What are the most compelling and irrefutable arguments against the existence of God?

When I say irrefutable, I mean “beyond a reasonable doubt”, as in a court of law.

 
First, we need to define the term “god”, so I will be referring to the Judeo-Christian god
of the bible who we must agree has the following attributes:

 
That god is omniscient
That god is omnipotent
That god is omnibenevolent

 
Let us also agree that the Christian bible is the true word of this god, and that it is his commandments to all humans.


Also please consider all philosophical counter arguments posed by C.S. Lewis, et’al.
Please explain and justify your argument.
For example; if you believe the Argument for Evil is compelling, please explain why the theist counter argument is not acceptable.


It could be argued for example, that god does not send any souls to hell, we send ourselves to hell by our own free will and that god has given us every opportunity to make that decision, and in our own free will, god is simply granting our request.

 
All philosophical and scientific arguments should have a justification.
For example; the bible says god created the earth and the “heavens” in 6 days, on the 7th day, he rested. We know from many disciplines of science that this cannot be true; however, it could be argued that the term "6 days" could have other biblical meaning, etc.

 

Be careful of logical falicies in forming your agruments. :) 

 

Please contribute your argument(s).

 

P.S. your argument does not need to be in your own words, you can copy and paste, just mention the source :)

Views: 1220

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yeah right artist William.  Ooooooh.  I am so scared by your freakish wisdom.

Fail

You are the one defining energy in a completely random and imagined way in your own little chunk of gray matter and then claiming you have solved the secret to the universe.  Un-fricken-believable!

Please reference your first fail to understand your second fail here. Or if you need help, you can take a gander as the little hint below:

 

"In fact, try posting a reply without having to use information as well!"

 

And what does this have to do with solving the worlds problems? Especially in a chaotic world? This argument only stresses the essence of the problems themselves to which at times can result in resolutions of such problems while at times cause other problems. Ahh yes, the fundamentals of positive, negative, and neutral feedback within a chaotic system to where problems can exist!. No surprise there! This tells me that you don't know much about chaos theory.

Just prove to me and the rest of the word that there are three types of energy as you state (positive, negative, and neutral).

This tells me right here that you are completely clueless ;). Nobody stated there were "three types of energy".. They are 3 attributes of energy. Way to be current with your physics. You might want to actually open up a science book before you make uneducated arguments. Go study Chaos theory, Quantum physics, Quantum Electrodynamics and at least learn the basics before making an argument.

The very least you could do is take the time to understand what the orders of magnitude are on the energy scale. Hell, lets post the following for your education in hopes that you might actually educate yourself.

 

It's the application of infinite regress until we reach a point to where regression can go no further in order to solve the problem. It can only be solved by an impossible, and point to which is impossible to regress any further.. So lets explore that here:

And why we already know by fact and by example:

Spatial capacity to which is the capacity to exist, and have a place to exist in. Capacity is directly linked to the capacity of energy. This can not ever have zero literal capacity, exist as zero capacity, or exist in the form of a negative capacity. Hence, literal 0 dimensional objects, places, or things do not exist because they can not have the capacity to do so. And that is especially true for someone that would try and imply -1 dimensional capacity..

And what is Spatial Capacity made of? Energy :)..And that also means no literal negative or zero energy can exist. This is also stated in the laws of Thermodynamics because literal zero temperature or thermal property is impossible for this very same reason. From ground state to every day objects like the chair you sit in here on Planet Earth.. So we do know quite a bit, we just don't know the entire sum total there is to know between zero (ground state) and above. And that is because Existence is a chaotic system of emerging properties, or the ever flow of energy. The destruction and renewal cycle we call life and death. However death is seen as the process of a change in form and the birth of whatever that form may become. Thus purpose is never lost.

So you can feel free to reference:

1) Why there is infinite Ground State Energy

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=124151

2) Scale:
http://primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/

3) You, me, and everything else on the orders of magnitude on the energy scale..as also demonstrated above under (scale):

http://talklikeaphysicist.com/2009/energy-scale-of-over-100-orders-...

Gravity is considered a negative energy (not literally, just opposite force in the opposite direction/attraction)This is also where expansion is considered positive energy. The total net energy is zero (not literal). This is where Zero energy, as energy, is in a state of Equilibrium vs actually being nothing or literally zero. This is why we refer to zero-point energy or ground state. So at rest there is zero-point energy. This is where zero also = 1 or (0,1)

Zero point energy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

Ground State:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_state

Vacuum Energy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy

Zero Energy Calculator:
http://www.curtismenning.com/ZeroEnergyCalc.htm

The Four stages of Matter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88tK5c0wgH4
--
Quantum Electrodynamics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8R4Tz_vKEE
--
Chaos Theory and Emerging order from the coupling of positive and negative feedback:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HVRniR3GrQ
--
Butterfly effect: Secret life of Chaos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6NnCOs20GQ

You can also note these references:

Our own Universe has been measured to be flat with less than a 2 percent margin of error.

http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_age.html

For clarity, like a disc floating in space similar to our own Galaxy but at a much grander scale. Thus the net Energy = zero (no lower than ground state).

