You Cannot Prove Zeus doesn't Exist

Originally posted by chithappens
Cause scripture is supposed to be the word of God and the laws of God can only be ordained by God, unless you are suggesting a man can decide what God wants on a whim.

But, the scriptures aren't the word of God. That's just the belief of the people who abide by them to justify said beliefs, furthermore the concept of GOD is subjective.

I don't think they should be changed either, but for different reasons than you. People should use the scriptures as it fits their life, but as humans progress certain traditions become outdated.

so, chemical addiction is based on dopamine being released into the hippocampus and the body needing that level to be maintained (along with other things, but bare with me).

So, when something makes you happy, like REALLY happy, you know, like say a religious experience, it would release dopamine into your brain...

hmmm, sorta forgot where I was going with that...

Originally posted by Sandai Kitetsu
furthermore the concept of GOD is subjective.

Go on...

Originally posted by chithappens
Go on...

Pretty much, some cultures believe god to be celestial bodies while others believe God was a gain Phallus. The intrinsic meaning of God is simply veneration of natural occurring phenomenon, Individuals, Celestial bodies or concepts.

Originally posted by chithappens
Cause scripture is supposed to be the word of God and the laws of God can only be ordained by God, unless you are suggesting a man can decide what God wants on a whim.

This is the era of media and I have not seen one tape showing God sitting down with Dan Patrick explaining how Barry Bonds REALLY never did 'roids:

"It was just a blessing through the Almighty, self, now accept it."

I haven't seen that tape yet.

Well god sis upposed to be everywhere even in man, so I guess yopu could say that man could change scripture, but of course most of the time people change scripture for personal benefit.

Originally posted by inimalist
so, chemical addiction is based on dopamine being released into the hippocampus and the body needing that level to be maintained (along with other things, but bare with me).

So, when something makes you happy, like REALLY happy, you know, like say a religious experience, it would release dopamine into your brain...

hmmm, sorta forgot where I was going with that...

I dunno something along the lines of relgious experieneces are just caused by chemicals in the brain.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I dunno something along the lines of relgious experieneces are just caused by chemicals in the brain.

it was going to be something about religion being addictive but i chickened out

then there is the whole ritual and habit forming aspect of something being done at a particular time over and over...

but ya... not to imply anything about the people who post here

(and to clarify, studies have shown that it isn't just religious beliefs that affect dopamine. People are essentially "addicted" to their political ideologies).

Originally posted by inimalist
it was going to be something about religion being addictive but i chickened out

then there is the whole ritual and habit forming aspect of something being done at a particular time over and over...

but ya... not to imply anything about the people who post here

(and to clarify, studies have shown that it isn't just religious beliefs that affect dopamine. People are essentially "addicted" to their political ideologies).

...yeah thanks for that.

Originally posted by inimalist
it was going to be something about religion being addictive but i chickened out

then there is the whole ritual and habit forming aspect of something being done at a particular time over and over...

but ya... not to imply anything about the people who post here

(and to clarify, studies have shown that it isn't just religious beliefs that affect dopamine. People are essentially "addicted" to their political ideologies).

One of the issues that I have is that people say that it is true when there is no evidence to support but a personal belief, while I’m an Atheist I believe my view is true but I would never say that it is true because I don’t have proof that it does. I have logic and life experiences that support my view but that is far from being able to say that it is true.

Originally posted by Sandai Kitetsu
I should note that the methods you mention are mindcontrol techniques.

🙄

I don't interpret the findings that way...

Originally posted by inimalist
🙄

[b]I don't interpret the findings that way... [/B]

In Greek mythology, Corvus was a bird who was cast into the sky by the Gods as a punishment. In the next breath they placed a dog called Laeleps in the sky as a reward for winning a race against a fox. I wish these Greek deities would make their bloody minds up.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I simply tire of the counter argument [b]"You can't PROVE that God DOESN'T EXIST" as a response to the statement that God's existance cannot be proven.

You can't prove Zeus doesn't exist either.

You can't prove Santa Clause doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the floating teacup in outer space doesn't exist either.

All you have to go by is Logic, History, and Science. Please realize the fallacy of the argument "You cannot Prove God doesn't exist".

All of you Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other Theists deny the existance of other myths and possibilities, but will defend your own to the death, even though you know you cannot prove your beleif true.

Your arguments will earn respect when you clarify your beleif as beleif, but once you claim your beleif as truth that is when the Burden of Proof falls upon you.

Understand ? [/B]

Good point Kali, once again you trump the Theists 😉

I don't see why people are having so much trouble with the premise.

All the OP is saying that some people are trying to counter rational attacks on their comments with the argument "You cannot prove that God does not exist" when that argument is indeed irrelevant because it is not part of that rational process. This is not a criticism arimed at everyone nor a trojan horse designed to try and undermine all religious belief. it is simply a criticism of that argument, and this thread will work better if people recognisr that.

And LIl- all very well you simply saying that God is a matter of philosophy, but for a lot ofmpeople he is a matter of certain fact, and as mentioned, with that comes certain legal demands based on his existence that we would not tolerate from any other source.

And likewise, such people who justify their grounds on the position of "you cannot prove god does not exist" would expect to be taken more seriously than people who use the same argument to justify their believe in the tooth fairy or pyramid building aliens- a simple douuble standard. Such people often makes claims of personal experience just as strong as the first reply to this thread gave, but we do not treat that seriously.

The application of science is a process that has given us modern civilisation. There should be no harm or stigma in pointing out that religion fails the scientific process.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

The application of science is a process that has given us modern civilisation. There should be no harm or stigma in pointing out that religion fails the scientific process.

I dunno man it seems to me that the universe can be proof for existance of god but wether god created the universe or not seems to be subjective, also the existance of very powerful beings seem to be entirely logical.

It might possibly be advanced as evidence, but at the very best- and really stretching it- evidence of the existence of some super-powerful crration process that you may be able to personify. Not of any specific existence of a deity as espoused by religion.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It might possibly be advanced as evidence, but at the very best- and really stretching it- evidence of the existence of some super-powerful crration process that you may be able to personify.

Thats not unreasonable.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Not of any specific existence of a deity as espoused by religion.

Well....I did edit my post...but even if the existance of God cannot be proven or may seem to be illogical, the existance of powerful beings (gods) does seem very likely.

I think 'very likely' is a mattter of opinion only.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I think 'very likely' is a mattter of opinion only.

mmmm well I find it unlikey that if ants exist and humans exist why wouldnt there be creatures more powerful than humans? If you spat on an ant an ant would think its raining. I think there is a strong possiblity that other beings exist but humans are not able to precieve them.

Originally posted by Alfheim
mmmm well I find it unlikey that if ants exist and humans exist why wouldnt there be creatures more powerful than humans? If you spat on an ant an ant would think its raining. I think there is a strong possiblity that other beings exist but humans are not able to precieve them.

how anthropic

mind explaining what makes you better than an ant without it boiling down to you are better at being human?

so of course, there must be something even better at being human out there than we are 😉