Atheists of Sup Forums here are some question for you:

Atheists of Sup Forums here are some question for you:

1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?

2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe?

3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?

4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?

5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=AekFGksvuDU
youtube.com/watch?v=ODetOE6cbbc
youtube.com/watch?v=lwek4CW7vOk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Okay I'll bite:

1) Since you put a capital letter in God, then yes, I am absolutely certain that he doesn't exist. This is mainly because of inherently syncretistic nature of of all middle eastern religions. All of them took bits and pieces out of other religions, ergo, none of them can be completely right. Including the concept of God. Now, you can't be certain that some sort of supernatural power doesn't exist. (Brains in a jar scenario). But there is no evidence for it so I won't even bother.

2) Yes, No, because there is no evidence of intelligent design.

3)Actually, no. There have been some calculations that if there is even smallest likelyhood of something happening, given time it will happen. Regarding birth of our universe, I don't think you understand, how it came to be. It didn't start out from nothing. Rather everything was in one tiny spot of something. Matter is constant. Energy is constant. What was before Big Bang, cannot be known. Maybe matter has always existed.

4)Yes. But today we don't eyes to see.

5)Yes, but with the caveat of 4). The question is illogical though. You prove something's existence, not the other way around. Otherwise, you'd have to disprove every silly thought someone can come up with. Why give special privileges to any one god?

Do you understand that every atheist is actually agnostic? Even Dawkins has said this. They just take the label for practical reasons. Denying Judeo-Christian God is an extremely easy exercise compared to denying all supernatural powers. I can deny existence of God as easily as I can existence of Zeus, Amaterasu, or Vishnu.

1. There might be a god, dunno never seen one. If you got evidence, go for it. Which god?
2. ID is nonsense, and a massive misunderstanding of evolution and assumed design.
3. the universe is a massive algebra problem totaling 0. Check out "a universe from nothing" by Krause
4. of course, there are plenty of ways of demonstrating something exists that don't involve light.
5. sure. why not.

This x2

1. I'm not absolutely sure, and it is possible. Nothing is keeping me from looking at the evidence except for the fact that there is none.

2.Yes. However, there isn't any evidence for the universe being intelligently designed so until we find anything that's basically irrelevant.

3. The universe has always existed. It just changes over "time". The part we live in was made by the big bang, but that isn't the universe. There is stuff outside of here, too.

4. Yes, but that doesn't mean anything until you apply it.

5. Not necessarily, but that doesn't mean shit until we can get proof.

1. I have no reason to be sure there is no god. I would prefer there was some sort of deity and would be happy if anyone could provide evidence.

2. Unsure, even if I was convinced it were designed how do I know who did it?

3. I do not know how things work outside of our universe.

4. If something cannot be observed somehow there is no way to know if it does or does not exist.

5. It means you are unable to see any deities with your eyes at this moment, nothing more.

>look at the evidence
I'm getting flashbacks
youtube.com/watch?v=AekFGksvuDU

>1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?
I'm as sure as anything that there is no personal God. The existence of any other kind of kind is irrelevant to anybody except maybe astrophysicists. There is no convincing evidence.

>2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them?
This question is deceptive. It's like asking "would you believe that humans created in Allah's perfection require Allah to exist?"

>3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something?
No. You don't have a brain yet you managed to make this post. Explain that.

Ignored the last 2 questions because they're retarded.

>You don't have a brain yet you managed to make this post.

>Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something?
>Believes God came out of nothing.
Religionfags are exactly like atheists except they just add an extra step of explanation

1 yes
2 no
3 no
4 no
5 no

1. Just as sure as you are that there is no toothfairy
2. No, and.I dont see much intelligence behind anything in this world. If there was an intelligent creator, things would have been done a lot better.
3. "Nothing" is just a metaphor, clearly you dont understand the concept, that nothing is not nothing.
4. The evidence can easily be seen.
5. Just because illiterate palestinian kikes claimed something happened without proof doesnt seem like the best probable source.

