?
@brainkaranja said in Reasons why god isn't real.:
A great philosopher said, ''If I say you there is an invisible man in the sky, people will believe on them but if I say them a painting is dry they will touch it for confirming themselves.''
Simply putting out a stupid social/psychological trend have no relevance to the paradox that comes with thinking of god nor verifying his existence.
Such a hypocrite you are! You did put a dumb random quote by an unknown person first. What could you expect from anyone else ? Did your random quote concern to this topic. NOT even 0.000001%
Everything can be inferred with reasoning. He is invisible so why is he an exception here ?
Physical world is limited to the experience verified by our sense only.
If something is not perceived we generally take help of inference. That is what I did and I am doing.
(like how you would touch paint to verify that its dry). God visited in the form of a human ages ago according to bible
Oh man Bible was written by 40 people not by Jesus himself. What are you saying ? Read the whole information here
and other valid historical sources
I would elaborate those historical sources first.
According to Genesis, God made Adam and Eve on the sixth day of Creation Week. The Genesis genealogies then detail the exact ages at which Adam and his male descendants "begat" their own male offspring. The Old Testament chronology traces the generations from Adam to Noah, from Noah to Abraham and from Abraham to David. The New Testament books of Matthew and Luke then continue the genealogy from David to Jesus, again specifying the age at which each male descendant "begat" the next generation. Since we have a fixed "historical" time period for Jesus' birth, creationists thereby calculate that the heavens and Earth were created by God in the year 4004 B.C. 1 Earth, therefore, is only 6000 years old by the biblical chronology.
Despite widely divergent viewpoints, creationists and evolutionary biologists agree on a crucial fact: Six-thousand years is insufficient time for evolution to have produced the complex life-forms we observe on Earth today. Homo sapiens could evolve only if given hundreds of millions of years to accumulate selective advantages. A 6000-year-old Earth means therefore that Genesis and the Theory of Evolution are forever irreconcilable.
Creationists frequently point to this timescale conflict as proof that evolution is a fraud. They echo the sentiments of St. Thomas Aquinas, who believed that any discord between science and Scripture was due to errors of science, rather than errors of Scripture. It is impossible to devise a legitimate means of harmonizing the Bible with evolution.
The findings of modern astronomy further spotlight the irrevocable divorce between Genesis and the scientific method. Using a powerful array of ground- and space-based telescopes, astronomers can detect galaxies billions of light-years from Earth. Because light requires one year of time to travel one light-year of distance, our detection of these galaxies proves incontrovertibly that they existed billions of years ago. Otherwise the electromagnetic radiation emitted by these galaxies could not yet have traversed the billion-light-year distance to Earth.
Imagine those naive dupes at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics—they gullibly swallow the myth that light requires a full year to travel one-light-year's distance. Pity those hapless dullards at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory —they're suckers for the same nonsense. Oh how misguided they all were— Hubble, Einstein, Feynman, Hawking, Asimov, Sagan. How fortunate we are today that creationist R. L. Wysong, a veterinarian, has finally straightened us out. Apparently, Wysong believes that light can travel faster than the speed of light (sic)—and so Creation of the heavens and Earth occurred 6000 years ago after all.
but we weren't there to use our senses to verify his existence (e.g. see him walk on water and heal people). Furthermore, god literally isn't in the clouds as bible says he is in 'enthroned in heaven'.
You opposed yourself here. First you wrote our senses can't verify his existence. Then you wrote he is in heaven (according to Bible). For your kind of information, senses include hearing and seeing. You did read the bible with your eyes. Did you read Bible without your senses? And you believed on your sense this time though. claps on your hypocrisy
So we physically can't see him.
1- Our senses can not describe GOD. ('E' categorical preposition)
2- Our senses can read the Bible. ('A' categorical preposition)
Conclusion- Not definite conclusion follows ( This is what you are writing )
you would get it only if you did read logic.
But there is a spiritual realm, separate from the physical realm.
We cannot assume that everything imagined in mental experiences (which include dreams, hallucinations etc) actually exists. Such experiences cannot be repeated, tested or publicly verified. Mystical and other personal experiences can be explained by other causes.
You literally cancelled out all chance of there being a god as you suggested previously
There is so much difference between a 'suggestion' and a 'conclusion'.
that there is no god in this physical world. If you put this physical 'dimension' as a reference point to verify whether or not something 'exists', you are not too far off from
the Christians lining up every notion of right and wrong with a book
I'd go ahead and say that the spiritual 'realm' is more confirmed as everybody in the world 'dreams', whilst not everybody feel the salvation of 'the lord'.
'the lord' ? Oh so you are a supporter of monarchy in this 2019 ?
So yeah. Your reasoning requires a bit more work
Oh nigga if i show you my reasoning here, you will not even think how to reply me anymore. Here you go-
if it is argued that everything that exists must have a maker, then that maker himself would stand in need of another maker, and we should be landed in an infinite regress. The way of escape from this circle is to assume the reality of a self-subsisting maker, who is the author of everything else.
I repudiate the theory of the creation of the world out of nothing or a series of accidents. The systematic working of the laws of nature cannot be a product of luck or accident. There is no need to assume with the theologian any first cause of the universe. We cannot conceive how a non-creative God suddenly becomes creative. On such a hypothesis the question of the material out of which the world is created is difficult to answer. Did it or did it not exist in some form prior to the making of the world ? If it is said that it all depends on the inscrutable will of the God, we should put an end to all science and philosophy. If things can function only obedience to the will of God, there is not any reason why they should be endowed with distinct attributes, different substances need not have specific functions which cannot be exchanged. Water can burn and fire cool is that be the will of God.
and we can work on mine (I'm sure you can point out some of mine) and urs if u want. Thanks for this discussion
Yours*. You*
Thank you too
english.watv.org
