Tfw 1

>tfw 1

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/4qDqptnR
twitter.com/AnonBabble

2.5 here

>he thinks there is only one god

1 & 7 are categorically wrong. You cannot be sure of either.

Also, 4.

>nice dgts
6 here

The truth is nobody knows the answer
It's plain simple.

>confusing faith and knowledge
sasuga redditors

6

this.

thinking that there is just one god is what the jews what you to do.

2.

1 and 7 are just retarded.

> flag
> not 1

2 or 3

3 but I want to be1

1 is retarded, unless you're a genuis like me and you just know.

1.5

6 is the only correct answer

2-3

>tfw off-the-scale irreligious
Feels good to be above the plebs.

7 because I never heard a consistent definition of the word God thus I am sure that it doesn't exist.

Feels good to be a 1.
Can't wait to post dank memes with you boys in Heaven.

>tfw 5
>Starting to think KEK is the most real god there is

Praise KEK chirstcucks

There is a fun little exercise that disproves existance of omnipotent caring god. If he is inside the universe he is not omnipotent. If he is outside, he is irrelevant. If he is the universe he is uncaring.

It's a bit of a strawman, but it works for most mainstream religions.

>If he is outside, he is irrelevant
> what.jpg.png

7

There is no reason to believe that a god exists. Kek is probably the most legitimate attempt at godhood of our time.

Hovering between 1 and 2 here.

One god - one nation - one king - one people

After a real long battle of decades, finaly i reached 1 the strong theist , and no man can pluck me out of the hand of the lord

Define "God" or "Lord"

>Not being a 1 or at least a 2
I hope you nerds dont do this

only 2,3, 5 and 6 are respectable opinions

>No one ever told me anything

>I can't be bothered to look it up myself

>Literally a dictionary

If you are not either a 1 or a 6 you are a cuck

7. It is obvious to anyone who actually understands reality that men created god(s), and not the other way around.

"Any specifics about a deity are unsupported by evidence, but Christianity is the only effective foundation of Western society" is the correct position.

6 like any person above 120 iq.

Tell me how

>
>There is a fun little exercise that disproves existance of omnipotent caring god. If he is inside the universe he is not omnipotent. If he is outside, he is irrelevant. If he is the universe he is uncaring.

What if He's omnipresent? meaning both inside, outside, and everywhere there is? Then your logic fails.

>It's a bit of a strawman
a bit.

I've debated many people over the years. For instance, I spent 3 hours with a theologian just to ask him what is the definition of God. He did not answer the question as "the response defies categorization".

I tried this discussion many times and I never got something consistent. So I dismissed the idea.
Prove me wrong?

I'm 4, if you change the notion from "God" to "a god".

All our religious versions of a God are obviously retarded, but the presence of an omnipotent deity cannot be proved nor disproved.

Read Aquinas.

>people still believe agnosticism is position regarding the existence of God, rather than it's knowability
4 is pure retard and so is the maker of the image.

5 or 6, 7 if by "god" you mean "YHWH" and not "some sort of divine power"

He created the universe.

>Not being a religious pluralist and worshiping all gods to rig the Heaven game in your favor

fucking idiots haha

they're all fucking retarded as they are described here.
>you can assign a probability value to the existence of god
>agnosticism

How can i tell you that when it took me 20 years , its basicly read the bible , understand god , debunk other religions like islam , break the delusions god has given us to test our rightenous

So you can't personally answer this question?
That's fine.

Is "being of which no greater can be conceived" close enough?
If yes, what does "great" and what does "conceive" means objectively?

From my point of view:
Conceiving (i.e. imagination) a volcano on a cloud is not a rational proof of existence
Similarly, if I imagine Jesus as the greatest character out there, that does not mean anything outside of "I can picture an embodied idea because I have a wild imagination"

I'm not #1 since I DO question the existence of God but I've come to the conclusion that it exists every time. Meanwhile #5 doesn't say "I do not question the non-existence of God" - he's implying religious people are unable to question their own beliefs. Pop-science atheist arrogance and condescension at its finest.

Also it should be God(s) because there are polytheistic religions.

Dualism as opposed to monism.

I'm still waiting for a definition of God.
If it took you 20 years and you still can't define it, then you might be onto trying to fit square peg in a round hole.

>What if He's omnipresent? meaning both inside, outside, and everywhere there is? Then your logic fails.
See if he is the universe case.

