I'm sure someone can disprove this but I will do my best to refute your points...

Ok we determine what is real in the world by sensing it, our perception of the world is how we decide what is fake and authentic.

How do we perceive the world? With our five sense. Sight, smell, sound, taste, and feeling (touching shit). We are unable to detect a presence of a higher being on any of those sense.

So we tell what is real and what is around us with our sense, god shows up on NONE of those senses. Saying he is there when we die is rather dumb considering none of us have come back and said anything about whether or not this is true.

Now people might argue that we can't sense emotion such as love but that is untrue, as certain bodily functions occur with love or any other type of emotion. For example in love, heart races increases, pupils dialate ect...ect...ect.

What do you think?

God, by definition, is a metaphysical being. There is no way to prove or disprove his/her/it's existance. You are pissing into the wind with your arguments.

then how the hell did anyone meet him/talk to him in the first place?

How did you come to the conclusion that I believed that a god exists? I simply stated that his/her/it's existance cannot be disproven.

thats why religion invented the word, faith. Belief without evidence. Evidence being something from your 5 senses. A waste of the human mind if you ask me.

truckfixr i didnt say u believed i just asked how anyone claim to speak to god, i wasnt trying to say you believed.

I'm sure someone can disprove this but I will do my best to refute your points...

Ok we determine what is real in the world by sensing it, our perception of the world is how we decide what is fake and authentic.

How do we perceive the world? With our five sense. Sight, smell, sound, taste, and feeling (touching shit). We are unable to detect a presence of a higher being on any of those sense.

So we tell what is real and what is around us with our sense, god shows up on NONE of those senses. Saying he is there when we die is rather dumb considering none of us have come back and said anything about whether or not this is true.

Now people might argue that we can't sense emotion such as love but that is untrue, as certain bodily functions occur with love or any other type of emotion. For example in love, heart races increases, pupils dialate ect...ect...ect.

What do you think?

I've never been to Asia but I don't even have to use my 5 senses to know there is at least one red-haired individual residing there right now.

You lose. :(

You gotta wonder what it must have been like when the first person claimed to have met god...I mean before god was even a thought. Maybe he was looking for answers science couldn't give, and just thought up god.

Maybe it was just a manipulative guy who could see that by making up god and religion, he could get control over people.

Maybe he really did meet god.

Who knows, why not just wait and see?

Does anybody know of a religion that follows that guideline? I suppose that would probably be agnostic?

truckfixr i didnt say u believed i just asked how anyone claim to speak to god, i wasnt trying to say you believed.

Delusion, possibly?

You have obviously never experienced psilocybin, ie Magic Mushrooms. You will experience God.

why do you care, If people live their lives in harmony and respect by supporting god.
(I'd like to mention that radical muslims and jews are not part of this and should be treated as criminals.)

Whats the big fucking problem?

Just because someone has different perspective on how the world is created, doesn't mean that he's a different person.

You should rather try thinking up some theories how to feed Africa instead of disproving god (not only for you but all people who like to bitch about religions.)

one theory that i agree partially with is that god fills in the blanks that science cannot explain. for instance religion used to explain why the sun rises. it goes more in depth than that but shit im not writing a paper here.

im in a philosophy of religion class right now and the biggest thing ive learned is that you can argue existance of god back and forth and no matter what neither side is going to give in.
ive been an athiest for a couple years now but i really dont have a big problem with religious people. only the ones that try to force their beliefs on others, that just bothers me. i think it was locke that said : tolerate all religions except those that do not tolerate others or somthing like that

If some unrefutable proof that God does not exist ever surfaces, it's not going to be on a public internet forum. Sorry buddy, you fail.

Don't forget our sixth sense of electromagnetism. It's how we feel moods, presence, and a few other things. It's the most often used sense, and the least recognized of the six.

Lack of evidence is nothing but lack of evidence. It's like a murder trial - without evidence, there's reasonable doubt but it doesn't mean the guy is definitely innocent. Thing is though, we're not doing a trial, so what does it fucking matter what conclusion one comes to on the matter of faith?

What should matter, is whether or not someone is trying to force their way of life onto you...theist, agnostic, or atheist.

why do you care, If people live their lives in harmony and respect by supporting god.
(I'd like to mention that radical muslims and jews are not part of this and should be treated as criminals.)

Whats the big fucking problem?


The big fucking problem is that every religion believes that they are the chosen. They are right and everyone else is wrong, and believe in their hearts that those who do not believe as they do are somehow less than human. Such bullshit has led to mass exterminations throughout history, by every Abrahamic religion.


Just because someone has different perspective on how the world is created, doesn't mean that he's a different person.

You should rather try thinking up some theories how to feed Africa instead of disproving god (not only for you but all people who like to bitch about religions.)


It's a total waste of time trying to disprove god, as it is impossible to do.

Consider this: Wouldn't the vast amounts of money being wasted (throughout the world) on huge cathedrals, religious theme parks, etc., be better spent feeding/clothing the hungry throughout the world? Billions of dollars are wasted on religious ceremony every year, while children die of hunger by the thousands.

