Are Atheists doing it wrong?

[Esso]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Everyone who is aware of the concept believes God exist. The only difference is what they believe God exists as. To some, God is a real supernatural being. To others, he's just a figment of some people's imagination, a fictitious character in religious texts. That's still a form of existence. If you say "God doesn't exist," you must have a definition for that which you call God which you claim doesn't exist. How can it have a definition yet be non-existent?

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

[Esso]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

Everyone who is aware of the concept believes God exist. The only difference is what they believe God exists as. To some, God is a real supernatural being. To others, he's just a figment of some people's imagination, a fictitious character in religious texts. That's still a form of existence. If you say "God doesn't exist," you must have a definition for that which you call God which you claim doesn't exist. How can it have a definition yet be non-existent?

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Student

We are becoming God

Exactly what an Illuminati New Age Luciferian would say.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Student

We are becoming God

Exactly what an Illuminati New Age Luciferian would say.

Originally Posted by Esso

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

As an idea, they sure do. How else would you be able to label, and identify them?

Originally Posted by Esso

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

As an idea, they sure do. How else would you be able to label, and identify them?

[Esso]

Originally Posted by Rant

As an idea, they sure do. How else would you be able to label, and identify them?

Existence- the state of being real and the ability to physically interact with the universe or multiverse.

No, I cant identify the boogeyman....he doesn't exist. If an Atheist believes God doesnt exist, theres nothing wrong with that....they're saying another person's idea of a deity is not physically affecting the universe.

[Esso]

Originally Posted by Rant

As an idea, they sure do. How else would you be able to label, and identify them?

Existence- the state of being real and the ability to physically interact with the universe or multiverse.

No, I cant identify the boogeyman....he doesn't exist. If an Atheist believes God doesnt exist, theres nothing wrong with that....they're saying another person's idea of a deity is not physically affecting the universe.

Originally Posted by Esso

Existence- the state of being real and the ability to physically interact with the universe or multiverse.

No, I cant identify the boogeyman....he doesn't exist. If an Atheist believes God doesnt exist, theres nothing wrong with that....they're saying another person's idea of a deity is not physically affecting the universe.

If lil Rohan from the block commits a suicide bombing in the name of Allah. Is this not the idea of God having a direct affect on the physical?

Originally Posted by Esso

Existence- the state of being real and the ability to physically interact with the universe or multiverse.

No, I cant identify the boogeyman....he doesn't exist. If an Atheist believes God doesnt exist, theres nothing wrong with that....they're saying another person's idea of a deity is not physically affecting the universe.

If lil Rohan from the block commits a suicide bombing in the name of Allah. Is this not the idea of God having a direct affect on the physical?

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Rant

If lil Rohan from the block commits a suicide bombing in the name of Allah. Is this not the idea of God having a direct affect on the physical?

The "idea of g0d" is a mental construct of g0d expressed in thought. If someone killed in the name of g0d g0d wouldn't have a direct affect on the physical, rather someone's belief did. So no, g0d wouldn't affect the physical realm in that sense. If a crazy person killed someone cuz he thought Mickey Mouse told him to do it it would just mean a crazy person killed someone because they have defective thinking. Even with self defence you need a credible reason to think your life's in danger or its a crime. You can't just shoot someone and say "I thought they were going to kill me". To kill people or make decisions without rational thought is insane. If g0d was insane there would be no natural law. Therefore, it has to be ones own irrational thought, making the perpetrator solely responsible for the murder. And lil Rohan from the block goes to jail and becomes someone's crazy bitch. There's personal reality and ultimate reality. You can think you can fly but go jump out of 20 stories.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Rant

If lil Rohan from the block commits a suicide bombing in the name of Allah. Is this not the idea of God having a direct affect on the physical?

The "idea of g0d" is a mental construct of g0d expressed in thought. If someone killed in the name of g0d g0d wouldn't have a direct affect on the physical, rather someone's belief did. So no, g0d wouldn't affect the physical realm in that sense. If a crazy person killed someone cuz he thought Mickey Mouse told him to do it it would just mean a crazy person killed someone because they have defective thinking. Even with self defence you need a credible reason to think your life's in danger or its a crime. You can't just shoot someone and say "I thought they were going to kill me". To kill people or make decisions without rational thought is insane. If g0d was insane there would be no natural law. Therefore, it has to be ones own irrational thought, making the perpetrator solely responsible for the murder. And lil Rohan from the block goes to jail and becomes someone's crazy bitch. There's personal reality and ultimate reality. You can think you can fly but go jump out of 20 stories.

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

The "idea of g0d" is a mental construct of g0d expressed in thought. If someone killed in the name of g0d g0d wouldn't have a direct affect on the physical, rather someone's belief did. So no, g0d wouldn't affect the physical realm in that sense. If a crazy person killed someone cuz he thought Mickey Mouse told him to do it it would just mean a crazy person killed someone because they have defective thinking. Even with self defence you need a credible reason to think your life's in danger or its a crime. You can't just shoot someone and say "I thought they were going to kill me". To kill people or make decisions without rational thought is insane. If g0d was insane there would be no natural law. Therefore, it has to be ones own irrational thought, making the perpetrator solely responsible for the murder. And lil Rohan from the block goes to jail and becomes someone's crazy bitch. There's personal reality and ultimate reality. You can think you can fly but go jump out of 20 stories.

Thought predetermines action. If the thought is a motivating factor in an action, then the thought is just as affective as the actions itself. As, without the thought, the action would never have occurred.

