So, listen, i was a smartass in class

so, listen, i was a smartass in class
and one thing lead to another
basically, now i have to prove god's existence to a whole gymnasium while debating some atheist leddit fedora unironically loved by the teachers

Other urls found in this thread:

returnofkings.com/68068/philosophical-approaches-to-proving-the-existence-of-god
youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God
youtube.com/watch?v=1hWE52zsOaA
imdb.com/title/tt2528814/reference
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
twitter.com/AnonBabble

best arguments anyone?

you fucked up. one thing is to believe in god. another is to force your god on others when you have zero proof

admit your mistake, and cancel the debate.

this is a 18+ board

Good luck. Maybe this humiliation will teach you to keep your gob shut in future.

say "how can there be a god when god hates fags but he made me a fag?

oh wait you have to prove there is a god? lol. oh. well im sure you will do better than everyone else in the last 1000 years

>returnofkings.com/68068/philosophical-approaches-to-proving-the-existence-of-god

Lol. Ok start with Augustine's argument from cause, that's probably your best bet. (Google it) also this is 18+ board this thread has been reported

Easy; go up there and blow their minds by saying there is no God but allah. Then watch as they squirm and try to figure out if they should debate you or let you win for fear of being a raycis.

Watch this.

The dude lives in Serbia. They don't give a shit about muh Islam.

There is literally zero scientific evidence to prove the existence of God. If that is your argument, you will lose. If you can change your position to instead prove why religion is healthy and necessary for certain low IQ populations, you stand a much better chance at winning the debate.

Again, with emphasis, you CANNOT prove the existence of God. Living by God's rules, however, is inherently good. Depending on the religion, of course. I assume you on Christianity's team.

Your gonna lose. There are no logical arguments to support religion.

Tell them they are kaffirs and that Allah will be merciless in his jihad against the non-believers

You will win I promise

Go for the jugular and bring up the atheist's worst nightmare.
youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4

Sorry I thought the internet was made by America for America, blame the burger education

You're wrong. There are no logical arguments to support the existence of God. Religion has shaped mankind for the better for thousands of years.

look up william lane craig
plagiarise

>basically, now i have to prove god's existence
well good luck, you'd be the first in human history to do so

>support
The word you are looking for is "prove". There are no logical arguments that prove the existence of God. There are also no logical arguments that disprove it, so atheists are in the same box as anybody else. Nobody knows and nobody can know.

>croatia flag

they secretly love islamists

There probably is no god though. No supreme being would allow this monstrosity.

Switch the argument to the fact that there is no such thing as a state. Throw then off with the menutia of sooks.

>so atheists are in the same box as anybody else.
Not really. Atheism is the rejection of the claim of gods existence. Antitheism would be straight up denial. That said, agnostic atheism is the only type of atheism you can rationally justify.

>There are also no logical arguments that disprove it, so atheists are in the same box as anybody else.
not how it works and you know it. i can tell you hesitated to write this. faggot

Just prove that atheism is in itself a belief system the same as God. You can't prove god and you can't not prove god. No matter what 'evolution' tier argument they have.. there's no stopping a god sitting at the top.

To be athiest just replaced that belief mechanism with another and they worship it, it's values and ways if life in the same way.

Then argue how it's healthier for a population.. even built in to our minds to see and perhaps invent a good to deal with things like death and to guide our morals.. that's why God's were generated in every corner of the flat Earth

Pic related as a PowerPoint slide for good measure

Just explain what light is until you reach the double slit experiment to blow everyones mind, then read genesis. It is the first thing that God gave His divinal approval. Give example of physicists that believed in God and tell him that if the people that he "worship" believed in God the burden of proof lies with him.

Religion is based on faith. You only have to prove the existence of something that you've *claimed* exists. You can't prove the existence of God, nobody can, that's not the point. If you could prove unequivocally that God exists, then there would be no need for faith, because people would know. It would be a monumental disaster that would undermine the reason we were sent to this earth in the first place (According to Christianity, at least)

If you're claiming that God exists, you're doing it wrong. Make no claims, only express your belief. If only you believe in him, you have nothing to claim and nothing to prove to the fedora-tipping anti-theists. They can't touch you that way, they can only disagree because their hearts are so hardened. But now they have leverage on you and will crucify you in the debate. Kinda painted yourself into a corner there, m8.