Gr8 b8

"intelligent design", yah right
- food and breath sharing a pathway
- refuse right next to procreation
- weak structural support for brain
- two sexes, practically opposite desires
if there is an all knowing, omnipotent god, then he's a horrible engineer.

1) There is no god. And if by any damn chance he DID exist, he is not a God to be revered or worshipped. He is the biggest dick.

2) No. Also there is no evidence for intelligent design therefore their is no evidence of a designer of the universe.

3) No. It is a scientific fact that you can get something from nothing.

4) No. We can see our mind, gravity, magnetism and the wind with science. Just because you can't see it on a day to day basis doesn't mean there isn't hard evidence that it does exist.

5) No.

I'm as sure as an intellectually honest man can be. If I accept the concept of God, and I wanted to be honest and consistent, I'd have to allow it's possible one could exist. On the other hand, I just can reject the whole thing, conceptually and phenomenologically.

Things are what they are. If they weren't, you wouldn't be able to question them. Are there examples of things poorly designed in nature or in the universe? Is everything perfect? What is a rationalization?

Because we don't understand something does not necessitate a magical Sky Daddy. Yes, there are some things we can't perceive with our naked senses. No, that doesn't necessarily mean God doesn't exist-- if you are willing to entertain the question at all, of course.

>Im going to make a species that walks on two legs
>this method of moving is the least efficient way out of every other animal I have created.
>Even the Kangaroo is better
>I'm going to make their spine curve three times to support this way of walking
>However, the spine wont be able to support their abnormally large heads I'm going to give them
>Their heads will basically crush their spines over time
>I'M A GENIUS

God sucks at designing. He should get an engineering degree.

>God exists
>he could have made it so I don't have to live every day in agony
>he didn't

Your autism is showing

This is true the way how your brain chemicals work is a miracle on it self , seeing that deppresion or eternal Ecstasy or many many other states of mind could be your default setting ,yet our chemicals default create our boring little self

Why even have life in the first place if eternal paradise exists!?!?!

God literally made earth just to give the chance that humans would be corrupted and go to hell

1. No, but I am 5 sigma sure. It's impossible to find evidence for such thing because it's beyond physical realm.
2. Sure, but there's no proof of intelligent design.
3. Yes, and no because physics and mathematics has no problem with this.
4. Yes, however it's testable, God is not and never will be.
5. Still not testable, therefore any answer is invalid.

You are designed like a human you are not a kangaroo who has to hop around. you are designed to sit on a chair and read a book , a kangaroo cant do that

>sit down to read book
>develop backpain

>wanting God to be your eternal mommy

Dude just believe in Christ and that's it

>He gets backpain from sitting what a nu male

>just believe in christ

What is the holy trinity
Christ is supposed to be gods son

Sometimes i really wonder what goes on in the brains of christian apologetics
Or was this bait and i just cant tell the difference anymore

Believing in God the Father and God the Holy Spirit is not going to save you from your sins

Only believing in Christ will

It's necessary to believe in the other persons of God as well, but not specifically for salvation of sin

Being a former atheist i can only say ,some people belong in heaven and some fuckers deserve hell

earth is some test do you belong with god or do you belong with satan , and then next step does god accept you

Humans has an epidemic of degenerative diseases because we're not living like cavemen

>be blessed with modern chairs and technology that allows us to work from a desk
>develop lower back and neck issues
>"""intelligently designed"""

>Be elderly female blessed with long life
>break bones
>"""intelligently designed"""

>make food tasty
>bless people with an easy access to an abundance of food
>1/3rd the population obese
>"""intelligently designed"""

Wtf is this shit. Have you guys reached puberty yet?

>former atheist

You sound weak willed and mentally impaired, neighbour. Maybe lay off the weed for a bit.

youtube.com/watch?v=ODetOE6cbbc

>be born
>blessed by being British
>"""intelligently designed"""

>>make food tasty
>>bless people with an easy access to an abundance of food
/3rd the population obese
>>"""intelligently designed"""

was gluttony not one of the deadly sins?