I've never been to Asia but I don't even have to use my 5 senses to know there is at least one red-haired individual residing there right now.

You lose. :(

you have seen red headed people in pictures or in real life, you are simply making the assumption that there is bound to be one in asia...so no...you lose.

For example in love, heart races increases, pupils dialate ect...ect...ect.


You are thinking about love in an erotic sense. There is more to love than that. Love runs deep and is expressed in many ways. It is more often expressed through the concern and care taken toward others than it is as an erotic expression toward a lover.

I don't think your post proves or disproves anything, and is very narrow in scope.

I've never been to Asia but I don't even have to use my 5 senses to know there is at least one red-haired individual residing there right now.

You lose. :(

You are not using faith. You've seen red headed people before. You know the approximate population of Asia. You know the approximate probability of redheaded people. You are using inductive reasoning to make a prediction that at least one red headed person resides in Asia. Not to mention the claim that you didn't use any of the senses is pure bullshit.
See-You saw red headed people before
Hear - You probably heard Carrot Top before
Feel - Have you touched a redheaded person? Most likely.
Smell - Sometimes even they don't shower.
Taste - Well whoever you taste is your own business.

It is reasonable to conclude that you use at least 4 senses to determine that redheads exist, and from there you use inductive reasoning to make your statement.

Now if you said

I've never been to Asia but I don't even have to use my 5 senses to know there is at least one red-haired unicorn residing there right now.

You lose. :(

Then you'd have a case...oh wait.

No, YOU LOSE

i reckon that there is need to understand what religieon is before you post your opinion how i see it is

religeon = faith
faith = belief without evidence or prove
there fore religeon = belif without evidance or prove
and so it is impsoosible to prove the existance or unexistane of the lord almighty (yes i am a catholic) because there is nothing to prove he is real in the first place exept for belief and faith

unfourtianitly i belive that this mean thaT this particular forum while not prove anything

the existence of a higher power CANNOT be DISPROVEN (i dont beleive in god... i hate religeon that blindly beleives bullshit)
however, it is harder and harder to convince that there is no god simply because the argument is infallible, that and worshippers are childish in their arguments
i suggest that everyone read 'the god delusion'

"one mans delusion = insanity
many peoples delusion= religion"

Your first argument is wrong. We have 6 senses, the final being the kinesthetic. This is our sense of balance and alertness etc. It is possible that this could be the sense that recognises God.

Cheers,

MOTO

thats why religion invented the word, faith. Belief without evidence. Evidence being something from your 5 senses. A waste of the human mind if you ask me.

Faith isn't as evil as you're making it out to me. Belief in a God can be very important for a person and I don't think it's faith that is the problem, but faith in certain religions or religious doctrines.

OP, you can't prove or disprove God. It's entirely up to each and every individual whether they want to believe in something that has no evidence.

God, by definition, is a metaphysical being. There is no way to prove or disprove his/her/it's existance. You are pissing into the wind with your arguments.

But we defined him as that. Who got that definition?

God, by definition, is a metaphysical being. There is no way to prove or disprove his/her/it's existance. You are pissing into the wind with your arguments.

thought you said "metaphysicist"

..woah

Ok we determine what is real in the world by sensing it, our perception of the world is how we decide what is fake and authentic.

That was the beginning of the end of your point.

You do not experience other galaxies, but you believe they exist. You have a terrible argument. According to your logic, I have never "experienced" the guys who started the Starbucks franchise. I have not seen, heard, touched, smelled, or tasted them. I have no idea who they are, but that doesn't throw them out of existence.

This is our sense of balance and alertness etc. It is possible that this could be the sense that recognises God.
No, it is our sense of balance and alertness etc... :p

You do not experience other galaxies, but you believe they exist. You have a terrible argument. According to your logic, I have never "experienced" the guys who started the Starbucks franchise. I have not seen, heard, touched, smelled, or tasted them. I have no idea who they are, but that doesn't throw them out of existence.

Well once again you are using inductive reasoning.
1) Starbucks franchise exists.
2) Practically all businesses are started by entrepreneurs.
Therefore from 1 and 2 we derive:
3) An entrepreneur started starbucks.
From 3 we derive.
4) An entrepreneur that started starbucks exists.

There is no faith, but inductive reasoning and senses. After all you have SEEN a starbucks to make assumption 1. Conclusion 4 is derived from fact 1. In order to have fact 1 you need senses. Fact 2 is also inductive reasoning based on further sensory perception and inductive reasoning.


I maintain that my argument is by no means weak.

Yeah galaxies.
1) Astronomers claim to have seen galaxies (Hear or See sense)
2) They have no reason to lie as they cannot directly profit from their claim
3) Vast amounts of astronomers arrive at the same conclusion independently
4) Physicists, cosmologists and other astronomers all support the claim through peer review
From 1, 2, 3, 4 we derive
5) Galaxies most likely exist

you have seen red headed people in pictures or in real life, you are simply making the assumption that there is bound to be one in asia...so no...you lose.

That's exactly why I am right, though. So no you lose.