All I can say is own up and admit that you can't prove anything, but also explain why it is that you can't prove it and why the point of religion is not proof but faith.

None of what you said actually helps him argue for gods existence.

There are two sides to the coin, a supernatural creator or a natural process devoid of purpose. You can color all the nuances all you want, but the debate comes down to that binary.
brilliant retort, socrates would be proud. I can tell you have no idea about the millennia-old discussion, so why dont you browse a little and catch up to the rest of us, kid
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

Protip: If you hypothesize that the entire cosmos is naturally occuring, you have to prove it before you can claim it as true. This is recognized to be an impossible task, and as such, modern science is understood to be as faith based as religion when it comes to the epistemological limitations of either one.

>Everything that exists had a cause
>The universe exists
>The universe has a cause
>I call this cause God

atheist : "Well why not just admit you don't know what caused the universe like everybody else"

you:
>shut up fedora fag!
>cry
>kys

>i have to prove god's existence

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You're fucked.

>lel big bang ok by catholic church
>micro vs macro evolution and time frame issues (see Darwins Black Box, the book)
>that one paradox about why aliens n sheeet arnt everywhere that psudo proves we are alone in the universe
>gods abundent punishments seen everywhere

Theists make the worst word salads and logical loopholes to rationalize the failure of their paradigm in face of evidence
It's obnoxious as fuck, and especially ironic coming from a country of heathens like burgerland

Binge watch doctor Peterson's Maps of meaning.

It is quite simple, talk about Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard. Basically man dismisses God when he mistakes what consciousness means.

Memes aside you're fucked because you logically can't prove God's existence. There's simply too many fallacies lmao

Is my country turning into leddit neckbeardry? What school is this and why are your teachers pushing atheism?

>unironically watching this shit movie .

are you fucking stupid
it's impossible to prove that god exists, the argument for religion is based on morals and virtue

Get ready, I'm dropping something here that doesn't disprove or prove God but makes all belief except for Islam and Judaism possible in the platonician mathematical realm.

>First of, get familiar with Plato's Theory of Ideas and Parmenide's Existential Paradox
>Get familiar with the Universal Equation Theory
>Get familiar with the Universal Perfect System Theory
>Consider all of them as true for the sake of this argument
>The Universe is entirely regulated by one equation, which would make that equation a perfect system.
>That perfect mathematical/physical system is capable of being deconstructed into small parts for our use in approximate calculations and actions according to proportionnal circumstances (i.e.: basic gravitational laws for architecture, where you don't take into account cosmic rays, radiations or other natural catastrophies occuring at a 0.00000000...1 propability rate)
>Same goes for Plato's Theory, in which we nitpick virtues off of Perfection for circumstancial use (i.e.: Courage in face of danger in battle, where wisdom and kindness is not take into account, etc.)
COULD SPIRITUALITY BE CONSTITUTED THE SAME WAY AS THOSE TWO MODELS?
>Consider this equation :
1=?
>One would be one unit, implying the unit is a perfect system because there's nothing affecting it practically
>The "?" would be the physical manifestation and/or perception of that force in the physical world. Note that the result still comes as one, but because of the physical world's nature and proportions, this side of the equation can never be reduced to one.
Spirituality could be reduced to a perfect system the same way as physics and philosophical concepts are, because of its elementary attributes: it has a cause and an effect in the physical world.
In the next post: practical examples of this.
(1/5)

