There is a God

>There is a God
>There is no God

Why are these the common arguments? There are surely more than two choices:
>We're a simulation
>There are multiple Gods
these, I think, are more likely than the first two statements, but people stick to those for some reason. I mean, we can even go deeper:
>We're the God
>We don't actually exist
>etc.

Not arguing for any of these, but there's more than two choices, all equally likely, I think(besides the last one, we definitely exist, right?).

You're right. The real issue with the God or no God argument is the definition of what "God" is. That's completely glossed over and assumed to be an Abrahamic god.

Also they are assumed to be all-powerful. Why? Also male. Why?

It's all just simplistic thinking and in reality meant to support a pre-existing position, not inspire debate.

True. Usually an all-powerful man. There are Goddesses, though, and in ancient times, the creation of the planet was attributed to females, such as Eurynome, Goddess of all things, from the Pelasgian creation myth. And then again with the Olympian creation myth, which mentions "Mother Earth". That's how it started, I believe, with female goddesses, and then it changed to men, for some reason.

You're right, there isn't meant to be a debate. This thread will get no replies.
If I said:
>"There is no God."
>Prove me wrong
It'd rustle jimmies, and everyone would be arguing. Because it's simple.

>There can be a god
>There can not be a god

Yes. The term God hides more than it shows. So, what's funny is that even if two people agree on there being a God, as long as they immediately stop talking after that, they feel good about it. But, any more detail or discussion would immediately bring up divisions again.

That's why I'm thinking that I might be agnostic. If you live a good life and there's a God that condemns it, then that's a devil and not a god.

I hate when people don't define god when they ask that question, there are multiple definitions

You're a fag

Fag in that I'd let you suck my dick, come here sissy boy

Let's spitroast the fucker

Yeah, usually "God" is whatever God they grew up hearing about. You can raise a child to think God is a pizza, and when it's asked of them if they believe in God, they'd say "yes!".

I generally think people are referring to a creator of everything which exists. But they usually have much more on that: an all-seeing, hearing being, which created the universe and grants wishes.

I'm game

which end you want first Sup Forumsro?

There may be a God. There may be multiple Gods. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and the null hypothesis is that there isn't.

We know of at least 7,000 different religions that have existed throughout the centuries. It seems odd that none of them managed to prove that their deit(ies) definitely exist.

You are a faggot.

>This is a fact.

>we're in a simulation
this doesn't really change much about the god/no god thing, since you just push away the question.
Sure even if we're in a simulation, then is the universe in which our simulation running created by god or not?

>There are multiple Gods
Again, doesn't really change the conversation, since the same arguments for a god or against it can be used to argue for multiple gods/against multiple gods.

>We're the god
this is just random bullshit that doesn't really mean anything
>We don't actually exist
same as above

The real argument imo can be reduced to "is everything physical, or is there some sort of meta-physical side to existence".
Although even that is weird because defining meta-physical is weird.

>null hypothesis
The null hypothesis says a lot of shit, it's insignificant, and only used to trick the retarded population with statistics.

I lost the game

>there is an extremely minute chance there is a God

Nah, u just a fag

>Sure even if we're in a simulation, then is the universe in which our simulation running created by god or not?
OP wasn't meant to argue, but I'll bite. We're in a simulation, and the people that created us are as well, ad infinitum.
>Again, doesn't really change the conversation
Yes, it clearly changes the conversation, lol. Are you retarded?
>We're the god
>this is just random bullshit that doesn't really mean anything
>We don't actually exist
>same as above
It's not "random bullshit" any less than claiming a God does or doesn't exist.

Metaphysics is dead, kid.

Dont care about this topic, but that girl has a great looking ass.

>We're the god
Again, that means nothing. Unless you then define what god is, and how we could be it, then it's random bullshit that you wrote that you thought sounded smart.

>We don't actually exist
Pretty much same as above. What does that even mean? How do you define "exist"?

>We're in a simulation, and the people that created us are as well, ad infinitum.
This is basically the same argument of "the universe has existed forever", just with a twist of "but there's also a bunch of simulations". It's not even actually an argument, just a hypothesis.

>Metaphysics is dead, kid.
And again, all of these hypotheses about how the universe was created are just that. They're basically guesses.
The whole god/no god debate is still about whether there is a metaphysical aspect to existence.

>Why are these the common arguments?
Because the vast majority of theists are monotheistic.
>There are surely more than two choices
Technically those two choices create a complete set. Regardless of anything else you might want to say, there either is a god or there isn't.
>all equally likely
Are they? How did you determine that?

Dude, grab a dictionary and read it. If you don't know what simple words mean, just fucking get out. You know what I'm talking about, but your faggy pseudo-philosophical "define this" is bullshit. If you can't come to an understanding, then you're simply retarded.

The problem is that words don't exist in a vacuum and they can often have different meanings depending on a lot of things.
The word "god" has different meaning to different people, so you asking "are we god" means nothing until you define what you mean by "god". Let's take a definition from google (there's more than one btw): "the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being."
So are you asking if we created the universe ourselves and are the supreme beings ourselves?

>You know what I'm talking about, but your faggy pseudo-philosophical "define this" is bullshit.
No, that's the whole fucking point, I don't know what you're talking about, because the sentence "We're the god" means completely fucking nothing without proper context.

>actually being this retarded

Not him, but he's right. "We're the god" on its own means nothing.

>Not him, but he's right.
>Not him

>let me pretend to be smart by asking retarded questions
>oh no someone said my questions are retarded
>better call them a retard as a counter argument, I'll sure look smart

OP is fag who is scared of death and refuses to take responsibility for his actions so he trying to deceive himself into believing in the poo loo hindu religion. There is only one God

Prove it.

I dont think it matters, What should be argued is whetever theres a god acting in the world (the human experience) which i think theres no proof of

>>There is a God
>>There is no God
>Why are these the common arguments?

The ONLY people who claim that these two are the only standpoints are religious fags who try to attack the general ground atheism is standing on.
Which isn't possible without placing wrong
restrictions in the premises to begin with.

See, an Atheist may say:
"I don't believe in anything which is unprovable by its very nature."

And the sneaky trick of religious shit-heads is to cite this wrongly like:
"All Atheists believe there is no God."

Always get those I am god scenarios in my head pls kill me