Puberty made me an atheist

I was born and raised Christian

At some point God made the decision to make desirable stuff the things that make you go to Hell

He literally did this just to fuck with humans

What is the reasoning behind this? To me, this seems like bullcrap. If you devote your whole life to your god, arent you also devoting your life to christ because of the trinity?

30 years a atheist mate then i saw some shit became agnostic , researched religion for years christianity is real

youtube.com/watch?v=lwek4CW7vOk

One thing is devoting your life to God. Another is "believing in which person of God brings salvation from sin?"

The answer to the question is Christ

>He literally did this just to fuck with humans

yes that is all part of his test

>someone wanted that ugly visage in his skin

What more evidence do you need that there is no god?

They're lying to you! Do not believe the myths these fake scientists want you to believe. Dinasaurs never existed. Do not believe the Dinajew

If you stick a banana up your ass then that is not gods problem

...

>youtube.com/watch?v=lwek4CW7vOk

>eye witness testimony as evidence
>from books written decades after the events they describe

American """"detectives""""

maybe he exists but surely he is not an old man on a cloud who watches you masturbating

I used to be an atheist/agnostic.

I think if there is a higher entity there must be 2 parts that represent him. one part that opposes the other. they cant exists without eachother to form 1 entity.

I think there is a fundamental principle in the universe, that for everything there is a counterpart. If we don't know a counterpart of something its because we don't understand it enough or we don't have the technological means to measure it.

to something to exist, there must be 2 things to be of value, hot and cold. if you have temperature but not 2 opposites there is no value. that would be a momentaneous balance.

if you need a balance over time you need to make a one of the sides more active/aggresive and the other passive/peaceful. So at one point the aggresive side will try to "conquer" the passive side at which the peaceful side will have enough from it and fight back. it will fight back until it sees no more need for it and becomes passive again. Whereas the aggresive side will start to attack it again.

He's a "cold case" detective so he specialises on solving cases that most people have given up on for lack of obvious and definite evidence

I have some questions for theists:

1. Are you absolutely sure that there exists a metaphysical entity named "Satan"? What evidence or logical argument do you have for this?

2. What evidence do you have (besides 2000-odd year old writings), that the intelligent designer wants things like praise, worship, obedience, or anything else from its creatures?

3. On what basis can any of the designers creatures claim to know the mind, objectives, intentions or morphology of the designer?

I guess anything goes when the case in hand is two thousand years old.

1) No, I'm not sure. But given the lack of any available evidence for God or gods I'm fairly comfortable in my stance. If actual evidence arises, then I'll change my stance accordingly.

2) There is no evidence of intelligent design in any form, merely adaptation of the most useful traits through trial and error.

3) There are 2 main possibilities that I've heard regarding a purely scientific creation of the universe. Either all energy and matter was condensed into a single point (like a vastly heavier and smaller black hole), or alternatively that all energy and matter, once combined have the mathematical value of 0, meaning that the combined sum of the universe is still nothing. I really couldn't tell you which one is true, though I will definitely suggest that if you consider it possible for God or gods to be create themselves from nothing or have always existed, then the same can be said for energy and matter.

4+5) Sure, but we can find physical evidence of all of those things, based on the actual material effects they have on the world. They are measurable, if not by our 5 senses, then by the machines we build to measure them. There hasn't been any sort of measurement of God or gods.

Start with the assumption that there is nothing, and from there find evidence of the existence of something. From the sensation of a breeze or the swaying of the tree branches you can deduce wind, IE the movement of air, for example.

>1. Are you absolutely sure that there exists a metaphysical entity named "Satan"?

Absolutely confident

>What evidence or logical argument do you have for this?

No scientific evidence. The logical aspect is that the existence of satan is consistent with the Bible

>2. What evidence do you have (besides 2000-odd year old writings), that the intelligent designer wants things like praise, worship, obedience, or anything else from its creatures?

A logical argument. The Creator of the Universe deserves praise for having created it. If such a feat is not worthy of praise, infinitely less is anything else that we consider praiseworthy

>3. On what basis can any of the designers creatures claim to know the mind, objectives, intentions or morphology of the designer?

