Page 4 of 6 « First<23456>
Topic Options
#42315 - 08/23/10 07:10 PM Re: Prove it [Re: WickedPup]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Actually took the time to read through all of this. Alot of it just seems to be on repeat and redundant merely for the sake of argument.


Well yes, this thread was indeed made merely for the sake of argument. At the time I made this thread there was a lot of talk about the existence of Satan as a deity.(Though one member in particular chooses to use a different name.)

Knowing that the subject had come up before, and would undoubtedly rear its ugly head again, I decided to create this thread to challenge people to prove their claims. So far I am still waiting for that to happen. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

 Quote:
From what I've seen, there is no objective or scientific data that proves OR disproves the existence of a "god" entity.


No there hasn't, however, every little bit of scientific knowledge that we can glean makes the possibility less and less likely. As far as I am concerned the Xian god most definitely does not exist. The Bible itself is great reason to doubt it.

 Quote:
The absence of belief in a "higher" power is the same as believing that this is no "higher" power. There is no absence of belief, just a difference in it.


No it isn't. I will refer you back to Dan's post and the issue of proving a negative.

I will add to it further by saying, as I have before, that faith and disbelief are not the same thing. Faith is belief without proof or good reason to believe and/or belief despite evidence to the contrary. I have good reason for not believing in any gods and there is much evidence to suggest that religious claims are false. Therefore my disbelief is not faith.

 Quote:
Just cuz some people don't see any use in it doesn't mean that others can't find use in it. Reality and belief is subjective to each individual.


I never said people couldn't find use in their beliefs but that doesn't make those beliefs any less irrational. And reality is only somewhat subjective to each individuals. There are somethings that apply to all people. That there is no man in the sky who is keeping track of everything we do or a cloven footed demon who tortures souls for all eternity is just one of them.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#42317 - 08/23/10 07:46 PM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3894
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: WP

I fail to see how either side has proof other than theories and faith.

There isn't really sides, as far as I see things. One one hand you have people making wild claims that aren't supported by any evidence, and on the other, reasonable people that do not give weight to claims that are not supported by evidence, or claims that are logically impossible.

As an example, lets look at standard christian based monotheism. There is no evidence in support of the claim that an omnimax deity exists, and further it's existence is logically impossible for several reasons. There is also ample evidence that people create gods via religion, and that many are mutually exclusive shows they are in fact, manufactured by man. Can you really say that believing and not believing are equal and opposite?

To say that believing things that ARE supported by logic and evidence is the same as believing things that are not seems an incoherent position to me.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#42336 - 08/24/10 02:26 AM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
WickedPup Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/10/10
Posts: 10
 Quote:
So far I am still waiting for that to happen. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

Honestly, it seems irrational to expect that anyone could validate their claims. Regardless of belief, we're debating via internet. I'm sure we're all aware of the wild ass claims that people make on a daily basis via the interwebs. Rationality and knowledge are essential to sifting through the bullshit that people want to say, and I appreciate your explanation for why this thread was started. But seriously, I'm sure you didn't expect anything other than pointless argument to evolve from such a thread. To expect otherwise seems ignorant.

 Quote:
No there hasn't, however, every little bit of scientific knowledge that we can glean makes the possibility less and less likely. As far as I am concerned the Xian god most definitely does not exist. The Bible itself is great reason to doubt it

Aye,completely agreed. Despite what people may try to spread through "christian science"(oxymoron?), there is no proof or theory which honestly suggests their god. Or any "god" for that matter. The singularity principle seems acceptable to me, but not in any way they try to espouse. Even multi dimensional theory seems to accept that on any given plane, our laws of physics would persist.

 Quote:
I will add to it further by saying, as I have before, that faith and disbelief are not the same thing. Faith is belief without proof or good reason to believe and/or belief despite evidence to the contrary. I have good reason for not believing in any gods and there is much evidence to suggest that religious claims are false. Therefore my disbelief is not faith.


Disbelief does not equal the opposite of faith. I agree with that. Your disbelief in an external entity does not equal the opposite of the belief in one. I agree with that. The belief that there is nothing else IS the opposite of the beliefthat there is something though. I do not equate disbelief with the belief in nothing.
Disbelief follows skepticism. And that is merely a doubting and questioning attitude. I feel that is essential to Satanism in general as well as to independent and human thought. But unless we aim at redefining terms(which I truly fucking love to do), we're stuck with the differences.

To be honest,I haven't seen a single decent response in defense for "theism" in any sense through this thread. The only logical backing for the "man in the sky" is through the acceptance of external living entities following physics to visit this planet and fuck it up. But even the people who believe that are grasping at random theories and ideas with very very very small objective reasoning.

