simplest path and the existence of God introduces a significant and complex assumption, Existence itself is self-sufficient without having a conscious creator in place: a supernatural being existing outside of the natural world, possessing extraordinary powers and attributes. This assumption adds a layer of complexity to explanations of the universe that is not necessary.
As previously stated, If God desires a personal relationship with humanity, as many religions claim, then his apparent absence and lack of clear, unambiguous communication is contradictory. Why would an all-loving God hide himself, requiring faith rather than providing clear evidence of his existence? This hiddenness leads to widespread doubt, confusion, and even disbelief, ultimately resulting in the very damnation he supposedly seeks to prevent. A truly benevolent God would presumably make his existence undeniable, eliminating the ambiguity that leads so many astray. The fact that his existence is a matter of faith, not demonstrable fact, contradicts the idea of a God who actively seeks a relationship with humanity.

Jesus' Story Proves God Does Not Exist

The narrative of Jesus's birth, life, crucifixion, and resurrection is interpreted allegorically as a representation of inner spiritual transformation. This interpretation posits that the story is not a literal historical account but a symbolic depiction of an internal process, connected to the concept of raising "Christ oil"—a literal brain fluid believed to awaken dormant brain cells. The descending of brain fluid from the spinal cord into the sacral plexus and its subsequent ascent back up into the brain, traveling along the 33 vertebrae, is presented as a direct, one-to-one mirroring of the literal story of Jesus. This theory equates the fluid, often referred to as "Christ oil" (derived from "Christos," meaning "anointed"), with the essence of Christ himself. The descent is likened to Jesus's birth in Bethlehem (symbolically represented by the sacral plexus, the "House of Bread" where this nourishing fluid resides), and the subsequent ascent through the 33 vertebrae is seen as a parallel to Jesus's 33-year lifespan. This journey involves various symbolic stages, including the fluid's interaction with the vagus nerve being interpreted as the crucifixion, its temporary presence in the cerebellum as Christ's time in the tomb, and its final arrival at the pineal gland/optic thalamus as the resurrection and awakening of "Christ Consciousness." Even the encounter with the Devil is reinterpreted as the temptations and distractions encountered during this internal ascent. This framework attempts to map the entire Jesus narrative onto a supposed physiological process within the human body, the 1:1 Mirroring of the Journey cannot be classified as 'Coincidental' however This thing requires separate new thread, but it fundamentally clashes with the literal reading of the Christian narrative. Taking the story literally presents numerous logical and moral contradictions.
View attachment 3382966View attachment 3382965View attachment 3383008
The most glaring contradiction arises from the idea that God impregnated himself into his own creation (Mary), then lived as Jesus to teach about himself, and finally sacrificed himself to himself for sins he himself condemned humanity for. This creates a logical loop: God is simultaneously the impregnator, the impregnated, the teacher, the sacrificed, and the recipient of the sacrifice. This self-referential act denies its necessity and purpose. If God is truly omnipotent, why would such a convoluted and self-inflicted process be required for forgiveness? A simple act of divine pardon would seem sufficient. The need for a blood sacrifice, especially a self-sacrifice, contradicts the concept of a merciful and forgiving God.

Furthermore, the literal interpretation raises questions about divine foresight and God's omniscience. If God is all-knowing, why did he not foresee the need for his own incarnation and sacrifice? The very act of sending Jesus implies a reactive measure, a response to a problem God either did not anticipate or chose not to prevent. This contradicts the notion of divine omniscience, which implies complete knowledge of all past, present, and future events. If God knew from the beginning that humanity would sin and require such a sacrifice, then the entire sequence of events, including the fall of humanity and the subsequent need for redemption, was preordained by God himself. This casts doubt on the concepts of free will and divine justice, as humans are essentially being punished for actions that God foresaw and, in a sense, orchestrated.

The idea of a blood sacrifice as a requirement for forgiveness also presents a moral problem. Why would a loving God demand such a violent and gruesome act as a condition for reconciliation with humanity? This concept seems more aligned with ancient pagan practices of appeasing wrathful deities than with the teachings of a compassionate and merciful God.

