The Rational Proof of God's Existence
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
- Status
nino_savatte said:
OK ... fair enough. I was certainly unaware of conflict on other threads.
I have been following this thread pretty closely (all 60+ pages of it!) from the beginning although I've rarely got involved in the arguments. I'm just interested to see where it's going.
It's pretty hard though when it keeps descending into petty points about reggae or poltical parties in the 16th century (was that this thread??) or whatever (not that i'm blaming anyone in particular for that).
It does seem to me that we'd all be better off without the insults and what have you ... but I realise I'm a newbie so I withdraw all criticism!
(and I'd really, really be interested to see a rational proof of the non-existence of god ... or at least arguments to that effect. I find the whole business fascinating ...)
nino_savatte said:
You're the only stalker here, Nino. My proof: your very presence on this thread. You've said over and over again that its all rubbish and nonsense, you've boasted that you're going to derail it if you can, you've failed to contribute *anything* to the discussion, and in fact have mocked the very idea that you might contribute when you've been invited to do so. What are you *doing* here? I mean, seriously, what kind of satisfaction do you get out of this?
phildwyer said:
I look forward to the rest of your proof. I'm somewhat of a dimwit when it comes to all this philosophical/theological language but I think I'm following so far.
As to why people care so much ... well this is only a bulletin board and it seems to me that people like to argue on it. It's a lot more fun than just agreeing!!
As an agnostic I find it somewhat strange that people can be so sure whether or not there is a god either way. But I'm always interested to find out.
Alex B said:
Ah yes, there is that. But I can't really think of Nino as a "fuckwit," since that term implies some vigour, some vim, some lively spark of insanity. Nino is more of a *dullard.* Yes, that's the very term I've been groping for, *dullard.* Dullard, and sluggard.
My point of view is that a) If you're claiming that there is a great entity, creator of the universe, foundation of all morality and worthy of our attention, then it's up to you to come up with some pretty fucking good evidence for It, and b) Any attempt at a definition of what God could be and how it would work always falls into contradiction, nonsense or hopeless ambiguity, e.g. whatever we can't explain is God, and God is Beyond Our Understanding, although I'm pretty sure he doesn't want you to have a lie-in on Sundays.
I've read some JBR, although not the full set (vita brevis and all that). I don't see what he says supporting your contention, in fact in his review of "The Devil at Isenheim" by Ruth Mellinkoff (Los Angeles Times Jun 4, 1989. pg. 9) he uses the terms 'Devil' and 'Satan' completely interchangeably from one sentence to the next - in reference to Matthias Grunewald's famous altarpiece (which is admittedly a little late at 1512-1516). In any case, I'd sooner trust a 'primary' source like the Patrologia Latina than third-hand info.
Alex B said:
Pretty common point of view. My question would be if you claim there is no great entity then- how did the universe come into being, what is the foundation of morality, what was the original spark of life? Are love, music, beauty, hope, etc. all just chemical reactions brought about my evolution in order for us to continue our existence as pointless little self-replicating machines?
That sounds like I'm advocating the existence of god ... which I'm not. They're just some of the reasons I'm not an atheist.
To me, just positing the existence of a thing called God doesn't answer any of those questions. (Very specifically, I don't think religion can answer ethical questions at all, but I can't be arsed to get into that at the moment.) If you posit a God, then I can quite legitimately ask 'Where did he come from?', 'If he's so clever, who made him?' etc.angry bob said:
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
Wrong, but then you can't see that can you? You followed me all over these boards with your half baked insults and pseudo-intellectual ramblings. You are really no better than some dosser outside Brixton Tube station.
As I said before, if you start a thread with such a provocative title, what do you expect? But you have singled me out for abuse because you have a personal problem with me that is merely a symptom of your mental health problem.
*Troll*
Alex B said:
But Nino hasn't *made* any objections. He's even said that he's not *going* to make any. He's clearly announced that he only wants to derail this thread, and that is his only purpose in being here. Quite why he feels such a strong need to do this I've no idea. But you're right, I should probably not dignify his dullardisms by responding. I'll stop now.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
Arrogant
Pompous
Egotist
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
Wrong, I have but it suits you to say that I haven't. You're one of the worst liars I have ever seen on Urban.
Now you have a new word to play with. That must make you truly happy O Onanistic one.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
You have used this thread to belittle others and generally take the piss. You are the *troll*.
You have consistently failed to provide 'proof' when asked...yet you pretend that you are serious...I beg to differ and so do many others.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
This is the sort of thing that is typical of the troll. You've been sussed phil, give it up.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
Like you contribute to other threads? Come on, let's see what you have. You've spent over 60 pages wanking yourself off and getting others to do the same. You're a *joke*.
nino_savatte said:
There's some truth in this, in that many Jewish people will tell you that both the prolific and the destructive elements of God are still God. And others will say that there is Shaitan, but that it works for God.
However, from the New Testament we have the story of Jesus in the wilderness for forty days and forty nights, and his temptation by the devil. It seems likely that this story must have been told by Jesus to his friends, as there doesn't seem to be much other way for anyone to have known about it.
