Total Posts:78|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Can you defend a religious god?

F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 4:43:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
One of the main problems I have with theists I've argued with is that they are completely unable to defend "god" as is commonly defined by most religions. They redefine god as a logical tautology and give it attributes which result in the entity requiring to exist. Then, they proceed to prove that god exists. This makes no sense and is little more than a cop-out. I'll define god here so we know what exactly we are talking about. Then, if a theist can prove its existence, that would be great.

God: God is defined as an anthropomorphic deity that many religions worship: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. A male deity is a "god," while a female deity is a "goddess."

Examples of god are shown on the page linked.

Some of the required attributes of "god" are:

1) The ability to walk on water.
2) The ability to wave his hand and create an Earth out of nothingness.
3) The ability to cause a flood.

Appearance: God looks like an old man with a grey or white beard, long hair and a ring-like golden crown on his head.

Location: God resides on a cloud in the Earth's atmosphere which is called "heaven." God is light enough that the cloud supports his weight. One end of the cloud is called the entrance and has a gate. Only people that are morally good are allowed past this gate.

My position is that this is completely false. No observable evidence indicates the existence of anything even remotely close to this. It is a myth and is fiction.

Any theists disagree?
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 4:50:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
They can't defend the specifics of their religion. Any evidence they have (not much) can have a variety of different explanations. Most the evidence they have is trickery of some kind.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 5:37:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 4:43:21 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One of the main problems I have with theists I've argued with is that they are completely unable to defend "god" as is commonly defined by most religions. They redefine god as a logical tautology and give it attributes which result in the entity requiring to exist. Then, they proceed to prove that god exists. This makes no sense and is little more than a cop-out. I'll define god here so we know what exactly we are talking about. Then, if a theist can prove its existence, that would be great.

God: God is defined as an anthropomorphic deity that many religions worship: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. A male deity is a "god," while a female deity is a "goddess."

Examples of god are shown on the page linked.

Some of the required attributes of "god" are:

1) The ability to walk on water.
2) The ability to wave his hand and create an Earth out of nothingness.
3) The ability to cause a flood.

Appearance: God looks like an old man with a grey or white beard, long hair and a ring-like golden crown on his head.

Location: God resides on a cloud in the Earth's atmosphere which is called "heaven." God is light enough that the cloud supports his weight. One end of the cloud is called the entrance and has a gate. Only people that are morally good are allowed past this gate.

My position is that this is completely false. No observable evidence indicates the existence of anything even remotely close to this. It is a myth and is fiction.

Any theists disagree?

To be fair, I think most theists have abandoned some of those attributes (such as the cloud, the white beard). Are you asking them to defend their specific view, or this specific view?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 5:54:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.

God is just a word. God is the truth, and you believe in the truth, right?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:13:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.

Yeah, darn those substantive definitions. How dare they try to specify what exactly they're intended to refer to to.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:29:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:13:30 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.

Yeah, darn those substantive definitions. How dare they try to specify what exactly they're intended to refer to to.

Here is an example:

1) God is defined as something that is great in every way and has unlimited powers including the power to necessarily exist.
2) God exists.

Do you see the problem?

I don't buy that something is required to exist. The problem lies in the definition.

By "prove that god exists," I don't mean construct a logical tautology. I mean, prove that the old man with the white beard and ring-like crown around his head living in a cloud exists.

I challenge any theist to show me this.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:33:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:29:51 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:13:30 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.

Yeah, darn those substantive definitions. How dare they try to specify what exactly they're intended to refer to to.

Here is an example:

1) God is defined as something that is great in every way and has unlimited powers including the power to necessarily exist.
2) God exists.

Do you see the problem?

I don't buy that something is required to exist. The problem lies in the definition.

By "prove that god exists," I don't mean construct a logical tautology. I mean, prove that the old man with the white beard and ring-like crown around his head living in a cloud exists.

I challenge any theist to show me this.

Does any respectable member on DDO, or in the whole of humanity itself, believe this?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:36:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:29:51 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:13:30 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 5:40:15 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Any specific view that doesn't involve moving around a couple of philosophical inferences to "prove" something that was already bundled into the definition to begin with.

Yeah, darn those substantive definitions. How dare they try to specify what exactly they're intended to refer to to.

