Challenge for the atheists?

- The characteristics of Zeus are physical, It's more likely that a non-physical God exists since we his effects without seeing him.

- There are no wheat fields in outer space for spaghetti to be orbiting the Earth, unless astronauts released it there for fun, and "monster" is a subjective term, so there may be a spaghetti monster...

- Pink unicorns are animals that we would find on the Earth if they existed, and we would find some genetic resemblance. Unless there were genetic deformations that happened to a horse that we haven't seen, It's improbable.

Now what makes the existence of an intelligent creator improbable.

Something other than denial. Denial is a psychological condition that makes it impossible to reason with someone.

Updates:
see his effects*...
No hypothetical scenarios allowed lol.

0|0
0|4

Most Helpful Guy

  • The fact that the existence of an intelligent creator is not improbable does not mean the intelligent creator exists.

    How can you "ban" people from using hypothetical scenarios when you used one as well. That's enormously hypocritical.
    Besides the hypothetical is used to make a logical ends of something which may or may not be logically existant and/or in the field of abstract thought, like you stated about the unicorn.

    Besides, it's pretty difficult to have a conversation about something as abstract and inexistant as a supernatural intelligent creator without using hypothetical scenarios. The whole teaching of any religion that professes an illogical belief in a supernatural being is hypothetical at least in its assumptions.

    0|2
    0|0
    • The belief in the existence of an intelligent creator (perfect, because it's a supposed god) fails on the imperfection of it's creation, imperfection proven a zillion times a day. A sloppy artisan thus, not a perfect deity.

What Girls Said 0

No girls shared opinions.

What Guys Said 3

  • If told you there was an Emperor of Jas Veroki dwelling in the ethereal plane of 9-dimensional space-time, and that She was the mother of all gods, including yours, would you believe me? Would you even consider the possibility that I was right?

    Let's give you some credit and assume you would consider that possibility. What would disprove it to you? Well, an easy way to disprove it would be to simply ask me "where did you hear that from?" Then if I reply with "I made it up," then you know it to be B. S.

    So, hypothetically, if we could go back in time and ask whoever first speculated on the nature of the gods and asked them "where did you hear that from?" What would they say?

    Of course, we can't know, because we can't go back in time. But anyway, my point is this: the existence of an intelligent creator is one of many explanations. If we are pretending they are all equally probable, then one divided by many makes it improbable.

    Also, induction. Religion says "how is the existence of a chariot with a huge flaming wheel being driven around the earth improbable?" years later, science says "because we have pictures of the sun." religion says "how is the existence of four elephants riding on a giant turtle carrying the world on its back improbable?" years later, science says "because we have pictures of the earth" And so on. Science continues to explain things that were once considered miracles, in terms that have no requirement of divine intervention.

    Granted, there are too many things to explain, and science will likely never be able to cover them all any time soon, but there is one thing that, if explained, nullifies all of religion - and that is religion itself. If religion can be explained in terms that have no requirement for divine intervention, then that nullifies their claim to divine intervention. And if it wasn't a god telling people what to write, and the only reason people even consider the possibility of a god is because of religion, then the existence of any god is just as improbable as the Emperor of Jas Veroki dwelling in the ethereal plane of 9-dimensional space-time.

    Of course, as it turns out, there is a very simple explanation for religion, and this is it: People want to believe there is no death and that we don't live in a random and indeterminate universe. So they do.

    0|4
    0|1
    • Could you answer with something other than the hypothetical though? And denying the real reasons why people believe a God on the side?

    • Show All
    • very. :-D

    • Ok. Hahaha

  • 1|3
    0|0
    • Thus, prove your belief, rather than asking others to disprove it. You can't prove it and you can't keep you unproven belief private either.

  • I think what we consider Gods are simply ancient astronauts that visited our planet in the dim distant past and influenced our ancestors. I'm not getting into any discussions here so just down vote and be done with it if that's what you want to do

    0|0
    0|0
Loading...