In this story, the devil offers Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, if he willl just bow down and worship the devil, and Jesus does not dispute the power of the devil to do this. which is suggestive, (but later Jesus says -my kingdom is not of this world,- meaning perhaps that he was waiting for a later stage.) Other names for the devil were Beelzebub, or -bul, which means the Lord of the house, it also suggests interpretations of why Jesus says, the messiah will come like a thief in the night, or the parable where he talks about breaking into a house, tieing up the owner, in order to get his locked up treasure out. he said you need to be strong to tie up the master of the house. and of course to many at the time, Roma, or Amor backwards was pretty much God- The Jews were in quite a minority to suggest that their God was in fact the true God, and most of the roman world thought they were pretty barking. (But go to Rome now)
It's worth bearing in mind that Jesus was jewish and yet it seemed that he believed in the devil, and furthermore considered him to be the current ruler of the world. Famously, also, he said, you cannot serve two masters. You cannot serve both God and Mammon. These days, perhaps for disguise, mammon is translated as money, http://www.angelfire.com/ca/mammon/. Maybe when it was said, mammon just meant wealth, or property, but then, it was odd of Jesus to put it alongside God as a potential master.
Roma. People don't really get it. Maybe you'd have to have been there to really grasp the full horror. When humanity is just another commodity, and justice just the carrying out of the law, means nailing up a runaway slave,and the word for -right- is -decorum- meaning what is done- is it irrational to think that the world is in the grip of a demon? And crucifixion. It's the torturer's torture. Being burned alive, or hung drawn and quartered are extraordinary mercy in comparison.
It's odd, , although most of the world was brought into subjection to the Jewish God, and ancient Rome now lies in ruins, it was very much a bastardised version of God and Christ that Roman christianity presented. The Romans stole the clothes of Christ, and carried on and are still trying to impose the commodification of humanity, and the master-slave reality on the rest of the world. Of course they have to pretend to be a lot nicer now, hypocrisy being the homage vice pays to virtue, and life has turned pretty strange. With Satan stealing God's clothes, it seems God had to steal Satan's also, so you find God in magic and ecstatic celebration where anything goes. But Satanism.. yes, it's the oldest religion there is, and money-worship is just the form it's taking today, the joke being that it's so easy to blind humanity to what they're actually doing, even when "In God we trust" is printed on the dollar bill. I wonder what will become of us, are they waiting for me to be dead before they take off the mask and bring back human sacrifice, or is that unnecessary given that we've been successfully enslaved into damaging the planet enough to cause climate change that will mainly wipe us out.
Well if we haven't been enslaved by a malign spirit, by the demand of money that it increase so that we exploit the earth and any humans we can to the limit, even destroying the ecosystem in the process, then why exactly are we doing it? And why can't we stop?
nino_savatte said:
Right, you've now finally made it clear to everyone that you just don't want this discussion to take place. You are here to stop us discussing God's existence. You might want to ask yourself why this is so important to you. From now on, I will confine myself to answering the serious points that others are making, and leave you to ramble away like the dullard in the corner.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
ZWord said:
Indeed, Satan had to be created for a reason and iirc the concept was appropriated from the Zoroastrians. There are other religions where the embodiment of 'evil' is absent as opposed to evil itself.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
phildwyer said:
Change the record fuckwit.
To be honest, I have had my doubts as to the wisdom of this thread.
I find the idea of "the rational proof of God's existence" not risible, but dubious, and I've generally thought that the best evidence for God is personal experience. But I remember now, there was a time when I didn't really think I had any personal experience, and yet reason still convinced me.
But maybe there's a confusion between logic and reason. Robots are logical, but not reasonable. Humans can be reasonable, but are rarely logical. I guess when people see the words -rational proof-, they expect a faultless seamless web of logic, not just a reasonable argument, I'm pleasantly surprised to see that the proof starts off with this discussion of Satan, a much underestimated force in the world. -you should see if you can find the poem -the money God- from -keep the aspidistra flying-,
The devil, though, I wonder... Looks like it won this one. But they say he was God's best mate originally
I find the idea of "the rational proof of God's existence" not risible, but dubious, and I've generally thought that the best evidence for God is personal experience. But I remember now, there was a time when I didn't really think I had any personal experience, and yet reason still convinced me.
But maybe there's a confusion between logic and reason. Robots are logical, but not reasonable. Humans can be reasonable, but are rarely logical. I guess when people see the words -rational proof-, they expect a faultless seamless web of logic, not just a reasonable argument, I'm pleasantly surprised to see that the proof starts off with this discussion of Satan, a much underestimated force in the world. -you should see if you can find the poem -the money God- from -keep the aspidistra flying-,
The devil, though, I wonder... Looks like it won this one. But they say he was God's best mate originally
nino_savatte said:
Well if we haven't been enslaved by a malign spirit or the demand of money for incessant growth into exploiting the planet and each other, even to the extent of destroying our ecosystem, and eventually our civilisation, why exactly are we doing it? And why can't we stop?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Crispy said:Click his username, then click 'add to my ignore list'
Problem solved.
Nino, you do the same
I tried ignoring him but it is difficult when you see him quoted in other posts spreading lies around. He's a fucking menance and no mistake.
Thing is, he could ignore me but he chooses not to, which says an awful lot about his pettiness and vindictiveness.
- Status
Similar threads