Here is an example:

1) God is defined as something that is great in every way and has unlimited powers including the power to necessarily exist.
2) God exists.


1. Necessary existence isn't a power, it's a property.
2. The conditional goes that "IF God exists, she is the sort of being that exists necessarily."

Do you see the problem?


No because I actually understand the argument which you're badly characterizing.

I don't buy that something is required to exist. The problem lies in the definition.


No, the problem lies in your understanding of the argument.

By "prove that god exists," I don't mean construct a logical tautology. I mean, prove that the old man with the white beard and ring-like crown around his head living in a cloud exists.


Cool. I don't believe that old man with a white beard and a ring-like crown who lives in a cloud exists, so I don't know what you want me to defend.

I challenge any theist to show me this.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:43:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:36:58 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

1. Necessary existence isn't a power, it's a property.

For the purpose of my argument, it is the same thing. Okay, so you assume something that MUST exist as per its definition. You then go on to prove that voila! Indeed it exists! Okay, good job on the philosophy, but exactly what have you proven that wasn't known before?

No because I actually understand the argument which you're badly characterizing.
I am sure you do. But it doesn't actually do anything useful. Also, the result of the argument should be called "tautology," not "god." You are misusing the term "god." "God" is an anthropomorphic diety according to most religions.

Cool. I don't believe that old man with a white beard and a ring-like crown who lives in a cloud exists, so I don't know what you want me to defend.

Great. So, you are not really a "religious" person or a "theist." You merely like to call the result of a philosophical argument "god." I mean, I could say that my computer is "god" and call myself a theist but it doesn't make sense to me overall.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:46:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

These are the people that I want to refute. If none of those kinds of people exist, then good for us.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:49:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:46:27 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

These are the people that I want to refute. If none of those kinds of people exist, then good for us.

I doubt any of them exist actively on DDO; at least, I hope not. Easier to let them die off than try to convert them though. The rest of us already know they're crazy.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:57:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 4:43:21 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One of the main problems I have with theists I've argued with is that they are completely unable to defend "god" as is commonly defined by most religions. They redefine god as a logical tautology and give it attributes which result in the entity requiring to exist. Then, they proceed to prove that god exists. This makes no sense and is little more than a cop-out. I'll define god here so we know what exactly we are talking about. Then, if a theist can prove its existence, that would be great.

God: God is defined as an anthropomorphic deity that many religions worship: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. A male deity is a "god," while a female deity is a "goddess."

Examples of god are shown on the page linked.

Some of the required attributes of "god" are:

1) The ability to walk on water.
2) The ability to wave his hand and create an Earth out of nothingness.
3) The ability to cause a flood.

Appearance: God looks like an old man with a grey or white beard, long hair and a ring-like golden crown on his head.

Location: God resides on a cloud in the Earth's atmosphere which is called "heaven." God is light enough that the cloud supports his weight. One end of the cloud is called the entrance and has a gate. Only people that are morally good are allowed past this gate.

My position is that this is completely false. No observable evidence indicates the existence of anything even remotely close to this. It is a myth and is fiction.

Any theists disagree?

Correction, morals do not matter. Its whether you accpet Jesus as your lord and savior. As the bible says, those that keep the least of these commandments(Laws) will simply be called least in heaven, but they still get to enter heaven.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 6:57:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

I'd be willing to bet that your average church-going Christian doesn't believe that there is literally an old guy in the sky sitting on clouds and what not.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:05:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:04:00 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Does the average Christian believe that everything said in the Bible is true? If not, why do they read it every night?

And I don't mean, read it as though they were reading fiction but read it as though it is the "word of god", "the law of god" or whatever.

Also, does the average Christian believe that the bible is "divinely inspired" or whatever, or are they aware that a human being wrote it as fiction in the same vein as the Harry Potter series for instance?
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:06:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:57:54 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

I'd be willing to bet that your average church-going Christian doesn't believe that there is literally an old guy in the sky sitting on clouds and what not.

Again, there was a key word there. It was "septuagenarians". Please, people, read every word I type... Otherwise things will less sense.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:11:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 6:43:05 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:36:58 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

1. Necessary existence isn't a power, it's a property.

For the purpose of my argument, it is the same thing. Okay, so you assume something that MUST exist as per its definition. You then go on to prove that voila! Indeed it exists!

