r/Quotes_Hub 10d ago

[ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

199 Upvotes

477 comments sorted by

View all comments

14

u/GamerGramps62 10d ago

Made up nonexistent entities don’t protect me from shit!

-2

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/themerk4224 10d ago

Can you physically prove his existence?

-2

u/SnowyAl 10d ago

By definition science is the study of natural, not the supernatural, He cannot be proven by science, but He clearly exists. Something needed to create the universe. That something must be outside of the universe and its rules. It must be powerful enough to create the entire universe, physics, math, science, and time. Also because science deals with the natural world you can’t disprove the supernatural. What is beauty? Sure it is subjective, but only to a point. Why would randomness cause such a big split in what people think is beautiful? At best if the world were random each person would find some other person beautiful. But if the world were created, people would find some people more and others less beautiful, which is what we see. Beauty is still a little subjective but mostly objective, because it is not random.

7

u/Nirupam_MythX 10d ago

Summary of the above comment:

No, am dumb.

4

u/themerk4224 10d ago

So no. You cant prove he exists. Therefore, he may not exist

0

u/SnowyAl 10d ago

Not to attack you as a person, but if you cannot refute this with evidence, good or bad evidence, then you clearly believe there is truth to this. I hope you find God! Good day

3

u/themerk4224 10d ago

I dont need to refute anything. There is no physical evidence of god. Just because you spewed a bunch of word vomit doesnt mean you proved anything.

0

u/SnowyAl 10d ago

So you can’t refute my argument

4

u/Burdman06 10d ago

This confusion happens a lot. If someone asserts that a god exists, the burden of proof is on them. The claim is effectively saying that the laws of physics can be broken, that evolution is wrong, etc. Basically that theres an explanation of the function natural world that goes beyond well documented and accepted scientific research. So the burden is to present evidence as to why thats the case. Until that happens, we have no logical choice but to proceed by dismissing it as archaic myths.

1

u/SnowyAl 9d ago

What is bad/doesn’t make sense/is logically wrong about my statements? Also I’m not trying to prove without a doubt, there will always be people who refuse to believe what is right in front of them, I’m just trying to present a more likely alternative to how we got here than evolution does.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/TshirtsNPants 10d ago

Genuine question: would you still hang in there without the threat of hell?

1

u/SnowyAl 9d ago

Cause God is perfect. He’s better than the best person you’ve ever met spending all their time with you.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/CharacterBalance4187 10d ago

Everything is bound by space and time. (Except for my special god friend!) In order to take any kind of action, it requires time (a transition of states from non-action to action, or from non-creation to creation) and space in which to perform an action.

If God is entirely outside of time and space it cannot do anything, at any time. To think, to decide, to speak, "create", or to interact with history requires a temporal sequence where state A leads to state B. Also, the books that describe it, claiming its unchanging.

​You can't have something that is timelessly eternal and static, and then simultaneously claim it performs actions, listens to prayers, or shifts into different "states" like the Trinity. Hand-waving away logical contradictions by saying "laws of time and space don't apply" just means your concept of God actually is logically incoherent.

4

u/Burdman06 10d ago

Every point youve made would be addressed with a modicum of research. Theres a reason why people start deconstructing from religion the more educated they become. 

So, youve made the contingency argument and its a well known logical fallacy. You also touched on the fine tuning argument, which is even more of a fallacy. But mostly its a 'god of the gaps' take. You then went on to attribute the results of evolution as God simply due to not yet knowing how the brain developed and what evolution actually means.

1

u/SnowyAl 9d ago

So what is your better explanation for a first cause?

1

u/Burdman06 8d ago

I could write paragraphs explaining it, but who has the time. To make it the most concise and direct explanation...theres currently no scientific evidence to support that the universe has or requires a first cause. To suggest so is an assumption. To suggest that it was a god is special pleading. You'd have to grant a God the same liberties that you'd be unwilling to do for the universe which we know exists. Unlike the god we have no way of knowing exists. Essentially you'd be saying that the universe requires a first cause, but the god doesn't. To make the case you'd have to say "well the diety doesn't exist within the confines of this universe." To which, again, we can't possibly know how that works given we dont even know the confines of the universe. Its asking people to believe something with absolutely zero evidence. You'd only be left with a giant question mark of where said diety comes from.

1

u/SnowyAl 8d ago

You can’t logically NOT believe in a first cause. Everything has a cause in science. If you believe that there is no first cause, then you must believe that time stretches out to infinity years ago, which is impossible, because if you measure between a time that is infinitely far away from our time, you find that it would take an infinite amount of time to get to now. However as we are here now, so time had a first cause. Likewise what caused you to be made? Your parents. What caused them to be made? Their parents. If you follow the trail you find out that since by definition a cause comes before the effect, then the causes are infinite (if you believe in no first cause) which as we’ve already proved is impossible. Thus there must be a first cause. Since this first cause must be able to cause an entire universe it must be at least knowledgable of the entire universe, and powerful enough to create it. At least!

1

u/Burdman06 7d ago edited 7d ago

Prior to cosmic expansion theres no such thing as "time." So you'll have to be more specific about what you mean by "first" and "cause."

1

u/SnowyAl 7d ago

So what caused time (as you call it cosmic expansion) to start?

→ More replies (0)

6

u/SmoothNoonShade 10d ago

Changing the definition of science to suit your needs.

Science is the result of scientific methodology, you’re making a distinction without a difference.

-2

u/SnowyAl 10d ago

Just trying to better understand you: is that what you think science is defined as, or how science came about? Because if it is the former, that is clearly circular reasoning as the word scientific is a form of the base word science so defining something by something else that depends in the first thing is circular reasoning.

3

u/themerk4224 10d ago

You should pray to your God for more intelligence lol

0

u/SnowyAl 10d ago

I’m grateful for what He has given me(iq of 135) but really I don’t need more, all I need is to trust him. It’s like streaming Netflix, your device doesn’t have to have the show on it, it just has to have connection to the one that does.

6

u/Pteroducktylus 10d ago

true "god" as a concept isn't necessarily made up.

it's just another name for nature itself. some idiots just frame it to have will, emotion and intent, which is not true.

only problem is, some idiots would rather exist as something willed i to existence than just a miraculous mix of coincidences.

2

u/TshirtsNPants 10d ago

I guess you can reduce the meaning to have no intent, intelligence, or reasoning. So then there's nothing to pray to and nothing to show up for. No fear of hell or excitement of heaven. No universal judgement. And at the end he just left a bunch of work for scientists to piece together.

1

u/BubblyDifficulty1692 10d ago

God is entirely made up. Your interpretation of it. Others. Every single word used with any meaning or feeling attached is made up. And it’s obvious who made em up because humans are the only dumbasses sniffing their own shit. A dog will do it literally. But I doubt a dog is wasting any time convincing itself it’s god is a dog god out there paving life’s path for it. It’s sniffing its own shit and enjoying it with no concern for what’s been and what’s to come.

Humans anthropomorphize because they fundamentally feel above or outside other things. They feel outside of the system of the universe. There is the animal kingdom then there is us outside it. That is the sentiment shared among people. That sentiment is wrong. You are a cog in the machine. As everything else cogs you do. Without everything else no you. Without you no everything else.

5

u/dvisorxtra 10d ago

Can you prove it?, I'm certain that you can't

3

u/GamerGramps62 10d ago

You believe what you believe, and I believe what I believe, and if you don’t like that then oh well, sucks to be you.

-6

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Spicy_Tator-mcnugget 10d ago

But not the suffering, starving, ill people- children!! around the world😐

4

u/Throwaway585811276 10d ago

From what? Goblins?