Conclusion

View attachment 3383000View attachment 3383010View attachment 3383025
No amount of historical accuracy or empirical evidence for the existence of Jesus or God can override a set of rationally derived contradictions within the core tenets of Christian theology. Even if historical figures resembling Jesus existed or if some phenomena could be interpreted as divine intervention, the internal inconsistencies within the narrative itself, such as the direct parallel between Jesus's life and the alleged "raising of Christ oil" (a process of internal spiritual transformation), coupled with the logical impossibility of a being possessing all traditionally ascribed divine attributes, effectively dismantle the narrative's claim to truth. The fact that Jesus's story can be so readily mapped onto an internal, physiological process suggests a symbolic or allegorical origin, not a literal historical one. This mirroring, combined with the logical impossibility of God's existence as traditionally defined, exposes the true function of the religion: not to convey objective truth, but to promote blind faith, unquestioning obedience to authority, and a sense of self-degradation and inferiority on a spiritual level, coupled with a paradoxical focus on the importance of the physical body (as the supposed vessel of this "Christ oil"). This emphasis on both spiritual inadequacy and physical importance creates a psychological tension that reinforces dependence on the religious system. This manipulation of the human psyche is demonstrably effective, as evidenced by Christianity's continued growth at a rate of 12.8% annually, demonstrating the insidious success of this deception in creating a hive-mind mentality where critical thinking is suppressed in favor of dogmatic adherence


My next thread will explore the raising of Christ oil in greater detail, real meaning of God, Mathematical God, Oneness, seeking to uncover the truth about reality and the universe's origins through methods that transcend both religious interpretations and flawed scientific theories

Summoning Intellectuals and few Ignorants

@Tabula Rasa @iwannabebreathtakin @jattlife @King Solomon @mewcel420 @kingsosa @Bliss @PARISIEN @kvn @nope @swt @nuisance @orman @übermog @BigJimsWornOutTires @Esteban1997 @RapeAllFemales @Gaygymmaxx @RomanianZaddy @abdi911 @Regressive @wishIwasSalludon

a "theistic religious god" does not exist. no academic in POR conflates the idea of God as He is in christianity with theistic notions like theistic activism, energia, bootstrapping or literally any other idea. The only God that is purported is the one proposed in the Bible

 

[Gmogger]

Praying is more than that.
God is not a Genie.

God doesn't have to be a genie because he does not exist externally listening to your prayers

 

[ngannou]

Don't claim things, if you are uneducated on the very topic, They don't worship a personal diety, you moron, Freemasonry is about self mastery, they do not worship any sort of God

They do you low IQ JFL then why would do that all those Satanic Ritual for what then???

 

[Gmogger]

a "theistic religious god" does not exist. no academic in POR conflates the idea of God as He is in christianity with theistic notions like theistic activism, energia, bootstrapping or literally any other idea. The only God that is purported is the one proposed in the Bible

Elaborate?

 

[ngannou]

Yeah they are not, they are Freemasons

Seriously this guyshas intelligence problem they literally say they do Satanic ritual and Satanic worship in their own book written by the most high ranking 33 degree freemason albert pikecan you even read english??

I just took the picture of the literal book and the literal page do you have eyes or what??

 

[Ur fav sub 5]

The Anti-dogmatic Gate

View attachment 3382930View attachment 3383062


The Concept of 'God' is a war on logic & rational mind, The most abstract concept the man has ever created is the concept "God" a supposed all knowing, all perfect, all powerful and all loving deity that you cannot see, touch, comprehend that somehow exists outside of space, time, matter who dictates human intervention, has a personality, hides his existence and relies on a 'beliefs' as metric that would determine whether you will end up in a pit of hell fire for eternity or an eternal state of Joy, All this with the existence of 'Free will' that supposedly grants humans the will to choose between Good & Bad, This thread is all you need to know that such being not only does not exist but also that he 'Cannot' exist fundamentally, all using logic, math and reasoning, Something that cannot be broken or subdued or agued against but can only be presented, Note that we are debunking the existence of an Theistic-Religious God to be more precise the Abrahamic/Biblical God (Abrahamic Theory) who is seen as an personal energy that is sentient, self aware and existing externally who determines human lives