There is an insane amount of data which disproves any "man in the sky" religion, theory or other such nonsense. But from what I can tell, there is nothing which can prove that there is nothing out there.

This is where skepticism plays its part. To weed through the nonsense. This is also where faith plays its part. To believe/ accept which parts are nonsense and disregard others is largely an act of faith. There are massive loads of objective data culminating in that all things in this universe follow the laws of physics, as such, it follows that any omnipotent "being" is objectively flawed in reasoning. In the sense that there IS an omnipotent being, I thoroughly disagree. Nothing, ever, (save personal delusion) supposes such ideas.
But in a different sense, there is a large amount of data suggesting a "universal data spread", or, in mundane terms, an energy that is all encompassing. Now heres where I take issue...

"Energy" in itself, is an amazingly subjective word. It really shouldn't be, but until english refines its concepts down to singular terms, we're stuck with it. "God" is another wonderfully subjective term, with far far more definitions than are dictionary bound. Combine the two and we sometimes wind up with shit like nature worship and buddhism.
It truly is a sad thing that most theists aren't into science, or theyd realize that what they're attempting to explain is coming off severely retarded.

Okay.. ..

My definition of what a "god" is, is extremely different than what most theists believe. I thoroughly encourage challenging any theist who claims in an anthropomorphic entity. It quite simply doesn't make sense. But I have always seen such things as mythology, and recognizing others beliefs in such things has always seemed encouraging it. Kinda like Santa Claus or other such shit.
kid: Santa is coming!
Adult: wtf is a santa?
kid: hes the person who visits all the houses on xmas to deliver presents
Adult: in no way at all does that make logical sense. Stop it.
(thats a poor example, I know. In many cases adults encourage the belief in santa to get kids to chill the fuck out for a couple months, but even then that person is using a mythology to his advantage in an objective sense. while there doesn't seem to be any objective justification for such things as the xian god...I have nothing to follow that one lol..)

blah... By straight up asking for someone to prove the existence in a "god", it usually just encourages their belief in the fact that we are denying it. Its a fucked up concept, but deal with xians for a few years head on, and you'll see what I mean. Its a psychological matter that I haven't really seemed to figure out yet. (irrationality is a messed up thing)

I think it'd be much more productive to maintain arguments like this as personal side arms until someone says something completely fucking stupid. But I can see where this could get tiring from attempting to shoot down the same bird without much success. Hence the futility of such argumentation.


Actually, I'll offer up a new challenge...
Instead of trying to PROVE the existence of an external entity, I want someone to explain WHY they believe in that external entity. Forgive me if someone has attempted already in this thread for that challenge, but I haven't seen anything worth recognizing through here to support it.

Top
#42338 - 08/24/10 02:38 AM Re: Prove it [Re: Dan_Dread]
WickedPup Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/10/10
Posts: 10
 Quote:
There isn't really sides, as far as I see things.

There are those that believe in an external entity and those that don't. There isn't a line drawn?

 Quote:
One one hand you have people making wild claims that aren't supported by any evidence, and on the other, reasonable people that do not give weight to claims that are not supported by evidence, or claims that are logically impossible.

Two hands equal two points, two points either rest on sides or ends of a line, and these two view points don't rest anywhere near the same line.
 Quote:
As an example, lets look at standard christian based monotheism

Ughh.... I'd rather not. Causes my knowledge pain...(lol)..
 Quote:
There is also ample evidence that people create gods via religion, and that many are mutually exclusive shows they are in fact, manufactured by man.

I have no complaint whatsoever towards this. I hold this as a well defined fact of life and belief.
 Quote:
Can you really say that believing and not believing are equal and opposite?

I seriously hope I just clarified this a post earlier. Belief in nothing is the opposite in the belief in something. I'm not arguing objectively with that one. I do not see disbelief as the same thing as the belief in nothing. This may be a matter of semantics, if so, lets just fucking forget the whole concept, k? \:D

 Quote:
To say that believing things that ARE supported by logic and evidence is the same as believing things that are not seems an incoherent position to me

Honestly, I agree with that. Bleh, I think this is just an issue of clarity on my part.

Once again.. I DO NOT SUPPORT THEISM OF ANY KIND. Hell, I only partially understand the reasons why people believe in such things. I haven't seen a single effort to prove "god"(in any sense) that followed the essential laws of this universe that the majority of us have accepted(x.X I honestly have seen xians shutdown in the face of contradiction. It is possibly one of the most disturbing things I've ever witnessed. To watch someone be confronted by infallible evidence that contradicts their belief, and then proceed to quite literally shut down their cognitive abilities and walk away is just immensely depressing). It truly seems a delusion to me.
I think the issue with the part of the argument I'm aiming at is merely semantic and definition based, instead of objectively based. If so, my apologies.