Morphology doesn't apply to non-physical entities. And the only basis those finite beings could claim to know an infinite absolute Being (God) is on the basis of that Being willing it

>1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?

No, and I don't think it's possible to know that with absolute certainty. I wouldn't want to look for evidence if what I already knew of it seemed implausible (which is the case for me sorry).

>2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe?

Yes I would agree to the former. As for the latter, I'd say evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer IN the universe but not necessarily OF the universe - things intelligently designed by humans are evidence for those humans, but not for a designer of the whole universe. I suspect we'd disagree as to what counts as evidence of intelligent design in many cases though.

>3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something?

I won't pretend to know for sure, but that tallies with all my personal observations.

>If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?

Yep.

>4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?

Yes of course.

>5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?

Entirely.

Sorry so many atheists are dicks. Hard to tell them not to be when they almost invariably reject moral absolutism.

>discussing religion
spiritual crap shouldn't be debated

Not the evidence for it

See >>from books written *decades* after the events they describe

Why are you linking me to my own post?

1) No, but im not 100% sure about a lot of things.
I dont claim to know things i dont know.

2) No, there are many possibilities to how things came about and singular intelligent designer(s) is not a must have prerequisite.

3) We can barely comprehend the universe let alone what created it. The big bang theory could simply explain a trans-dimensional spark from another existence.

4) I agree, but once I again i do not take the leaps to believe in it beyond scientific curiosities. I wait till there is good evidence and even then it does not need to rule my life.

5) I agree but the problem with this premise is that when i give you an inch, you take a mile. Theres more proof for subatomic particles that I also cant see, but I dont base my lifestyle on them.

>No scientific evidence. The logical aspect is that the existence of satan is consistent with the Bible
Non-sequitur

You've said it better than I could have

>Breaking News: murder solved! Crack cold case detective finds murderer decades later and charges him in court, sentenced to life.
>20 different witnesses testified against the man
>one witness, Tyreesia Shawn said "well, I was at the club last night and my girl said to me that it was probably George Bush that strangled dat baby all those years ago"
>after hearing this testimony, the other 19 witnesses said they didn't need to testify because they agree with everything Ms Shawn said

Logic is not the scientific method

And my belief in the Bible is axiomatic/ linear, not circular

>A logical argument. The Creator of the Universe deserves praise for having created it. If such a feat is not worthy of praise, infinitely less is anything else that we consider praiseworthy
It doesn't follow that the "watch-designer" wants praise from his watch, no matter whether he deserves it or not. The jewish tribal god wanting constant praise, being jealous, given to fits of rage, describes his functional morphology as anthropomorphic.

>1 post by this id

sage

>It doesn't follow that the "watch-designer" wants praise from his watch, no matter whether he deserves it or not.

Not from only from His watch, but especially from His design

>The jewish tribal god wanting constant praise, being jealous, given to fits of rage, describes his functional morphology as anthropomorphic.

It's not that He is anthropomorphic, it's that we are God-like (in some limited respect of course) - Genesis 1:26

>>The jewish tribal god wanting constant praise, being jealous, given to fits of rage, describes his functional morphology as anthropomorphic.
>It's not that He is anthropomorphic, it's that we are God-like (in some limited respect of course) - Genesis 1:26
IMO that's a pretty shitty god, omnipotence notwithstanding. Getting pissy because your own creations don't worship you, when you had every opportunity to just program worship into them, just smacks of rank narcissism. The need for worship in-and-of itself it's pretty fallible, considering the temper tantrums that get thrown over it.

Did you actually not understand what he meant?

I'm gonna wait for him to tell me

I can prove god is real, we can make some gods right now if you like

we need statues and various materials

>scientific method

that was discovered by a freemason alchemist wizard? that one?