>you cant prove something because there are too many bad arguments

jesus christ, canada. at least learn what the words mean, first

>Let's take it to the spiritual levels
>First off, Animist, Spiritualism, Shamanism and Fetichism theories
Let's consider the previous points as true.
Then, on a Perfect Level, every religion should be considered 1=1. However, in the material world, they all deconstruct in similar fashions, from one unit of Perfection, usually a primordial force that formed the Cosmos.
Let's take the four above religious groups, for example :
In Perfect World
1=1
In material world, senses manifestation
1=1/x
"x" meaning the numbers of potential spiritual recipients in the Physical universe
(Note : this is a wildly innaccurate formula. Most of these spiritual essences have different "weights" than some, but overall it is still an accurrate representation of the principle of it all)
See, Perfection of a spiritual essence is divided in all things more or less equally in a pattern that can be retraced approximately back to One ; usually considered the All-Maker, the Dreamland, the Void, etc. meaning that there was only ONE thing before everything else.
>Polytheistic religions theories
Same as the previous, with new variables
In the Perfect Level :
1=1
In the Material Universe :
1=a+b+c+...+z
Here, the variables are not about the amount of possible vessels, which is set, but the possible spiritual powers, over the material Universe, that these divine essences or entities possess.
Overall, it still come back to one, since they work in a system (what we call a pantheon) that WOULD be the "perceived" Perfection we get of them, but this is also false, because it is actually part of a cosmogony that also predicts the fall and rebirth of this world as well as its origins, meaning that Perfection, in most of these beliefs, would be the Cycle of Rejuvenation and Destruction experienced by most natural systems like the water cycles, life/death/digestion/reproduction/life cycle, etc.
(2/5)

Okay, so consider this first :
>The Physical Universe is the only perfect, closed system known to Man
>The Physical Universe is entirely evolving from a single equation that controls its every physical actions and reactions
Therefore, the Physical Universe is perfect.
Hence, we can use the unit (1) to singularize the Physical Universe.
>Now comes Plato's theory
Even if the Physical Universe is perfect, it is proportionally imperfect until you look at the ensemble
Therefore, the Physical Universe can be decomposed.
Just like Ideas in Plato's theories.
>Here comes the concrete examples
Then lets take the Physical Universe as a comparable
Let's say that one (1) is equal the the ensemble of every physical laws existing in this Physical Universe
1=a+b+c+...
In Ultimate proportion, which is the contemplation of the Whole (let's name it the "Perfect Level"), then the Universe, whatever the equations making it, is still 1=1.
Couldn't the same be said about the deconstruction of Perfection, in Plato's theory?
1 Perfection = 1 Perfection in the Perfect Level
but
1 Perfection = a+b+c+d+... in the Virtue/Abstract/Mathematical/Physical/Human/Animalistic Levels
Therefore, following natural laws, Perfection, on a whole, is undeniable, but can be deconstructed.
(3/5)

If the universe is infinite god is one of infinite possibilities

If the universe is finite then god exist as the absolutes that define the universe.

>Dualist theories
This one is simple
Perfect Level:
1=1
Material Universe's manifestation:
1=a+b
The Universe, spiritual as well as material, would be divided in two opposing entities or concepts : Good/Evil, Life/Death, Light/Darkness, etc.
This theory is mostly a more primordial approach to deistic polytheism, because it conserves the elements that trace back both of these divine essences to a Cycle of Light and Darkness.
>The question of Islam and Judaism
This is where everything falls apart.
Muslim and Jewish doctrines claim that their Gods are indivisible AND perfect, meaning that, theorically :
Perfect Level :
1=1
Material universe's manifestation :
1=1
BUT THAT ISN'T MONOTHEISM
There are two theories that could represent this formula, and you'll understand it pretty quickly.
>FIRST THEORY
There is a God, but he cannot manifest in the Physical World because he IS the physical World, and therefore obeys its laws.
>SECOND THEORY
There is a God, but it could only be the observer of this equation (meaning you, dear reader).
Do you see the discrepancy? This is not the formula for monotheism ; this is the formula for nihilism/egoism for the latest or atheism in the first case.
There is also the theory that they exist only in the Perfect World. Bu then, how could we have grasped its manifestation in the physical Universe to start with? It simply doesn't correlate.
>The question of Christianity
Wait isn't Christianity like the other Abrahamic faiths?
No, it's not. Chrisitanity (at least anything that isn't aryanism) preach that God is divided into essences, which are perfect in the ensembles, inseparable in duty, but imperfect take alone.
Strangely platonic, isn't it? Also, wouldn't that be the same as just pointing at the equation from gravitation and relativity and saying "it's aprt of the Universe, so it's perfect as a whole"?
(4/5)

Nobody can prove the existence of god, retard, stop believing in bullshit and admit you have an irrational belief or get laughed at for years, your chocie