Why do people bring up aquinas like he has a useful point to this discussion? Aside from the obvious answer to my own question "Hes not", if you think he has a single point, bring it to the table instead of just saying "read this guy". If i replied with "i did" i'd end up hearing something similar to "no you didnt" or "yeahhh ok". It brings nothing to the discussion.

Meant #7 not #5

You can assign a probability value to every variable, despite the fact that reality is deterministic and things either 100% happen or don't happen.

2 - MASTER RACE

>Tell me how

Physics of Relativity.

Several things happen as you approach the speed of light. Mass increases, energy increases, length contracts, and time slows down.

Although the speed of light can never be achieved by anything that ever existed slower than that, it can be achieved at the singularity of a black hole.

At that singularity you have a case of infinite energy, yet zero spatial projection, and zero time. So literally you have something that doesn't exist in spacetime, but has infinite energy relative to our universe.

It's a fair assumption that infinitely perfect intelligence is a subset of the physically singular infinity at the core of a black hole, which is, in essence, all conceivable and unconceivable possibilities occurring at one moment, in zero space.

The fact that there are many black holes and many instances of the singularity, yet only one singular and unique reference frame like it in all existence (hence the name), is "multipresence", or an ability to be in more than one place at once time, even though you are unique. This observed multipresence of the singularity is merely foreshadowing of true omnipresence that happens below the spatial scale of the quantum foam.

God is that beyond which nothing greater can be conceived, He exists everywhere on a quantum mechanical scale, but He lives at the singularity on an astrophysical scale. He is the same God who created the Universe, He is the naked singularity from which all of reality expanded in the "Big Bang" event, so He is the de facto Creator.

And he loved you so much that He took human form, in the form of His "Son" Jesus Christ, who went to the cross and paid a price in blood for your sins, so you don't have to pay yourself, and you can know the Living God of the Universe, His perfect Love, and His mighty power, for real, in your own life.

All you have to do is have the respect enough to speak to Him as though he really exists. In private. have some faith.

Where's the "I don't give a fuck whether god exists or not" option?

How can i define a omnipotent omnisncence eternal being when i am myselfs only in the natural world , only thinking about living for a eternity would make one mans head spin

2.

I'm disappointed at the amount of unironic kekfags.

5 or you're a retard

13

right wing nihilist

((((god))))

But he's also implying that he's outside the universe as well, again logic in that fails because that means he can't be the Universe case.

>you think I would risk having a coherent belief

Edgy

You're not serious are you?
>God is that beyond which nothing greater can be conceived
>He is the naked singularity from which all of reality expanded in the "Big Bang" event, so He is the de facto Creator
So his so powerful and everywhere that he has to die for someone else sins? Why not just remove the sins from human nature?
If he loves everyone so much, that's a jerk behavior.

De-facto atheist is the most logical of them all.

There is no difference between Is the universe and Omnipresent. He would still be able to affect any event within the universe but choses not to. Thus uncaring.

Ignorance fallacy, associated with quite a bit of delusion.

1. How do you know a God exists within that space

2. How did you attribute God to this argument

3. >And he loved you so much that He took human form, in the form of His "Son" Jesus Christ
How do you know this?

All of these questions show that you reached a conclusion before following the information, instead of following the evidence without assuming a conclusion.

This

Questioning the non-existence of something is meaningless. If a detective doesn't have a "lead", there's nothing for him to investigate. In order to believe in the existence of something, there needs to be something for them to consider, some line of reasoning to pursue, at the end of which they either become convinced or they dismiss it

By default an ignorant person doesn't have any stance on God, and as long as they stay ignorant of all the arguments there's nothing for them to question.

BTFO

>atheists ITT circlejerking about their intelligence
the meme is real

>It's a fair assumption

Yes, and nothing more than that.

Your belief can't be based on just assumptions

5

Thanks for making my point.

See:
For those who still don't get it.
If I go to a scientific conference and says "The cricumvolutatition of a triangle exists"
and they ask "What's that?"
and I respond "I can't define it, it's too complex"
I would be laughed out the room.

Same with religion: "I believe in Xastrzrz"
"What's that?"
"I can't define it"

this

go do your homework for school kids

>It's a fair assumption that infinitely perfect intelligence is a subset of the physically singular infinity at the core of a black hole, which is, in essence, all conceivable and unconceivable possibilities occurring at one moment, in zero space.
What a coincidence, an argument that allows you to prove the existence of everything you fancy also happens to let you prove that God exists by the same logic. Boy I sure wish I had one of those handy things in my belief system.