Simplest Method
View attachment 3382940

A simple yet effective way to disprove any concept or idea is using the Modus Tollens methodology. This logical argument asserts that if certain conditions are necessary for a concept to be true, then disproving one or more of those conditions is sufficient to disprove the entire concept. A basic example is the definition of a human being: all human beings possess consciousness and are mortal. If someone does not have consciousness, is immortal, or possesses both or either of these characteristics, then that individual is, by definition, not human. A more precise example is a square, which requires all four sides to be of equal length and all four angles to be equal. If a quadrilateral does not have all sides equal, then it is, by definition, not a square. Extending this to the concept of God, as defined by religious adherents, God is considered a deity who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. Disproving any one or more of these conditions disproves the entire concept. Therefore, if a being possesses all other attributes but is not all-knowing, then that being is not God. Similarly, if a being is all-knowing but not all-powerful, that being is also not God. If a being is all-knowing and all-powerful but not all-loving, that being is again not God, as the very definition of God, according to believers, includes the attribute of being "all-loving."

Christianity Proves God Does Not Exist

View attachment 3382942View attachment 3382973
The whole Christian narrative is a big paradox-breeding machine when taken literally, to the extent that it seems unworthy of being presented even as a fictional story due to it's lack of logical coherency, let alone as eternal truth. It does, however, hold metaphorical meaning, which is rational and is supposed to be just that. But playing by the rules, the fact that God allows people to go to hell is proof that God cannot be "all-loving." Now, the common argument presented is that this is a consequence of "free will" granted by God, but the concept of "free will" itself is fundamentally and equally flawed when viewed with an open mind. We will delve into that later. But getting back to the point, if God cannot stop people from going to hell because of "free will"—a system he himself put in place—and somehow he cannot stop or rule against it to save his very own creations from the worst fate imaginable, eternal torment, then it would also mean God is not all-powerful. The whole Christian narrative is tied with a very thin string of "free will," a complex term that is maintained so people stop questioning. Once people break that string, it is impossible to revert back.

View attachment 3382945View attachment 3382964
Free will and God cannot coexist. The existence of one necessitates the non-existence of the other and creates another infinite paradox. The whole concept of "free will" is an impossibility with the existence of God. Free will states that God allows people to choose, and depending on their choices combined with chosen beliefs, they are either sent to suffer for eternity in hell or to enjoy in heaven. But there is a problem that can be addressed with an example. Since we believe "God is all-knowing," didn't God foresee Hitler causing mass genocides and eventually going to hell as per the rules? If God is all-knowing and did foresee Hitler's eventual sins, then he never actually had "free will"; everything was unfolding the way it was foreseen in the mind of God even before Hitler was born. So either free will is an illusion and everything is predetermined, and God is all-knowing, meaning you choose what was already foreknown and foreseen (but that would then mean God is not all-loving and all-powerful since those who will inevitably go to hell will do so, which defeats the purpose of Jesus and his own narrative, and that even God himself cannot stop the predetermined reality), or the alternative concept is that God is not all-knowing and does not know what humans will choose. Either way, it disproves the concept of God from every possible angle. Free will disproves the existence of God, and the non-existence of God disproves free will.

View attachment 3382949View attachment 3382954
Secondly, consider the flaws in the narrative: Lucifer grew in pride and rebelled against God in heaven. Again, hypocritically, God did not foresee that in the all-perfect heaven with all perfect angels. Secondly, placing a system where humans are born in a flawed world where God hides his nature and relies on beliefs as a metric of punishment or salvation—wouldn't an all-knowing God at least know that true belief comes from within? There is no reason why a human being would not choose heaven if it existed, an eternal world with no suffering. But what stops a man from even rejecting God and Heaven? The nonexistent evidence and irrational narrative surrounding it. Those who can see through the veil have no choice but to not "believe" in the narrative. True belief is not a choice; it comes from inner conviction. The only way is to deceive oneself and believe things one knows are not true, meaning to go against one's own rational mind and constantly lie in fear of a supposed hell. Is that what a God would want: compliance through fear and lies? Of course not. Such a god would perfectly describe "Satan," let alone an all-loving being. Also, let's not discuss his other immoral acts, like ordering Saul to annihilate the Amalekites, sparing no one, not even infants or livestock, or causing mass genocide with floods and killing everyone except for Noah and his family. To consider this archetype "all-loving" is a crime against the rational mind. Again, most people "believe" in God because of fear of hell or the temptation of heaven. Remove hell and heaven from the equation, and it would be ridiculed more than the flat-earth theory. The very word "belief" means that they are not convinced. You "know" the sun and the moon; you don't believe in the sun and moon. I don't believe in the non-existence of God; I know it.
View attachment 3382971View attachment 3382982View attachment 3383023
To conclude, the very own narrative of Christianity proves the non-existence of God more than anything else. God being all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving creates an infinite paradox. If the Christian narrative is true, then God truly cannot be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. But if God is actually all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving, then the narrative cannot be true. If the narrative cannot be true, then God cannot be real. Either way, it can be said with 100% certainty that the God described in Christianity or other Abrahamic religions does not and cannot fundamentally exist, no matter how you try to position it.