Top
#42346 - 08/24/10 10:54 AM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
Every now and then this site gets people who maintain that Satan, as an actual living entity, exists. I invite all who make such claims to prove it.

Disclaimer: Do NOT try to use faith as proof. I do not care if you can "just feel" its presence, I want undeniable, verifiable proof. If you can not do this then please do not assert any such claims as fact.


"You can't argue with belief." This is a phrase I've used my whole life to remind me of exactly this type of discussion.

Science, by it's own definition, has its scope limited to the physical world. Most stereotypical objects of faith (ie the Abrahamic God) are defined as existing outside that world. Both sides, therefore, have already agreed that science and logic cannot be applied to those types of objects (or concepts, or whatever label you give it). There cannot be proof of such things, by the very definition of "proof".

On the other hand, there can certainly be argument (in the vulgar, not-classical-Logic form). People will argue about anything, as we've seen here. But, as we've also seen, such argument is pointless, as you cannot convince someone to change their beliefs via such argument.

That last statement also applies to someone who is not willing to be open-minded, regardless of topic (I think that was mentioned earlier in the thread, too). Even if the discussion is about something that could be logically argued (in the Classical sense), if one party stubbornly won't follow the set of proofs - eg, they believe they already know the "truth" - there's also no point in arguing (either formally or classically).

Unless both sides are willing to communicate and learn, such discussion is basically a waste of time. That's what "You can't argue with belief" means to me.

(Cue Monty Python "I'd like to have an argument" skit)
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#42353 - 08/24/10 03:36 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Autodidact]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
Claiming that something is real, yet exists outside the perceivable universe, and therefore can only be observed by those blessed by said something, is a bit of a losing proposition in my book. It's pretty much identical to having an imaginary friend.

Claiming that no such something exists, by comparison, requires no proof. Proving a negative is also a losing proposition. Plenty of things have been proven to exist, and the list grows longer every time a new species is discovered or a new cure for a grave illness is invented.

Making a claim that a supernatural deity exists requires proof. I don't think this is too much to ask. If no such proof exists, then the claim is null and void. No tithes or genuflections, thank you. Faith often hides behind this "Non-Overlapping Magisteria" umbrella you mention, but that doesn't lend it credence in the least. I think people should be allowed to believe whatever they want, but the moment I am required to believe on flimsy evidence, we are no longer in the realm of "Non-Overlapping Magisteria", but the realm of "proselytizing thought police inquisition bastards", which we all know and despise.

Faith and non-faith are not equal. They are not two sides of the same coin. They are antithetical to each other.

Oh, and the argument? "I told you once." "No, you didn't." "Yes, I did." "When?" "Just now." "No, you didn't."
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#42359 - 08/24/10 04:53 PM Re: Prove it [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: SkaffenAmtiskaw

Making a claim that a supernatural deity exists requires proof. I don't think this is too much to ask.


It is too much to ask. The very nature of faith is such that no proof is required. You said yourself faith and non-faith are antithetical to each other.

You will never receive proof of a supernatural deity, because there can be none. (At least, I cannot think of any set of evidence that would make me think, "Oh, yeah, clearly that proves that a god exists outside of the known universe.")

And so you (we, Satanists, et al.) will never be "convinced" by any particular group of "faithful". (Which is fine - I would doubt the sanity of anyone on this list who could be so convinced.)

The faithful and non-faithful will never convince/convert each other - argument between believer and non-believer is a waste of time. That was my point.

"It's not just saying 'No, it isn't'."
"Yes it is."
"No, it isn't!"
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#42360 - 08/24/10 04:58 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Autodidact]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
You will never receive proof of a supernatural deity, because there can be none.


And did you ever consider that maybe this was my point?

Since no proof can be given then perhaps people should just shut up all together about it.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#42361 - 08/24/10 05:13 PM Re: Prove it [Re: WickedPup]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
But from what I can tell, there is nothing which can prove that there is nothing out there.


Well, I am sure there is lots of stuff "out there" - just not any deities.

 Quote:
"Energy" in itself, is an amazingly subjective word. It really shouldn't be, but until english refines its concepts down to singular terms, we're stuck with it.


"Energy" is a very defined word; it is the amount of work that can be performed by a quantity of force. It's just that people have bastardized the word and used it to try and make their claims sound more valid. Just last night I had someone give me the whole "energy can not be created or destroyed" routine in an attempt to try and argue in favor of reincarnation.

 Quote:
Instead of trying to PROVE the existence of an external entity, I want someone to explain WHY they believe in that external entity.