He deserves to be infinitely worshipped and thanked for His creation

It's only fitting that He'd be infinitely pissed off

Don't know, don't care

Logic is simply not the same thing as the scientific method

>1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God?
A supposed Master of the UNIVERSE couldn't care if a biproduct of a random chemical reaction on a tiny planet touches itself at night.
He has fucking UNIVERSE to care about.
I'm sure its not a beardy man on a cloud.
>Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them?
Human is not intelligent my designed.
Human is horribly unoptimized, imperfect, prone to everything, cant survives in the world without goods of cuvilization such as tools, clothes and medicine.
Youre just a mutated fish that walked out of the sea.
Some animal are 100% Cancer proof, such genes exists, why did your creator deny us wings and immunity?
I want 4 hands, wings, wenomous stinger and to live 300 years.
>Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something?
Matter is a firm of energy
Energy is a property of timespace.
If theres a mirtor universe made of antimatter then we're still nothing. Like ripples on water, a wawe is not a thing, its an occurance
>Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity
I can interact with gravity.
Air is transparent but i can touchung and measure it.
Something i absilutely cannot interact with in any way effectively doesnt exists to me.
>Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes
If it exists you could do anything to prove it.
If somebody said "god sucks" and got struck by lightning immidiately i would believe after this experiment is repeated.
If god written a message on the clouds i also would.

>I want 4 hands, wings, wenomous stinger and to live 300 years.
Isn't being Russian enough

Survivor of major brain trauma here.

The existence or non-existence of a god is inconsequential because nobody has a soul and everything you are is the product of the physical structures of your brain.

You cannot receive eternal punishment on the basis of character if displacing a small amount of brain matter can change who you are.

>everything you are is the product of the physical structures of your brain.

If that were true, you couldn't know it's true

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

There is a lot more to the nervous system than the brain.

You could if you experienced it first-hand, as I did.

You're claiming that some of god's self-replicating creation (Moses, Paul, Tertullian, etc.) have standing and access to directly communicate with and promulgate His directives. But you give no evidence of that or that any other's standing is any less.

IT'S ALL BASED ON WHAT MEN SAY ABOUT GOD AND WHAT JEWS SAID ABOUT THEIR TRIBAL GODS. There's no better reason to believe them than there is to believe anyone else who claims direct access to god.

back then, everyone behaved like a nigger.
He didn't want praise, only love, but people expressed and received love strangely during those times, especially the jews who even now are conspicuously fucked up.

>program worship into them

our souls are not machines. we have free will.
mechanical love is not love

Why?

How do you know what you experienced was truth?

Checked and confirmed

>1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God?
Yes.

>2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them?
No. Considering something to be "Intelligently designed" subjective.

>3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something?
No. Under the correct circumstances, nothing can produce equal amounts of positive and negative particles.

>4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?
Yes.

>5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?
No. We can still directly measure the things you listed with your fourth question. There s a difference between not being able to see something and not being able to see, measure, or observe something.

>3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?

Post yfw when the net energy of the universe is 0 and therefore the universe is literally nothing

Because a working logic is not physical. It's trans-cendental (beyond the physical)

A working logic helps in finding definite universal truths

If everything is physical, all you have is the appearance of a working logic

1) There is not a single indication that there is any kind of deity, so why bother going deep into it? Who cares?

2) The implication being that humans and our nature are intelligently designed? No.

3) Cause beyond the universe doesn't necessarily mean a deity. Especially not 'known' and revered one..

4) Seeing isn't everything. You can observe and measure wind even if you can't see it. Same with gravity or its effects. If you can't see or measure something in any way you might as well assume it isn't there for all practical purposes.

5) There is no reason to assume it exists, so why bother?

>Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
>Then he is not omnipotent.

if you really want to do evil, you can do it.

what if God struck down every man who willed evil? then we really have no free will. we're just worthless machines. God's toys that he can turn off whenever they don't please him.

He created us in His image. In the worldly realm, our will has as much authority as God's.


In eternity, all the suffering here will be put into perspective. We are only being educated for eternity

>Energy is a property of timespace.
Time is a measurement -- like length. It's "existence" is an artifact of us measuring it.