Reason & Logic Proves God Does Not Exist
View attachment 3383024View attachment 3383032

The principle of sufficient reason & Occom's razor
The principle of sufficient reason, states that everything must have a reason or cause for it be existing or unfolding. or in simple terms a creation must be a creator and reason for it to exist, If everything requires a cause or a creator, then God, as a being, must also require a cause or a creator. People often posit God as the uncaused first cause, an exception to this principle. However, asserting an exception without sufficient justification violates the principle itself. If we allow for one exception to the principle of sufficient reason, there is no logical basis for preventing further exceptions. This leads to an arbitrary and inconsistent application of causality, undermining the principle's explanatory power. Why should God be exempt from the need for a cause while everything else in the universe is subject to it? Simply declaring God as "uncaused" does not constitute a sufficient reason; it is an assertion without justification, if God a supernatural being that you cannot see, touch, comprehend can be uncaused without a creator then the Universe which is observable itself can be uncaused cause too, a simpler explanation is already present, hence there's no reason for a 'God' to exist as existence will always choose the simplest path and the existence of God introduces a significant and complex assumption, Existence itself is self-sufficient without having a conscious creator in place: a supernatural being existing outside of the natural world, possessing extraordinary powers and attributes. This assumption adds a layer of complexity to explanations of the universe that is not necessary.
As previously stated, If God desires a personal relationship with humanity, as many religions claim, then his apparent absence and lack of clear, unambiguous communication is contradictory. Why would an all-loving God hide himself, requiring faith rather than providing clear evidence of his existence? This hiddenness leads to widespread doubt, confusion, and even disbelief, ultimately resulting in the very damnation he supposedly seeks to prevent. A truly benevolent God would presumably make his existence undeniable, eliminating the ambiguity that leads so many astray. The fact that his existence is a matter of faith, not demonstrable fact, contradicts the idea of a God who actively seeks a relationship with humanity.

Jesus' Story Proves God Does Not Exist

The narrative of Jesus's birth, life, crucifixion, and resurrection is interpreted allegorically as a representation of inner spiritual transformation. This interpretation posits that the story is not a literal historical account but a symbolic depiction of an internal process, connected to the concept of raising "Christ oil"—a literal brain fluid believed to awaken dormant brain cells. The descending of brain fluid from the spinal cord into the sacral plexus and its subsequent ascent back up into the brain, traveling along the 33 vertebrae, is presented as a direct, one-to-one mirroring of the literal story of Jesus. This theory equates the fluid, often referred to as "Christ oil" (derived from "Christos," meaning "anointed"), with the essence of Christ himself. The descent is likened to Jesus's birth in Bethlehem (symbolically represented by the sacral plexus, the "House of Bread" where this nourishing fluid resides), and the subsequent ascent through the 33 vertebrae is seen as a parallel to Jesus's 33-year lifespan. This journey involves various symbolic stages, including the fluid's interaction with the vagus nerve being interpreted as the crucifixion, its temporary presence in the cerebellum as Christ's time in the tomb, and its final arrival at the pineal gland/optic thalamus as the resurrection and awakening of "Christ Consciousness." Even the encounter with the Devil is reinterpreted as the temptations and distractions encountered during this internal ascent. This framework attempts to map the entire Jesus narrative onto a supposed physiological process within the human body, the 1:1 Mirroring of the Journey cannot be classified as 'Coincidental' however This thing requires separate new thread, but it fundamentally clashes with the literal reading of the Christian narrative. Taking the story literally presents numerous logical and moral contradictions.
View attachment 3382966View attachment 3382965View attachment 3383008
The most glaring contradiction arises from the idea that God impregnated himself into his own creation (Mary), then lived as Jesus to teach about himself, and finally sacrificed himself to himself for sins he himself condemned humanity for. This creates a logical loop: God is simultaneously the impregnator, the impregnated, the teacher, the sacrificed, and the recipient of the sacrifice. This self-referential act denies its necessity and purpose. If God is truly omnipotent, why would such a convoluted and self-inflicted process be required for forgiveness? A simple act of divine pardon would seem sufficient. The need for a blood sacrifice, especially a self-sacrifice, contradicts the concept of a merciful and forgiving God.