Essentially those are the same things. I'm an interested in the proof that translates into the "why". Really the only answer a person can give, without providing actual proof, is "because I want it to be true" or some variation thereof.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#42394 - 08/25/10 01:53 AM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
WickedPup Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/10/10
Posts: 10
 Quote:
Just last night I had someone give me the whole "energy can not be created or destroyed" routine in an attempt to try and argue in favor of reincarnation.

I was actually a proponent of this argument for a long fuckin time. That is, until I started to study more into actual physics. The information is always there, it just wouldn't be recognizable in any way or form, along with the notion that the distorted information expelled by humanity could actually make itself back into a life form is somewhat ridiculous.
 Quote:
Really the only answer a person can give, without providing actual proof, is "because I want it to be true" or some variation thereof

Thats the only answer I've ever been able to accept for a theist from any religion. Most people start rambling off useless nonsense that is only barely linked to whatever existence they're trying to prove. But for someone to just be like "I believe it because I believe it" is hard to argue. Its not the most logical or rational but at least it shows some acceptance in their own beliefs rather than relying on outside sources to prove to attempt to prove things for them. Last conversation I had with a theist that ended like that, we both just dropped it. Kinda an understanding that theres no point in arguing it at that point.

Top
#42431 - 08/25/10 01:57 PM Re: Prove it [Re: WickedPup]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
And being that this is a Satanism forum, faith based claims should be abhorred as much as typos and bad grammar seem to be.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#42757 - 09/04/10 04:41 AM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Syn_Holliday Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/18/10
Posts: 25
Loc: West Covina, CA
Sure, it's virtually impossible for any Christian theist, regardless of which side of the coin they're on, to defend their belief without resorting to faith. But sometimes it's interesting to hear how creative they can get. The ones that can admit to themselves that it's entirely based on faith won't even enter the discussion, so what you get are those who actually feel they have a chance at proving the existence of their deity through rational argument. For some of them, it's somewhat embarassing to admit something they hold so dear and personal has no basis other than faith. When people point it out, they take it personally and are lured into the discussion.
Top
#42760 - 09/04/10 07:57 AM Re: Prove it [Re: Syn_Holliday]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Sure, it's virtually impossible for any Christian theist, regardless of which side of the coin they're on, to defend their belief without resorting to faith.


It is impossible for any theist, Christian or otherwise, to defend their beliefs without resorting to faith. If you had read this thread and/or paid attention you would understand that was the point behind creating it in the first place.

 Quote:
But sometimes it's interesting to hear how creative they can get.


Yes, most of the time it is just annoying to hear others blather on about their imaginary friends and what they have to offer if I would just shut my brain off and believe.

 Quote:
The ones that can admit to themselves that it's entirely based on faith won't even enter the discussion, so what you get are those who actually feel they have a chance at proving the existence of their deity through rational argument.


If only that were really the case. The truth is that most of those who "enter the discussion" have nothing but faith to use as evidence and, worst of all, they think their faith constitutes a rational argument.

 Quote:
For some of them, it's somewhat embarassing to admit something they hold so dear and personal has no basis other than faith. When people point it out, they take it personally and are lured into the discussion.


And those people have no business posting in this thread.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#42775 - 09/04/10 04:27 PM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Syn_Holliday Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/18/10
Posts: 25
Loc: West Covina, CA
 Quote:
If you had read this thread and/or paid attention you would understand that was the point behind creating it in the first place.

And if you noticed the simple word "sure" that the statement started with, you would have realized that I was stating my agreement with the initial post (logically, I would have had to read the post first in order to agree with it).

 Quote:
Yes, most of the time it is just annoying to hear others blather on about their imaginary friends and what they have to offer if I would just shut my brain off and believe.

And that's when those who have no interest would simply ignore. I wouldn't assume every topic would interest everyone.

 Quote:
If only that were really the case. The truth is that most of those who "enter the discussion" have nothing but faith to use as evidence and, worst of all, they think their faith constitutes a rational argument.

And there are those who attempt to prove it beyond faith. Some are quite amusing in the new approaches they devise to rationalize their belief, same as Christians. Again, no assumption everyone would find this amusing.

 Quote:
And those people have no business posting in this thread.

Huh? Isn't the topic of this post exactly that, asking them to prove it?

Top
#42778 - 09/04/10 08:24 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Syn_Holliday]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
I ignore a fair amount of stuff that gets posted on this board. However, somethings can't be ignored because ignoring them sends the message that you will put up with it. "It" in this case being the contention that there are gods and/or devils. I'm of the opinion that some things aren't even worth entertaining; faith-based beliefs being near the top of that list.

The point of this thread is for people to prove their belief without resorting to faith. The people who I said have no business posting here are the people who resort to faith. Again, if you had read what I just wrote you would understand that.

Really this whole thing is obviously way beyond your comprehension.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
Page 4 of 6 « First<23456>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.031 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.