Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
The very first sentence of the Wikipedia page you linked on it says it is a formal argument.
Since it is clear we aren't going to get the formal proof, lets consider a snippet of what was given. It says that the set of contingent things must also be contingent because it contains contingent things? Do I have that right? Is that part of the proof?
"Oh, tiptoe through the window
By the window
That's where I'll be
Come tiptoe
Through the tulips
With meeeee....."
*strips off clothes and runs through the ripe fields of windbaggery, stooping to blow the ripe heads of brilliant proofs into the sky*
"Come Tin Man...no, no...eeeew, I mean approach Tin Man we shall seek together, the truth of the proof in far wikipedia...where all things grow, in the persian garden of polymathery, where it is always tea time"
@Old Man Re: "....approach Tin Man we shall seek together, the truth of the proof in far wikipedia..."
I'll be right with you in a split sec. Let me finish chugging this six pack of 18oz. Red Bulls. Just want that little extra "zip" to help me fully absorb the intoxicating richness of the garden's beautifully bountiful blossoms of bonafide brain-building buffet.
har! you guys make me laugh. giggle. snort.
@ avicenna
Nope. Not Proof. Just a bunch of bullshit proselytizing like William Lane Craig, Master of Genocidal Massacre.
Now we need a clean up Aisle 11. Another dump.
rmfr
Craig at least posts/presents the formal version of his garbage.
True.
rmfr
It's an old Islamic argument for a deity, it's called ""Proof of the Truthful". The thread seems to be predicating it as a full proof for god's existence. It isn't of course, quelle surprise. It has more holes in it than a colander. It's simply trying to define a deity into existence piecemeal, by first step by step predicating what it considers necessary or contingent for existence, then of course defining that contingent thing with the same attributes they assign to the Islamic deity.
@avicenna
And it is really easy to tell exactly what the argument is doing, because the argument works for anything!
Is Sheldon poster here actually the actor (Jim Parsons) that plays Sheldon in Big Bang TV series?
Well using this argument we could... prove it! And also that Sheldon is a god! It is a very weak argument, it is unfalsifiable and a worthless argument, but that is a giant clue that you seem to miss but the rest of us see. The argument is already lousy, but the simple fact the argument could work for anything, any random idea I come up with about some sort of god means it is worthless.
following LogicForTW...
I am a god. The god of nature. I am an awakened tree. Look at my avatar. ←
Point proven. Now prove I am not the "god of nature".
rmfr
@Arakish Re: "Now prove I am not the "god of nature"."
Uh, hate to be the bearer of bad news, buddy, but I spoke with the talking apple trees in the forest off the Yellow Brick Road. I'm afraid you are busted, pal. They told me alllll about some of those parties during your younger days when you were just a wild sapling. How you would wait until midnight to snatch apples from their limbs while they were asleep, and then use them to make hard apple cider. Then you would invite all the oaks, elms, redwoods, and even the PINE TREES into that end of the forest to party for days. And I heard you guys were really hardcore. Tossing each other into bonfires. Pinecone battles. Seeing who could handle the most termites at one time. (Those who over-did the termites are the ones who kept the bonfire going.) Bark-strip poker games. And a few other activities I cannot mention here. Anyway, the apple trees would finally have to threaten to call the Lumberjack Squad to get you all to leaf! Then they would spend several months cleaning up all the apple cores, not to mention all the pine needles and pine cones. (They really did not like the pine trees, by the way.) That was back waaaaay before my time with the Lumberjack Squad, though, but I almost wish I could have been there to see it. I heard you could sway with the best of 'em. Nice try with the whole "I am the god of nature" thing, though. Unfortunately for you, those apple trees have very loooooong memories.
Damnit! And I bribed them with some of that special brew.
rmfr
(sharpens axe for Tin-Man)
***awakened tree suddenly disappears into the forest***
rmfr
* quietly enjoys the spectacle of yet another "unassailable proof" being dismantled, and the proponent being shown the door*
How many times do we have to endure this dribbling childish (mostly plagiarized) "proof" of the giant creative Unicorn in the sky?
I don't know, but I wish that creator would quit leaving its gifts all over the place.
rmfr
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
That was funny. I think your timing was spot on.
I just spit coffee all over my keyboard.
hahahaha.. oh, gawd
Another I have to teach the Third Commandment of Forum Reading:
"Thou shalt not be eating or drinking while perusing forum boards for thou shalt never know when a post may cause great spewage."
rmfr
HAHA "great spewage" lol funny!