Furthermore, the literal interpretation raises questions about divine foresight and God's omniscience. If God is all-knowing, why did he not foresee the need for his own incarnation and sacrifice? The very act of sending Jesus implies a reactive measure, a response to a problem God either did not anticipate or chose not to prevent. This contradicts the notion of divine omniscience, which implies complete knowledge of all past, present, and future events. If God knew from the beginning that humanity would sin and require such a sacrifice, then the entire sequence of events, including the fall of humanity and the subsequent need for redemption, was preordained by God himself. This casts doubt on the concepts of free will and divine justice, as humans are essentially being punished for actions that God foresaw and, in a sense, orchestrated.

The idea of a blood sacrifice as a requirement for forgiveness also presents a moral problem. Why would a loving God demand such a violent and gruesome act as a condition for reconciliation with humanity? This concept seems more aligned with ancient pagan practices of appeasing wrathful deities than with the teachings of a compassionate and merciful God.

Conclusion

View attachment 3383000View attachment 3383010View attachment 3383025
No amount of historical accuracy or empirical evidence for the existence of Jesus or God can override a set of rationally derived contradictions within the core tenets of Christian theology. Even if historical figures resembling Jesus existed or if some phenomena could be interpreted as divine intervention, the internal inconsistencies within the narrative itself, such as the direct parallel between Jesus's life and the alleged "raising of Christ oil" (a process of internal spiritual transformation), coupled with the logical impossibility of a being possessing all traditionally ascribed divine attributes, effectively dismantle the narrative's claim to truth. The fact that Jesus's story can be so readily mapped onto an internal, physiological process suggests a symbolic or allegorical origin, not a literal historical one. This mirroring, combined with the logical impossibility of God's existence as traditionally defined, exposes the true function of the religion: not to convey objective truth, but to promote blind faith, unquestioning obedience to authority, and a sense of self-degradation and inferiority on a spiritual level, coupled with a paradoxical focus on the importance of the physical body (as the supposed vessel of this "Christ oil"). This emphasis on both spiritual inadequacy and physical importance creates a psychological tension that reinforces dependence on the religious system. This manipulation of the human psyche is demonstrably effective, as evidenced by Christianity's continued growth at a rate of 12.8% annually, demonstrating the insidious success of this deception in creating a hive-mind mentality where critical thinking is suppressed in favor of dogmatic adherence


My next thread will explore the raising of Christ oil in greater detail, real meaning of God, Mathematical God, Oneness, seeking to uncover the truth about reality and the universe's origins through methods that transcend both religious interpretations and flawed scientific theories

Summoning Intellectuals and few Ignorants

@Tabula Rasa @iwannabebreathtakin @jattlife @King Solomon @mewcel420 @kingsosa @Bliss @PARISIEN @kvn @nope @swt @nuisance @orman @übermog @BigJimsWornOutTires @Esteban1997 @RapeAllFemales @Gaygymmaxx @RomanianZaddy @abdi911 @Regressive @wishIwasSalludon

Low IQ thread

 

[Gmogger]

They do you low IQ JFL then why would do that all those Satanic Ritual for what then???

If you stop calling me names, I can take you seriously, otherwise all your questions seem more like defense mechanism than a genuine question, are you genuninely open to hear what I have to say or do you consider yourself "Figured out'? I personally don't but I can answer your question, but there's no point if you dont want to listen

 

[LancasteR]

Again God is not a deity, All in encompassing is God and it's an impersonal energy. You are right about the definition of Satan, it's the collective force that represents Human's negative emotions and animal nature

It doesn‘t just represent human negative emotions and animal nature, but has a metaphysical aspect to it. Hence it being a intelligent system, force, chain of command all simultaneously.
Akin to a cancer, virus or parasite.