Some Good source videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqb1lSdqRZY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV33t8U6w28&feature=relmfu

Other resources:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2848

http://icecube.wisc.edu/~halzen/notes/week1-3.pdf

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/lectures/early_univ.html

http://casswww.ucsd.edu/public/tutorial/Cosmology.html

 

Can you even tell me the differences between a carbon atom and a helium atom John D?

"You suck at this!"

Actually I don't.. You might actually want to try and address the argument it's posted under lol. Nice fail son


"Something is born when you die?  WTF?  You are a mystic chanting new age spiritualist... right?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoeU_XGJKGc&feature=player_embedded


You might actually want to understand the context of the use of life and death is this discussion. It's conceptual premise in the context of destruction and renewal. Much like that of the surface of the Earth. You also might want to google Atomic Decay.


"If you simply state you are a new age spiritualist I will end this conversation immediately."


Is hardly new age lol.. It's been around a lot longer than Christianity ect.

Sorry, William, but I and most of the A/N folks aren't going to take you seriously.

You start off on the wrong foot by trying to put the onus on us, "What are the most compelling and irrefutable arguments against the existence of God?" The burden is on you to provide the extraordinary evidence to back your extraordinary (and I'm being kind here) claim.

The Argument wasn't against if a GOD existed or not lol. GODS are purely concepts and titles of pure opinion. It would actually be irrelevant if an entity existed or not because it's still entirely relative to opinion. The argument I have posted was addressing logical fallacies concerning Omniscience.. Hence disproving 1 GOD to which would be impossible..

 

It's real simple people.. One can not create that which one's self requires to exist, or even know itself exists. There is a reason why consciousness is an observer of reality and not the creator of it. It doesn't take a genius to understand you can not create existence so your self can exist. So unless you can tell us all how a GOD can design and create all of the following into existence, there is no such thing as an all OMNI GOD.

* existence = impossible (slave to require)
* intelligence = impossible (Slave to require)
* information = impossible (slave to require)
* knowledge = impossible (slave to require)
* Material Physicality = impossible (slave to require) Pretty hard to exist as being made of "nothing". lol
* Experience, and experiences = impossible (slave to be an observer of reality in which it's slave to require in order to have such things) (see also information)
* Ground state of complexity or point zero = impossible (can't really have power, intelligence, Omniscience, divinity, consciousness, or self-awareness at this level)
* Empty Space = impossible ( no space = no capacity, and without capacity there is no place to exist in, or contain anything at all)
* Capacity = impossible ( see space)
* self-awareness = impossible (slave to require, and see information)
* self-identity = impossible (slave to require, and see information)
* consciousness = impossible (salve to requires, and see information)
* a place to exist in = impossible (slave to require, see capacity and space)
* mind containment = impossible (each mind is contained, must have a place to exist) (see capacity, and space, and information)
* light/dark = impossible (it's either ever only dark, light, or a mixture of both)
* infinity = equals impossible to create
* Wisdom = impsossible (slave to require, see information)
* time = impossible (the process to create time would in itself require time)
* The basic 5 senses (hearing, smell, touch, see, taste) = (must require if it is to see anything itself or even reality to which it could observe)
* observation = (slave to require, see information also)
* calculation = (pretty hard to create anything without the ability to process information) (see also information)
* manipulation (slave to require in order to create anything at all)
* thought = impossible (slave to require, see information also)
* perception = impossible (slave to require in order to be conscious)
* reality = impossible (slave to require in order to exist, observe, process, or do anything)
* complexity = impossible (slave to require, see capacity, information)
* cause and effect = impossible (slave to require, see information, capacity, mental processing, reality, complexity, perception, observation, ect)
* Morality
* Cognitive dynamics = impossible ( slave to require)
* Inertia
* Progress / progression = impossible (slave to require to even have a mental process, create, or do anything.. see also time)
* Mental Processing = impossible (slave to require) (see also information)
* Memory = impossible (slave to require in order to know or have a base of knowledge) (see information, capacity, space, self-identity, self-awareness, consciousness ect)
* Oscillation
* intent
* Ability = impossible (slave to require in order to do anything, see also information, mental processing, cognitive behavior, cause and effect)
* Positive, Negative, neutral = impossible (slave to require in order to do anything at all)
* Imagination
* Design
* Point of View
* Life
* mobility
* power
* divinity
* math = imossible (slave to require being 1 above zero, or more complex than zero) (see all the above)

 

The following quote is just nonsensical because I already have extraordinary evidence to support my argument.. His own post, and yours are direct evidence of my argument posted. You can feel free to explain why you think it's not ;). Pretty interesting when you get people here who act like theists and ignore direct evidence that proves their positions incorrect.