Actually I have a plastic skin over the keyboard. Not drink or eat whilst dancing over the keys? Perish the thought. May it never be.
GIANT CREATIVE UNICORN IN THE SKY??
what? sniff? sobbing..
s'pose to be a spaghetti monster. a spaghetti monster! who spews out meatballs on heathens.
sniff.... you mean it's not true? hunh? HUNH??
Of course she is real. There is plenty of room for anything. Also, if the Flying Spaghetti Monster did not exist, then why do planets look like meatballs?
Besides, look at what has come before: List of thousands of dead gods
rmfr
So, in summary, Avicenna's "proof" is immaterial.
@ Sapporo
Its the standard Islamic approach to "evidence", entirely circular and entirely threadbare. It is deeply ingrained in Islamic tradition and impressed upon the questioning convert. It does not vary except in order of topics. I did post the bare bones of the structure on a forum a week or so ago when SfT was shrieking at the top of his lungs.
I've had countless discussions with Islamic scholars of all sects and they all use the exact same traditional methods to "prove" their god/prophet.
It is all absolute bollocks of course, predicated on the divine origins of the Qu'ran and the purity of Mohammed's morals, which are not introduced until later in the discourse to "prove" the logic of the first part...and thus the divine origins of the second...as I said complete bollocking bollocks and beloved of Islamic charlatans everywhere.
Ok, I'm new to AR, but what is this? Is it really a pastime for religious people to come here and try to show us that god is not revealed to us because we are not truthful enough? (that was my fav part, seriously. Gotta love it). Or is it some kinda very deep, clever satiric joke? It must be it. A good one.
Actually it is both. Sometimes we offer real responses. Sometimes we go off on a whole slew of wild tangents and just have fun.
So far with this one, I have been cracking crude jokes, but the seriousness behind them is real.
Tin-Man and Old Man could probably explain it better. Right now I am drunk and enjoying myself.
rmfr
Dear, I'm not talking about us. Of course I get the AR responses. I meant, what the hell are those people thinking who are posting here, trying to convert us? Just dont get it. Oh wait, they are religious....
Pass me a drink, please?
@Lydia
Yep you will see a lot of post like these, at least 2-3 a week. Some theist get in their head they have found the ultimate truth/evidence of their god, and feel they can come in save all us "atheist heathens" from ourselves by sharing this deep truth they found.
Of course the reality is, all the regulars have seen these arguments before, (usually slight variations of,) and with our minds not clouded with warm fuzzy god is great, we see right through the arguments made.
.
Most all theist arguments for god can be narrowed down to variations of:
- "Argument from design/improbability" also Cosmological argument (first mover.) I consider all of these closely related.
- "Morality based" arguments
- Ontological arguments
- Transcendental argument
- Personal experience arguments (usually used in conjunction with other arguments, as most theist even know it is a "naked assertion.")
Less commonly used:
- Arguments from scripture, highlighting miracles, predictions, holy relics.
- Argument from Popularity
- Pascal's wager.
Wow. Guess I was really drunk. Your previous comment went right over like a 747. However, as Logic said...
Sometimes I can go off on the people. Sometimes I am just in funny mood. Just depends on what part of the bipolar cycle of CPTSD I happen to be in. Like yesterday, I had a 3-hour MRI of my spine and was in a good mood (although back pain was still there). When I got home, I decided "What the Hell. I ain't pulled a snoot in a while," and pulled a snoot.
And here is something I always find strange. Even if I am in the most depressive state of the bipolar cycle within the CPTSD, if I start drinking, it just mellows me out and actually kind of make me happy. Thus, the "numbing the pain". When I am happy, it just mellows me out and makes me like a crazy happy. And do not let me burn a bowl of some good weed, then my mind does go off on some of the wildest tangents ever.
rmfr
@Lydia Re: "I meant, what the hell are those people thinking who are posting here, trying to convert us?"
I have a theory regarding some of the theists we get in here. Bear in mind, this is ONLY a theory. There are times here when things get a little slow. As a result, the mods may tend to get bored. Plus, the rest of us start getting cranky and grumpy and all depressed because we have only our own ugly mugs to look at, and we start squabbling with each other like five year old siblings on a long car trip. Therefore, MODS TO THE RESCUE! One of them creates a somewhat believable profile, and then starts a theistic thread of epic proportions to catch our attention. Suddenly it's PLAYTIME, and the car trip becomes a bit more peaceful and relaxing and entertaining for a few more miles......*runs away to hide behind Arakish*.....*peeking from behind his branches waiting for Cyber*....*giggle-giggle*....
Pages