>FORMULAS FOR CHRISTIANITY
Perfect Level :
1=1
Material Universe's manifestation
1=a+b+c
where a is the Father, b the Son and c the Holy Spirit.
all have equal values, but cannot be taken together on this scale to form Perfection.
>CONCLUSION
Islam and Judaism have no mathematical formulation in this model. I dare you to find one actually and to contradict me.
And because they have no mathematical formulations in this model, it means they don't exist.
Ergo, Islam and Judaism are frauds.
Ce qu'il fallait demontrer
(5/5)

you can't prove god's existence you underaged faggot
way to miss the entire point of the religion you claim to follow

no matter what your proof for god will be their proof for no god
admit that believing requires faith
and then argue the best argument for intelligent design you have faith in intelligent design
they do not you will never convince them
but where they see science you see gods guiding hand

read the classics faggot. Don't act like you're hot shit, everything worth saying is already been said.

hes right, OP just put him on the defensive, get him to make a claim and then just find one exception to his claim and keep doing that until he gets mad

Maydole's modal perfection argument is a good one that doesn't often come up.
Universal fine tuning is my personal favourite.

Majority of the time debates will be something like the theist giving a deductive argument for god's existence and then the atheist saying but where is the evidence.
All you have to do is defend the premises of the argument as more plausible than the alternatives and you're good.

Also if you have time throw in a couple of anti-materialism arguments. Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism is a good one there.

>TL;DR
God (as in the Holy Trinity of God) has a mathematical possibility of existing, along with many other deities not including Allah and Yahweh.
It doesn't answer your question, but it's the closest I can give you.

>purpose
Purpose is a subjective term

this. if you still lose sue the school for discrimination

Jordan Peterson's ideas on religion are pretty interesting. Depends on how much time you want to put into preparing, but watching a couple of his videos and taking notes can help.

Looked through my Deus Vult folder for red pills to drop but most of them are just arguing against the "kike on a stick" faggots.

Say that existence either is infinity or had a starting point from nothing. The later option violates laws of thermodynamics and the first one is inconceivable unless there was once a state of timeless existence, because by definition there has to be a start.
Either way, none of this is proof god exists but i can guarantee to you that the fedora neckbeard will not have proof that he doesnt exist either. So you should focus on trying to make people think and not to find proof.

If they come with "muh cancer babies" make them understand that we are not made directly in the image of god. God is most likely a force responsible for starting existence. It does not care for the chaotic nature of its creation and all the moral evaluations we do of the matter are flawed because they come from a human mind, the same mind that doesnt even understand their own purpose and mortality, much less existence.

If your defending the jew god youre fucked. Focus on how important it is for moral values and shit, and if they say "IM SMART AND I HAVE MORALS AND IM ATHEIST" tell them good for them but that they have to understand theres always dumber people in a society that need guidance. It is a mechanism for overall betterment, not individual. but people wont agree with you so youre just fucked.

kek, that's what you get for sperging out in school, faggot
Also, didn't the summer holidays start here?
youtube.com/watch?v=1hWE52zsOaA

Dont prove god exists, prove atheism is dumb.

>logical loopholes

Logic doesn't really work on religion. It's not meant to be something you can provide evidence for. The only concrete argument you can provide for it is demonstrating its benefits, but even that is asking for trouble.

>but people wont agree with you so youre just fucked.
this

watch a full william lane craig debate

no one beats him, he is the best debater out there today even though he is a heretic protestant

Look for Peter Hitchens videos about God

You can't.

Apologists have been trying since organized religions competed memetically for adherents. Anything you can use to 'prove' your deity's existence can be used to 'prove' any other deity's existence.

You cant.If you could prove the existence of God,there would be no islam,no buddhism,no hinduism,because none of them can prove it.Just like you cant.End of story.

It's a debate on the existance or non-existance of God, you twat.

Is the universe perfectly objective or is there a subjective force at least at the point of creation if not driving it forward continuously.

You cannot prove he exists. You dont have to. You have to give them good reasons why to believe God exists over believing he doesn't

What a load of bullshit, how can people even consider this an actual argument? You have to be prettu fukin retarded.