Nuff said artist William.  I can safely leave this post with the full knowledge that you are a spiritualist woo woo preacher.  TTFN!

 

Thus you have to love it when people call other people woo woo's when those who they claim are woo woo's make obvious observations of reality. His argument is like watching a Flat Earther make an argument that the Earth is flat and not an Oblate sphere. I provided evidence, so perhaps he can feel free to actually address the evidence.

The article here didn't even post all the attributes to which Christianity assigns to their supposed GOD. So let me correct that for you:

 

That god is omniscient
That god is omnipotent
That god is omnibenevolent
That god is omnipresent
That god is uncontained
That god is unlimited
That god contains and sustains all things
That god is the principle of all principles

 

The Best argument you can derive from that is that GOD is existence itself.. And the problem with that is that it's either all things are GODS, or there are no such things as GODS. You may as well just state the obvious and say that it's the substance of existence itself that is to which contains and sustains all things, or is metaphorically GOD. :/ It becomes moot really quickly. And it doesn't matter if you think this substance is energy, or an infinite box of legos.. Only one fact will remain is that nothing can't be a substance, or anything at all! Arguing other wise is just pleading for ignorance.

 

So sure, I can't disprove the existence of existence lol. So what god is it that you are trying to have me disprove here?

And let me put this into a more finalized concept for you..

 

Even if GOD was the entire infinite sum total of existence.. I still wouldn't worship it, or even view it as a GOD!. Well, if I did, it would literally be the ultimate case of narcissism lol.

 

But never mind.. I am just woo wooing here lol../sarcasm

This sounds a bit like Spinosa ;)
"less than" all knowing god).

Sure it does.. because the concept of GOD is a moving goal post lol. It's purely opinion.. It would be like you telling me that I can't disprove a cow being a divine creature to which is worshiped when some people worship it as such.. Well, welcome to the reality of relativity! Especially in matters of pure opinion because to me, that cow is nothing but a burger on a bun with ketchup, lettuce, pickles, saute onions, and tomatoes.

I only require my opinion to disprove a GOD's existence, or even the divinity of some other thing, object, or entity. In that case, GOD's existence is at best =/= .

Thus you can tell me X-entity is GOD, and even believe it's a GOD and it will entirely be irrelevant to someone who simply rejects and disagrees with it. Opinions in a world of opinions only have relevance to those with the opinion, or those who share the opinion. And even then such opinions are relative.. And that is why you can get different sects in religions, or different views in Christianity ect.

 

If you think I am in error.. feel free to state exactly where I am in error. Sure I can be wrong at times, or even wrong a lot of times :) But I don't mind being proven wrong either. So have at it :)

 

So let's begin with information theory.. Can something exist to which has no informational value what-so-ever? AKA can nothing exist literally as an object, substance, person, place, or thing? Especially when it states that itself can not exist, and does not exist in literal terms?.

I suspect you have yet to actually address any argument, so you can just keep trolling here. You can feel free to address where I have "back peddled" ;)

(Of course this does nothing to falsify claims of a "less than" all knowing god).

This would destroy the notion of an uncontained, unlimited, boundless, or even an omnipresent GOD.. Thus not only do they knock each other out of the picture, taking any one of them out of the picture also collapses the entire concept.You may as well worship an alien to which is more intelligent and more powerful than you are.. It would be like a cultivation of single celled organisms worshiping us as GOD's.

 

Perhaps you can define for us what makes a GOD, a GOD?

 

Does our ability to create synthetic life make us a GOD? How about our ability to make and use molecular assemblers to create thins one atom at a time? What defines GOD in your argument? Does anything in the following make us, or not make us GODS?

http://pinktentacle.com/2008/12/scientists-extract-images-directly-...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12037941/

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-0eZytv6Qk[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9Ci3QCgPxg[/youtube]

or we can explore G-lock:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUBrH1ER7K0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK8U8RZyzsM[/youtube]

 

(forms of energy, infinite regression... sheeeesh).

 

I actually did, your ability to ignore them is not my problem lol. Intentional stupidity on your part is an issue you are going to have to learn and deal with ;)

If you were really sincere, you'd present a few concise, helpful and polite statements or positions so that a constructive conversation, without heat, could follow.

Instead, those who don't get out of the way of your scree are all idiots.

Are you located in Tripoli by any chance?

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service