Originally Posted by Lyve SCIENCE

The "idea of g0d" is a mental construct of g0d expressed in thought. If someone killed in the name of g0d g0d wouldn't have a direct affect on the physical, rather someone's belief did. So no, g0d wouldn't affect the physical realm in that sense. If a crazy person killed someone cuz he thought Mickey Mouse told him to do it it would just mean a crazy person killed someone because they have defective thinking. Even with self defence you need a credible reason to think your life's in danger or its a crime. You can't just shoot someone and say "I thought they were going to kill me". To kill people or make decisions without rational thought is insane. If g0d was insane there would be no natural law. Therefore, it has to be ones own irrational thought, making the perpetrator solely responsible for the murder. And lil Rohan from the block goes to jail and becomes someone's crazy bitch. There's personal reality and ultimate reality. You can think you can fly but go jump out of 20 stories.

Thought predetermines action. If the thought is a motivating factor in an action, then the thought is just as affective as the actions itself. As, without the thought, the action would never have occurred.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Rant

Thought predetermines action. If the thought is a motivating factor in an action, then the thought is just as affective as the actions itself. As, without the thought, the action would never have occurred.

The fault is with the thought. Not the object. The thought "I need to kill for g0d" is the motivation, not g0d.

Example: If you think a girl's beautiful and kill her man so you can have her you're to blame for the murder, not the girl. Regardless if you thought she was a goddess and wanted you to do it.

A fault in logic is the motivating factor. Action is a response. You can react to a haullenation but it wouldn't be the hallucination's fault. Just like if a scitzo killed someone he thought was being controlled by satan. It wouldn't actually be Satan's fault (technically) but the scitzo's, for his false belief.

[Wayco]

Originally Posted by Rant

Thought predetermines action. If the thought is a motivating factor in an action, then the thought is just as affective as the actions itself. As, without the thought, the action would never have occurred.

The fault is with the thought. Not the object. The thought "I need to kill for g0d" is the motivation, not g0d.

Example: If you think a girl's beautiful and kill her man so you can have her you're to blame for the murder, not the girl. Regardless if you thought she was a goddess and wanted you to do it.

A fault in logic is the motivating factor. Action is a response. You can react to a haullenation but it wouldn't be the hallucination's fault. Just like if a scitzo killed someone he thought was being controlled by satan. It wouldn't actually be Satan's fault (technically) but the scitzo's, for his false belief.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by EtHnic Cleansing

I think you're just combining definitions into the group "existence" there. It sounds smart and all, but if you break up that word to have more definitions. We are talking about God here, not the concept of God. God's existence isn't concrete and proven to be real. To have a definition isn't to exist. The concept of God absolutely exists, but that's not what the question was.

To us, everything that exists comes with a concept, no matter our notion of objectivity and how objective we try to be. We never perceive objects directly. We only see concepts or our mind's visualization or attempted reconstructions of them. Therefore, it is hard to argue the existence of something independent of our perception or conceptualization, when in order to know of such an existence itself takes conceptualizing. If you believe that "existence" should be reserved for only things with concrete or material reality, you'll run into problems quickly. You wouldn't be able to say things like love or the number 2 exists. After all, you can't pick up the number 2 or weight it or put it in a bag. There are only instances of and symbolizations of it, but you can't find what we call "two" in material reality. You wouldn't even be able to say that movies exist. If I ask you to go bring me a movie and you brought me a blu-Ray disk copy of Pirates of the Caribbean, like numbers, that wouldn't actually be a "movie" but rather an instance or symbolization of one.

Originally Posted by Esso

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

Everything exists in some form. If someone were to ask me if I believe Bugs Bunny is real, I would say I believe he is a real cartoon character. Do I believe there's an actual bunny out there who eats carrots and greets people with "what's up doc?" Negative. But cartoons do exist, and there are real cartoon characters.

[NOBLE]

Originally Posted by EtHnic Cleansing

I think you're just combining definitions into the group "existence" there. It sounds smart and all, but if you break up that word to have more definitions. We are talking about God here, not the concept of God. God's existence isn't concrete and proven to be real. To have a definition isn't to exist. The concept of God absolutely exists, but that's not what the question was.

To us, everything that exists comes with a concept, no matter our notion of objectivity and how objective we try to be. We never perceive objects directly. We only see concepts or our mind's visualization or attempted reconstructions of them. Therefore, it is hard to argue the existence of something independent of our perception or conceptualization, when in order to know of such an existence itself takes conceptualizing. If you believe that "existence" should be reserved for only things with concrete or material reality, you'll run into problems quickly. You wouldn't be able to say things like love or the number 2 exists. After all, you can't pick up the number 2 or weight it or put it in a bag. There are only instances of and symbolizations of it, but you can't find what we call "two" in material reality. You wouldn't even be able to say that movies exist. If I ask you to go bring me a movie and you brought me a blu-Ray disk copy of Pirates of the Caribbean, like numbers, that wouldn't actually be a "movie" but rather an instance or symbolization of one.

Originally Posted by Esso

What? So that means the boogeyman exists...and leprechauns?

Everything exists in some form. If someone were to ask me if I believe Bugs Bunny is real, I would say I believe he is a real cartoon character. Do I believe there's an actual bunny out there who eats carrots and greets people with "what's up doc?" Negative. But cartoons do exist, and there are real cartoon characters.

A whole lot of people talking complete and utter bollocks trying to sound smart in here.

A whole lot of people talking complete and utter bollocks trying to sound smart in here.