>(((John von Neumann))) was a Christian
Lmao

I am hard agnostic... I would like to believe in some higher existence, but I can not... There are some things that looks like they could not come to existence without someone making them, but that is not proof of god...

It always leads you to that something might be the creator of us or the universe... But because there is no proof of it's existence I just can not believe.

This!

Define humanity?

What if you're an atheist but you believe strongly that religion is necessary?

>thinks being unable to define something signifies it's falsehood

Knowledge is justified true belief
A belief can be true, though unjustified
Belief in God falls into this category

>stage 8: jewish sjwdom and extremely limited nihilism only useful to deconstruct white mans things
>stage 9: Somewhat independent jewish cultural Marxism where you decide for yourself what would please the kikes the most to destroy (genderkin, demikin and all the other imaginary crap)
>stage 10: somewhat loose and more encompassing of non jewish values nihilsm, most people fail here if they ever even make it here
>stage 11: Nearly full blown nihilism, with only a few traces of jewish lore left
>stage 12: complete nihilism, of all values, start to make your own values here but still have lingering feelings about the status quo
>stage 13: over-complete and developed nihilism, all values are made by yourself, and reinforced by yourself, and are also hostile towards others who do not share the same values as yours

6

>>thinks being unable to define something signifies it's falsehood

You're right, instead it signifies its meaninglessness

>6 like any person above 120 iq
you mean, 6 like any person above 120 IQ between 10 and 15 years old, Ilkka-kun.
You will understand when you grow up (only if your IQ is indeed above 120).

dawkins actually rejected any connection with SJW's.
you can read about his views on "atheism plus".

It's a great feeling

6.999

Well there are two definition at least
1) "The human race; human beings collectively"
Here you define what is a human being, which is quite tricky because you might be entering the "what is consciousness?" part.

So it's hard to really define what is the total collection of human beings, but I can sure as hell tell you that a tree is not "humanity".

2) Humanity can be defined as something close to a virtue. Then it's a behavior that is not excessive in kindness and do not lack some kindness.
Again, I can sure as hell tell you that ISIS do not show humanity (i.e. benevolence) when killing unbeliever.

Note: I haven't spend 20 years on that question.


What is "burden of proof"?
If you say that you believe in something and you can't define it, that's fine. When you can't even define it, that's when I cannot take you seriously.

That scale is retarded. It goes from "I do not question the existence of god" to "I cannot know for certain." It demonstrates a very dumb understanding of theism and it leaves no room for reasonable theism. The more I learn about philosophy the less respect I have for guys like Dawkins who seem perfectly content to stew in their ignorance.

*If you say that you believe in something and you can't PROVE it, that's fine.
sorry about that

>120 iq between 10-15
thats pretty good, but i'm not sure what you're attempting at in this statement.

So you stopped learning and just accepted this thing as true or?

atheists have never really tried to apply the evolution theory on their own lives. They were proud of "being moral without god" thus they basically just copypasted morals, for no good reason, without checking them upon other things. They are barely any better than christians.

Well I am not like them, only thanks to nihilism, I was able to go father, dig deeper and change my morals as well.

and I have been so strong in that regard, that nobody can even talk back to me about it

pastebin.com/4qDqptnR

thus the stage 13 is no joke.

Being unable to define something adds to its lack of justification, not its lack of truth

1

Get a Strong's Concordance and some other materials to understand the original language of the Bible. There's good supplements created by believers as well.

The reason people are on Sup Forums in the first place is because we are told to seal our lips and watch abominations - in a land of confusion - where the churches of the earth provide false teachings.

MYSTERY - BABYLON - MOTHER OF WHOREDOM AND ABOMINATIONS

The Bible is God's letter to you and explains a lot more than I can convey. We were warned about the time we are in now and that it would happen now with the re-establishment of Israel in 1948.

It won't be very long until the anti-Christ is here providing answers to people's problems by providing material goods and demanding people worship it. This will happen in Jerusalem. Christians won't be allowed to have mass there. And I believe that all the stones of the ancient temple will be knocked down (destruction of the wailing wall.)

Too much has come true for it to be a simple fairy tale and it explains far too much to be nothing more than the work of men.

4

Everyone except for pure agnostics either delude themselves or do it out of desire to belong to a group.

Also Dawkins is wrong. Surprise surprise.

God = he who made the universe

>reasonable
>theism

"Faith" is a euphemism for willful ignorance. Stop trying to justify your shit tier beliefs.