....seriously?

The conditional is important here. It's if God exists at all, she exists of metaphysical necessity.

Okay, good job on the philosophy, but exactly what have you proven that wasn't known before?


That God exists. You know that "proofs" are person relative, right? Suppose I knew the proof for Fermat's last theorem but you didn't. Then suppose I show you the proof and how it works. Would a good response be "what have you proven that wasn't known before?"

No because I actually understand the argument which you're badly characterizing.

I am sure you do. But it doesn't actually do anything useful. Also, the result of the argument should be called "tautology," not "god."

Again, it's because you're misunderstanding the argument. It's not a tautology.

You are misusing the term "god."

Lol @ an atheist trying to tell me what what I should mean by the term "God".

"God" is an anthropomorphic diety according to most religions.


Cool. I don't believe that old man with a white beard and a ring-like crown who lives in a cloud exists, so I don't know what you want me to defend.

Great. So, you are not really a "religious" person or a "theist."

Lol.

You merely like to call the result of a philosophical argument "god." I mean, I could say that my computer is "god" and call myself a theist but it doesn't make sense to me overall.

Lol, alrighty then.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:14:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:05:54 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 7:04:00 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Does the average Christian believe that everything said in the Bible is true? If not, why do they read it every night?

And I don't mean, read it as though they were reading fiction but read it as though it is the "word of god", "the law of god" or whatever.

Also, does the average Christian believe that the bible is "divinely inspired" or whatever, or are they aware that a human being wrote it as fiction in the same vein as the Harry Potter series for instance?

What does the average Christian mean when they say the bible is divinely inspired? Or when they say that the Bible is the "word of God". You seem to be the expert on these things.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:16:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:06:04 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:57:54 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

I'd be willing to bet that your average church-going Christian doesn't believe that there is literally an old guy in the sky sitting on clouds and what not.

Again, there was a key word there. It was "septuagenarians". Please, people, read every word I type... Otherwise things will less sense.

Whoops, I didn't read that part. Apologies, good sir.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:17:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:16:29 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 7:06:04 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:57:54 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:44:00 PM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/20/2013 6:34:30 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
https://www.google.com...

Sure they do.

The descriptor "respectable" was the key there and I meant for it to carry over to "or in the whole of humanity itself" as well. To rephrase my question: Is there any academically respectable theist who believes in your physical description of God, or is that mainly a belief held by your average church-going septuagenarians?

I'd be willing to bet that your average church-going Christian doesn't believe that there is literally an old guy in the sky sitting on clouds and what not.

Again, there was a key word there. It was "septuagenarians". Please, people, read every word I type... Otherwise things will less sense.

Whoops, I didn't read that part. Apologies, good sir.

Think nothing of it, old chap.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:19:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:11:41 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

The conditional is important here. It's if God exists at all, she exists of metaphysical necessity.

So, do you concede that god is empirically non-existent?

You are misusing the term "god."

Lol @ an atheist trying to tell me what what I should mean by the term "God".

Okay, so you can believe that anything is god?

Great. So, you are not really a "religious" person or a "theist."
Lol.

Common response when people don't have a rebuttal.

You merely like to call the result of a philosophical argument "god." I mean, I could say that my computer is "god" and call myself a theist but it doesn't make sense to me overall.
Lol, alrighty then.

See above.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:22:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:14:55 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

What does the average Christian mean when they say the bible is divinely inspired? Or when they say that the Bible is the "word of God". You seem to be the expert on these things.

They mean that the old man in the clouds personally wrote it, came down to the Earth 4000 years ago and said "I am god. This is my law. I created the Earth. You may not eat the forbidden fruit, etc."

Then man ate the forbidden fruit. Then there was a flood. Then Noah got all the animals to safety. They are divided into "kinds" etc. Medic would know the details.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:25:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:14:55 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 4/20/2013 7:05:54 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 7:04:00 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Does the average Christian believe that everything said in the Bible is true? If not, why do they read it every night?

And I don't mean, read it as though they were reading fiction but read it as though it is the "word of god", "the law of god" or whatever.

Also, does the average Christian believe that the bible is "divinely inspired" or whatever, or are they aware that a human being wrote it as fiction in the same vein as the Harry Potter series for instance?

