Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:04:12 â„– 2419298 [Quote]
In my continous study of these works you are talking about, I habe definitely come to the conclusiok that some creator entity exists(100%), wether its the christian one or some other I dont know.
Chud WuAVzNn3 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:05:48 â„– 2419307 [Quote]
Modern science is superior to everything that came before it. Most modern scientists agree that god doesn't exist.
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:06:41 â„– 2419313 [Quote]
So far my favorite smug reddit take is the omnipotence paradox ("God cannot create a stone that he cannot lift, therefore he is not omnipotent").
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:07:07 â„– 2419319 [Quote]
>>2419307 They believe that god doesnt exist. The keyword is god. I can prove with very much clarity that something outside the physical and mental realm exists, which I would call god.
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:07:53 â„– 2419325 [Quote]
>>2419298 This. We cannot prove in any way that any particular religion is correct, but the chance of there being no God at all is precisely 0.
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:08:03 â„– 2419327 [Quote]
>>2419313 These statements should in my opinion be ihnored in first oder logic, since with them you cant probe anything and even science falls apart.
Chud V64yOrG7 [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:09:12 â„– 2419342 [Quote]
>>2419288 (OP) >some of the greatest minds to ever exist wrote entire books where they proved attempted to prove the existence of God ftfy
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:09:43 â„– 2419347 [Quote]
>>2419343 One subject above you
Chud Qk78Do2G 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:10:21 â„– 2419352 [Quote]
>>2419313 so whats the debunk
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:10:53 â„– 2419356 [Quote]
>>2419342 Do you want an outline of a proof only consisting of the most rudimentary assumptions?
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:12:39 â„– 2419367 [Quote]
>>2419352 That the statements are incoherent. With this kind of logic you can make mathematics fall apart. Here:
Suppose statement A exists,
it says: Statement A is not true.
Now you have a paradox you cant say anything about statement A, if it is true or not.
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:13:13 â„– 2419371 [Quote]
>>2419367 But a fundamental thing about statemants has to be that they are either true or false.
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:13:51 â„– 2419375 [Quote]
>>2419352 The word "omnipotence" does not imply that He can do things that are ontologically impossible, and creating a rock He can't lift would, in fact, be ontologically impossible since if He can lift it then He failed to create the rock but if He can't lift it then there is limit to His strength (which there is none), creating an infinite loop where any outcome is incorrect.
Chud Qk78Do2G 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:14:01 â„– 2419377 [Quote]
0>>2419367
Rolf Eidhalt hw54^aN6 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:14:59 â„– 2419384 [Quote]
>>2419377 It is a self referring statement, it is an extension of the liars paradox.
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 16:20:25 â„– 2419407 [Quote]
>>2419352 Think about it this way:
A hydrogen atom has 1 proton in its nucleus.
A gold atom has 79 protons in its nucleus.
Can God create a hydrogen atom? Yes. Can God create a gold atom? Yes. Can God create a hydrogen atom with 79 protons in its nucleus? No, because an atom with 79 protons is gold, not hydrogen. The last request is therefore impossible to fulfill because it makes no sense from a logical standpoint, making it ontologically impossible. Omnipotence implies the ability to do things that are possible to do. Things that are ontologically impossible cannot be done because they make no sense, there is nothing to do because the request is pointless.
Chud uKQmYz7m 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:36:57 â„– 2419721 [Quote]
>>2419288 (OP) It's because they don't want to be held accountable for their actions.
Chud Pd15S8dY 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:45:44 â„– 2419760 [Quote]
If you raised a child without ever suggesting the idea of a god, do you think the child would ever come to the conclusion that there had to be a creator? I've never experienced anything in life thatade me feel as though there were a sentient, higher power influencing the world in supernatural ways. The only signs of God that I have heard are from other people claiming to have witnessed miracles which is pretty unconvincing.
Chud VCALvFb1 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:47:08 â„– 2419761 [Quote]
the only way we can know if there is a God or something else is if we've died, too bad science doesn't know what happens to us when we die
Chud Pd15S8dY 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:50:29 â„– 2419772 [Quote]
>>2419761 Actually we do. Your body fails to maintain the conditions necessary to keep cells alive, and so your individual cells eventually die.
Chud 204M7DHN [VPN ] 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:56:16 â„– 2419785 [Quote]
>>2419760 >If you raised a child without ever suggesting the idea of a god, do you think the child would ever come to the conclusion that there had to be a creator? How do you think any religion started and why do you think there has never been a single atheistic nation or tribe in history? Believing that we were created by a higher being is the default software installed in our brains, if you raise a child while not talking about whether or not there is God, he will just make up his own gods out of pure imagination.
Chud VCALvFb1 11/17/25 (Mon) 17:59:05 â„– 2419793 [Quote]
>>2419772 im more talking about the point of the view to the dying person, what happens to his consciousness when he dies? does his consciousness die with him too? does he see nothing, but only black vision?