The nihilist reduces everything to nonsense. They don't believe in truth. Therefore, their appeal to reason is always a pretense. Empty rhetoric and sophistry.
Arguments against God
Posts
Total:
103
-->
@Mopac
I haven't created a strawman. I have disproved every little thing you have said. You can't correct something if you are wrong in the first place.
Dismissing things as nonsense is more detrimental than refusing to be corrected by something that is false.
Your claims are literally all false in nature, and talking passively seems like a gambit to get you to sound more intelligent. You can't say you proved something when you have not.
Cheers
-->
@BearMan
I pointed out that you don't understand omnipotence the way we do.
You simply ignored this.
That being the case, you have no ground to stand on. You are not even debating me, but an imaginary person.
-->
@Mopac
Your understanding of omnipotence does not fit the definition of omnipotence and is therefore wrongly interpreted.
You have nothing true to stand on.
-->
@BearMan
My understanding does not fit your interpretation of the definition of omnipotence.
I see no problem with the definition you posted.
-->
@Mopac
It's not my interpretation, it's a dictionaries' DEFINITION. You found no other evidence to contradict this definition, rather tried to weasel out of it.
Your interpretation is not within the definition, therefore should not be held as correct.
-->
@BearMan
Post 18
-->
@BearMan
I don't dispute the definition.
This is a Latin word by the way.
Omni- meaning All.
Potens- meaning power.
All power comes from God.
Nobody believes that God makes square circles. That isn't what omnipotence means.
It is stupid to argue semantics. What matters is what we actually believe, not how you can twist and lawyer around language so you can deceptively paint us as believing something we don't.
-->
@Mopac
I would say rather that omnipotence doesn't make sense to you.But having universal power, authority, and force certainly is in line with my understanding. That is, all power, force, and authority, is derived from God.That is also the doctrine of the church, which understands our relationship with this power through synergism rather than monergism
Proven false
I don't dispute the definition.This is a Latin word by the way.Omni- meaning All.Potens- meaning power.All power comes from God.Nobody believes that God makes square circles. That isn't what omnipotence means.
All power not "All power comes from God." Reputable sources have proven this wrong again. You're speaking false words.
Nobody believes that God makes square circles, but the fact that he can't means that omnipotence is self-contradictory thus doesn't exist.
-->
@Mopac
It is stupid to argue semantics. What matters is what we actually believe, not how you can twist and lawyer around language so you can deceptively paint us as believing something we don't.
I'm not arguing semantics, your interpretation is wrong by definition.
-->
@BearMan
We don't understand omnipotence as you do.
Therefore, you aren't addressing what we believe.
End of debate.
-->
@Mopac
Your belief is false by definition, thus I already proved it wrong. Your belief is off baseless claims.
End of debate.
-->
@BearMan
You haven't proven anything other than your own arrogance.
-->
@Mopac
Yare yare daze...
Your belief in omnipotence surrounds around the fact that you think omnipotent means "all power comes from God" when the definition of omnipotent is "Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful."
God may be omnipotent in the Christian religion, but that doesn't change the definition of omnipotent.
In essence, your definition is completely falsely derived from your own mind, rather than any reputable source. By using ad hominem to prove your case, it solidifies mine. You have been wrong the entire time, yet you can't admit it for some reason. You relate back to "our beliefs don't match your understanding" but you have never explained your so-called beliefs without stating a false fact. Therefore leading me to infer that your belief is based on false facts.
My arrogance doesn't come from nowhere, and I have exhibited barely any arrogance in that matter.
End of debate...
Not necessarily evidence against God, but whenever a religious person points out that we can't explain something, therefore, God, I would like to point them to the "God of the Gaps" fallacy. It is where a religious person claims that because science does not know how something happens, or simply cannot explain something, obviously it means God. The problem with this argument by religious people is
1) Even though we don't have an explanation with evidence yet, therefore only have hypotheses, God is nothing but a hypothesis either, so claiming that one hypothesis out of several, is completely illogical
2) Lightning was also unexplained. Until a couple of hundred years ago, people believed that being struck by God or having your house burn down because of lightning was God giving you a punishment for being a bad person (So, of course, people probably didn't help their unfortunate neighbour). Of course, we now know how lightning works.
Conclusion: We didn't know how lightning worked, but that wasn't at all evidence of an omnipotent being, specifically, your omnipotent being you just so happen to believe in. We don't know what the first mover was for the big bang, but that is also not evidence for God, yes, that includes whatever God you, the reader, may worship
-->
@BearMan
God possesses omnipotence.
I do not dispute the definition.
I dispute the interpretation you have of the definition that equates omnipotence with the ability to do what is impossible.
-->
@Mopac
End of debate...
-->
@ImminentDownfall
We would say that to accept what happens is to accept God's will.
Not really a God of the gaps, as God doesn't simply fill the gaps but is "everywhere present and fills all things".
Explaining the process of how something is done does not in anyway push God out to "the gaps".
-->
@Mopac
Like I said in the beginning, it isn't proof of a lack of God, but is something to say to religious people when they mention something or other that cannot be explained by science
-->
@Mopac
But you haven't proved the first thing!
Look, I get it, you believe that god is everywhere is everything, etc, etc...
WHY do you believe that? And is that reasoning justified?
-->
@Theweakeredge
Lol the good old ontological argument. Literally an attempt to define God into existence. That's why it's never convinced me
-->
@Sum1hugme
That and its suuuper fallacious, do these guys even know what begging the question means?
-->
@Theweakeredge
Don't forget it fails to define what maximally great even means. And you can replace the word god with any noun.
-->
@Sum1hugme
Not to mention within classical gods there isn't even a reason to even apply that standard to any gods
-->
@Theweakeredge
All of these things follow from knowing what God is.
Namely, The Ultimate Reality.
Because The Ultimate Reality fulfills all these descriptions.
There is nothing greater than The Ultimate Reality. Nothing can ovverride it. There is nothing that can equal it. There is nothing that can contain it. Literally nothing else can be God.
And sure enough, this is the God we have always believed.
The God of Truth.
-->
@Mopac
Okay, but why is god the ultimate reality? Why? What logical reason do you have for asserting that?
-->
@Theweakeredge
I just gave you several. Nothing else is even worthy of being called God.
-->
@Mopac
No you told me that you believe god to be the ultimate reality, not why you believed god to be ultimate reality.
-->
@Theweakeredge
I just gave you some.
"There is nothing greater than The Ultimate Reality. Nothing can ovverride it. There is nothing that can equal it. There is nothing that can contain it."
In addition, all power and authority ultimately derives from The Ultimate Reality. Where there is existence, The Ultimate Reality is there sustaining that existence. It is The Ultimate Reality that gives existence to all things.
Nothing else can fulfill these things. The only possible God is The Ultimate Reality. That is the God we believe.