I don't know i would put myself as more of an agnostic atheist merely because i believe you should never truly set an opinion in stone as new evidence can change ones opinion and anyone who doesn't take new facts and truths don't care about the truth and only about being right

I know in the laws of randomness and i believe no matter how it may seem we are the product of randomness and evolution

as stated earlier matter existed according to our calculations but as i said i can't take that as set in stone because by our laws of the universe matter cannot be created from nothing but there may be information we don't know to say otherwise just like with a higher power

As you said i can't see gravity or dark matter or so on but we know it is there

I wouldn't give an argument that we can't see god thus he may not exist because someone could give the counter argument of gravity and such.

I hate edgy athiests who belittle those with faith, I lost my cousin at a young age (She was 8 ) absolute angel i loved her to death and the only solace her friends and family had ( very relgious area ) is that she was in a better place, it gave them strength in time when they were broken and i like that.

>You're claiming that some of god's self-replicating creation (Moses, Paul, Tertullian, etc.) have standing and access to directly communicate with and promulgate His directives. But you give no evidence of that or that any other's standing is any less.

Because it's axiomatic/ linear. That is where my line starts. At the presumptions that those men were, at the hand of His direction, inspired to testify to the works of God

>IT'S ALL BASED ON WHAT MEN SAY ABOUT GOD AND WHAT JEWS SAID ABOUT THEIR TRIBAL GODS. There's no better reason to believe them than there is to believe anyone else who claims direct access to god.

The Abrahamic God is the archetypal absolute God. Limited gods have little to no bearing on fundamental questions such as the existence of logic, objective truth, objective beauty, free-will, conscience, and objective morality

People with severe brain damage sometimes can remember how they used to be functional individuals, smart creative and virtuous.

Its a super tragic sight when you see a retard telling you that he used to be smart and he knows that he became a price of shit.
All you call "self" is a very physical thing, its a material orject inside your head.

mods pls

>I'm super great
>Now worship me or else
>Despite me not really leaving any proof of my existence, beyond that there are thing existing which isn't really proof of my existence
>And despite me not coding worship of me into your DNA, despite have full capabilities to do so

People with severe brain damage sometimes can remember how they used to be functional individuals, smart creative and virtuous.
>Its a super tragic sight when you see a retard telling you that he used to be smart and he knows that he became a price of shit.

And why would a healthy brain necessarily mean one is able to find truth?

>All you call "self" is a very physical thing, its a material orject inside your head.

If that is true, then that is indemonstrable

I'm not gonna bother reading your wall of shit, but here's the bottom line facts:

Is it possible there is some creator-deity, a god or god-force that created the laws of physics and the universe, and then sat back to watch them unfold without interfering in our lives? Sure, it could be possible. It can't be disproven. Such a thing is outside the realm of science.

But is it possible that there exists a god such as described in any of the monotheistic holy books, that personally intervenes in the affairs of the universe, has all the character flaws and tempers of a mortal human, desires our unending worship and praise to the point of enacting vengeance on his own creation, and suspends the laws of physics in his followers' favor if they wish hard enough? No, not only is that patently retarded, it's far easier to prove that all of these believes are simply the superstitions and fever-dreams of illiterate goat herders that evolved as memes across millennia due to the natural tendencies of our ape brains to seek patterns, insert explanations in the form of intelligent agency, and strive to dominate, or be dominated by each other, in the name of inarguable moral authority.

It's axiomatic/linear, you don't need evidence.

You don't think you would have changed if you lost your legs instead of getting that bump on the head that made you cranky?

You're gonna burn in Hell anyway if you worship Him or not

I'm just saying His work deserves worship. And His being deserves infinite worship

The only way you're gonna escape burning is by believing in the Christ

I have memories from before I was sick, there's also a bunch of videos and other supporting material from before and after and the change is quite evident.

From my perspective, it's like I just popped into existence one day and stole my body from the consciousness that previously occupied it, though this is probably just a side effect of my old behavior being so alien to my mind as it exists now.

It's interesting and also horrifying to ponder on in any case.