 

[Gmogger]

Low IQ thread

Low IQ response, +You agree with me

 

[Gmogger]

It doesn‘t just represent human negative emotions and animal nature, but has a metaphysical aspect to it. Hence it being a intelligent system, force, chain of command all simultaneously.
Akin to a cancer, virus or parasite.

Yeah I agree, that's basically my understanding of Satan. It exists metaphysically charging through human negative emotions

 

[Gmogger]

Seriously this guyshas intelligence problem they literally say they do Satanic ritual and Satanic worship in their own book written by the most high ranking 33 degree freemason albert pikecan you even read english??

I just took the picture of the literal book and the literal page do you have eyes or what??

Where is the part where it says Freemasons do Blood rituals etc?

 

[Ur fav sub 5]

Low IQ response, +You agree with me

Whats this gaslighting nigga ion agree with u go pray to your astrology book or sum

 

[Gmogger]

pray to your astrology book or sum

Nigga is clueless

 

[Ur fav sub 5]

Nigga is clueless

I like it that way

 

[Gmogger]

I like it that way

Have a nice day

 

[rul]

The principle of sufficient reason & Occom's razor
The principle of sufficient reason, states that everything must have a reason or cause for it be existing or unfolding. or in simple terms a creation must be a creator and reason for it to exist, If everything requires a cause or a creator, then God, as a being, must also require a cause or a creator. People often posit God as the uncaused first cause, an exception to this principle. However, asserting an exception without sufficient justification violates the principle itself. If we allow for one exception to the principle of sufficient reason, there is no logical basis for preventing further exceptions. This leads to an arbitrary and inconsistent application of causality, undermining the principle's explanatory power. Why should God be exempt from the need for a cause while everything else in the universe is subject to it? Simply declaring God as "uncaused" does not constitute a sufficient reason; it is an assertion without justification, if God a supernatural being that you cannot see, touch, comprehend can be uncaused without a creator then the Universe which is observable itself can be uncaused cause too, a simpler explanation is already present, hence there's no reason for a 'God' to exist as existence will always choose the simplest path and the existence of God introduces a significant and complex assumption, Existence itself is self-sufficient without having a conscious creator in place: a supernatural being existing outside of the natural world, possessing extraordinary powers and attributes. This assumption adds a layer of complexity to explanations of the universe that is not necessary.
As previously stated, If God desires a personal relationship with humanity, as many religions claim, then his apparent absence and lack of clear, unambiguous communication is contradictory. Why would an all-loving God hide himself, requiring faith rather than providing clear evidence of his existence? This hiddenness leads to widespread doubt, confusion, and even disbelief, ultimately resulting in the very damnation he supposedly seeks to prevent. A truly benevolent God would presumably make his existence undeniable, eliminating the ambiguity that leads so many astray. The fact that his existence is a matter of faith, not demonstrable fact, contradicts the idea of a God who actively seeks a relationship with humanity.

"a creation must be a creator" what does that mean? The PSR states that all explanans have explanations, or reasons for their being. Also, the fact you say that "asserting an exception without sufficient justification" tells me you're not well read on the dialectic on god being the first cause. Also to say "If we allow for one exception to the principle of sufficient reason, there is no logical basis for preventing further exceptions." itself has no basis in regards to what you're talking about. "God" being the explanation of the universe is the only reasonable explanation, as only the properties needed for CREATING the universe are FOUND in God. What further exceptions may there be? we describe god as an uncaused, all powerful, personal, aspatiotemporal being who can enter into causal relations within spatiotemporal regions.

" if God a supernatural being that you cannot see, touch, comprehend can be uncaused without a creator then the Universe which is observable itself can be uncaused cause too, a simpler explanation is already present, hence there's no reason for a 'God' to exist as existence will always choose the simplest path" what? what is the simpler explanation already present? If you mean the universe as the simplest explanation, then your explanation is circular: "The explanation for the universe existing is the universe existing, thereby meaning that the universe exists because the universe exists, you repeat your explanans.

if we postulate the PSR to be true, then there need be an explanation for the universe. You can't switch between the PSR being true and it not being true. Though, you could posit the WPSR.