What does the average Christian mean when they say the bible is divinely inspired? Or when they say that the Bible is the "word of God". You seem to be the expert on these things.

I can answer this!
They mean "herr derr, the Bible is Gods word because it says it's Gods word and God is God so the Bible is the Bible and God's word is God's word."

http://lifeisbangin.com...
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 7:25:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 7:22:22 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 4/20/2013 7:14:55 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

What does the average Christian mean when they say the bible is divinely inspired? Or when they say that the Bible is the "word of God". You seem to be the expert on these things.

They mean that the old man in the clouds personally wrote it, came down to the Earth 4000 years ago and said "I am god. This is my law. I created the Earth. You may not eat the forbidden fruit, etc."

Then man ate the forbidden fruit. Then there was a flood. Then Noah got all the animals to safety. They are divided into "kinds" etc. Medic would know the details.

The average Christian really believes that an elderly man with a white beard sat on a cloud, writing this book, then decided to descend to the ancient Israelites, introduce himself, and hand them the book?
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 8:48:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Having to exist is definitely a property. Lol
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Pennington
Posts: 1,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 9:08:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/20/2013 4:43:21 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One of the main problems I have with theists I've argued with is that they are completely unable to defend "god" as is commonly defined by most religions. They redefine god as a logical tautology and give it attributes which result in the entity requiring to exist. Then, they proceed to prove that god exists. This makes no sense and is little more than a cop-out. I'll define god here so we know what exactly we are talking about. Then, if a theist can prove its existence, that would be great.

God: God is defined as an anthropomorphic deity that many religions worship: http://en.wikipedia.org...:
I disagree with the definition of God. Simply the God of the Bible will suffice, with scripture to verify the attribute. That's the problem Christians should not define God into one sentence of words. God is described throughout the Bible and His titles and attributes are numerous. We can only conclude to a minimum breakdown that He is completely loving, Completely just, Can do all things, Can be at all places, Was the First and the Last.

Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. A male deity is a "god," while a female deity is a "goddess."

Examples of god are shown on the page linked.

Some of the required attributes of "god" are:

1) The ability to walk on water.
2) The ability to wave his hand and create an Earth out of nothingness.:
False to a degree. It came from Him, it was not nothing then, just not the earth.
3) The ability to cause a flood.

Appearance: God looks like an old man with a grey or white beard, long hair and a ring-like golden crown on his head. :
False. No one has His complete description but we have examples in the Bible. He is too bright to look upon. He is made of 12 jewels. We are made in His image, so He looks like a man. His hair looks like wool. His feet are bronze.

Location: God resides on a cloud in the Earth's atmosphere which is called "heaven." God is light enough that the cloud supports his weight. One end of the cloud is called the entrance and has a gate. Only people that are morally good are allowed past this gate.:
This is just utter nonsense. Heaven is obviously in another dimension(s). We are not in that dimension(s) physically, we can experience them spiritually, conscience, but we are outside them. This theory explains a lot and is highly discussed.

My position is that this is completely false. No observable evidence indicates the existence of anything even remotely close to this. It is a myth and is fiction. :
Of course it is false because your understanding is not correct.

Any theists disagree?:
Yep.
DDO Debate Champion Forum
http://www.debate.org...
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2013 9:16:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Awesome, finally found someone who believes god looks like a man rather than those people who spout a load of philosophical BS. This is refreshing.

@ Penn,

1) How can someone made of 12 jewels look like a man? How are the jewels arranged? What elements and compounds are contained in the jewels?

2) You have examples of his description in the bible? How? Did he come down personally and hand the bible to humans? If not, how do the writers of the bible know his description?

3) Which dimension does he live in? What do you mean "another dimension?" There are only 3 spatial dimensions (and one temporal one).

4) "His hair looks like wool." Awesome. I have said that he has long, white hair but couldn't quite match your description. Okay, we'll go with that.

5) Is you spelling mistake of "him" as "Him" deliberate? I initially thought it was a mispelling but I recalled that when conversing with a theist, he often used to spell god with an uppercase G. I think theists feel more special doing so. Why do you do this?

6) How can someone be at all places? Do you have empirical evidence to prove this?