Truth doesnt care if you believe it or not.Its still truth.

I believe people misunderstand God and Gods.
At first we were all polytheists, putting Gods responsible for things like facts of human life like war and agriculture or human emotions like hatred, love and rage.
Monotheist religions replaced the various gods by angels and demons and helped giving back free will to believers as opposed to fatalism.
God is the concept of good and evil, with a "holier than thou" morality.

forgot the pic

>a fucking catholic

Dude start trolling and tell them God exists because the Earth is flat. Look up Eric Dubays 200 flat earth proofs on YouTube and Brian mullin flat earth engineer for the science. If they say NASA tell them it's only a belief and it's an appeal to authority.

Ignorance is a bliss. We refer to a higher being as God because we can not explain it in our language yet. Even Steven Honkins agreed to the fact that there is a higher being than us presumably called God.

good job idiot

Godel's incompleteness Theorem. Look it up and BTFO that smug athiest fuck.

Also make sure you define god as something provable. Make sure that faggot doesn't try to box you into proving an anthropomorphic sky man. God is the universe, he is what is far within and far without.

christian rules aren't better than any other, pure christianity from the bible is a lot more like judaism than the christianity we have today (or would have, if you guys even pretended to believe in your religion)

Here's what you do:
1. boot science out: science can't disprove or approve God's existence so science is irrelevant to the discussion i.e. science can't falsify the existence of God in a comprehensible context.

2.God is a mental reality meaning whether real or not Got will exist in a person's mind i.e. it has real mental entity verifiable by each believer who fell it and can define it. Most mental realities verified by the majority are considered/accepted as real truths in a historical time or defined as truly real meaning God is real.

& last one is a crowd pleaser and appeaser

3.God is useful and it is a tool for survival, just leach on the placebo effect and good moral practices beneficial to the health and society so you can compare God to the concept of justice or freedom, we all know justice is real so God is real the same way and since we accept something as useful as justice we should accept something as useful as God.

Boom! You won.

A rejection is the same as a proposition you retard. "Nothingness" is not a priori more likely than "somethingness" because it is also a human construct.

Actually OP just say that.

Fuck off kikestein.

There are logical arguments to disprove existance of gods from human written fiction like the bible though.

Nigga do you mean Stephen Hawking?

Well, you're fucked. Should probly just kys. No girl at that school will ever touch your dick after you spaghetti infront of literally everyone there.

Kek
Most young people in Croatia are religious
I remember when my mate said that he doesn't believe in god, everybody in the school stopped talking to him just because of that
If anything, the atheist will get fucked

>expecting religious people to not be retarded with equally retarded ways of thinking

bro just have god descend a lightning bolt which strikes down from the clouds through the gymnasium roof, you'll be fine then and your audience will be like OHLY SHIT HE WAS RIGHT FUCK and want to get baptized asap.
foolproof duh, do it pussy. 'with faith 'anything' is possible' .. the crocks of shit people believe..

Why wouldn't it work on religion ? Is there an international council on logic and shit that said so and doing otherwise creates a dimensional rift ?
Again, your own personal bias bears no impact on the issue. As a phenomenon in nature, religion can get as much scrutiny as art, economy or psychology

OK, you are going, both of you, to look stupid.

The atheist cannot prove God doesnt exist.
The believer has no proof.

KEK

That is one of the reason i am agnostic.
That, and the fact that God is xenos scum and only the emprah deserves my loyalty

Sounds like the plot of this movie lol

imdb.com/title/tt2528814/reference

You cant prove something that doesnt exist.

“And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.”
—Judges 1:19

Seeing as you will be arguing for a falsehood maybe you can get some inspiration from here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

>cosmos is naturally occuring, you have to prove it before you can claim it as true. This is recognized to be an impossible
w r o n g
so anyone who believes something has to prove it for it, so you can't make any debatable claim?

Read Case for Christ by Lee Stroble. He by far does the best job.

The philosophic burden of proof lies upon the person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims, this is a basic thing you fags don't get

There is no such things as gods, only the Imperial Truth.

>god is the universe!

How convenient, so Christcucks now
only have to prove the universe exists rather than proving their particular benevolent omnipotent god exists. Really stimulates the synapses.