Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Bear with me, this is kind of complicated:





A. God is, by definition, illogical.
Therefore B. God can not (and does not) exist.






Wow, mind blowing huh?  It's just so involved and complex.  And it assumes so many premises! (It assumes one premise)  But I assure you, the logic is perfectly valid and irrefutable.


Now, while the logic is perfect and irrefutable, you could possibly argue with the premise (Anybody have a definition of a god that is not illogical?  If you do, then please do share.), but provided A, then B. God can not and does not exist.  If A. is true, B. is true.  If A. is not true, B. may or may not be true.

If you have an alternative definition of a god which isn't illogical, I would:

1. Like to shake your hand.  You are a very rare breed: a logical theist.  I can count on one hand how many I have met.

and:

2. Be happy to have a civil and logical conversation with you on the matter.



Here are some common sayings of theists that provide evidence for A:

"God is, by definition, beyond logic"   What's beyond logic?  Oh, yes!  Illogic.
"God is omnipotent, and immune to logic"  The only things that *need* people to claim they are immune to logic are illogical things.  Omnipotence is not a logically coherent concept (particularly if it contains those things which are illogical).
"God is outside of reality, and so logic does not apply to him"  What's outside of reality?  Oh, right- things that aren't real.
"God created logic, and is not subject to his creation."  The only use of logic is to falsify things that are illogical (separating what is real from what is false).  Did this god create something that doesn't work?  Interesting!  Does this god break the rules that he himself made?  What a dirty cheat!
"Logic is a human invention, it doesn't apply to God."  Logic is a human discovery along with mathematics (one plus one was still two in concept before we had words for those concepts), and it only applies to things that are logical (real things).  If it doesn't apply to a god, that is only because said god is not real.


If you don't understand why logical contradiction is a problem, study logic, and specifically study the principle of explosion (why logic is not tolerant of illogic).


To be fair, here are some (very rarely seen) sayings of theists that provide some evidence against A. (though seemingly outweighed by those in opposition to these claims):

"God can not defy his own nature"  This implies that this god can not be contradictory, which implies that this god might be logical in some way.
"God is perfectly logical and natural"  More overt- I see something like this once in a blue moon.

Logical replies will be appreciated and responded to in so far as I have the time to do so.
Replies that overtly reject logic will be hidden (I will assume such replies to be trolling).


EDIT:  And unfortunately I have to add another condition:  No semantic tomfoolery.
That is, use a dictionary.  No dishonest twisting of definitions to suit your agenda, as demonstrated by "DarkQasim" below in the comments.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconawesome-happykat:
Awesome-happykat Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
:iconyusplz:

Hug Hug Hug Hug Hug 



I love you
Reply
:icongravity618:
Gravity618 Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
This doesn't disprove God. He's not really something you can disprove.
Reply
:iconinternetexplorer968:
Internetexplorer968 Featured By Owner Mar 13, 2015  Hobbyist Artist
"I say it is, therefore I am right."
Not in a million years. :iconlolmemeplz:
Reply
:iconaclockworkkitten:
AClockworkKitten Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2013  Student Digital Artist
I don't buy it, dude.  God can't go against himself.

All you said is "god isn't logical" and not much else.  No explanation or anything.  No examples.  I'm pretty damn unconvinced.
Reply
:iconyaminohikari14:
YaminoHikari14 Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2013
My friend, you argue brilliantly and I love this Journal. There's no way I can argue back because, well, I find myself completely agreeing with it! And knowing me and my teenage knowledge, or Religion, philosophy and ethics I doubt I would stand a chance, though I do enjoy a debate. Again, bravo on this, it is a very good read. :)
Reply
:iconaroniense21:
aroniense21 Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2012
Holy. Bloody. Hell.

I'm obliged to give respect where it's due, and after reading every single comment on this thread and seeing your logical line I'm just appalled, I take my fedora off to you.
However I'm particularly interested in one comment on the first page, when you explained why the models in chemistry are just approximations and how energy and matter are created at random, I would certainly like to know more, if it doesn't bother you of course.

Awaiting your reply for the moment I say goodbye, and thank you for enlightening me at the moment.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2012  Professional General Artist
It has to do with the uncertainty principle.

The easiest (and most entertaining) way to understand it is to read Douglas Adams on his infinite improbability drive in the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy. It's a fictionalized extrapolation, of course, but it gets the general point across.

Everything is ultimately a matter of quantum probability- even seemingly very improbable things.

Matter is spontaneously created and destroyed constantly due to uncertainty when solved as time vs. energy. They are called vacuum fluctuations.
Reply
:icongarudax:
GarudaX Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Alright, I have another question for you. It regards the paradox of omniscience and free will.

Suppose someone were to argue that Humans have free will and God has foreknowledge of the choices we make. In other words, we have free will and God just happens to know which choices we will make in life, does this solve the paradox? Or is the person who made this argument an idiot?
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Professional General Artist
Umm... the person who made that "argument" isn't just an idiot, but a complete idiot. Or possibly trolling you.

It's not an argument at all- it's just an affirmative statement of the paradox, phrased in such a way that it pretends to be a resolution.

It's like this:

"A square circle seems to be a contradiction... :idea: But what if you had a circle, but at the same time it was also a square? That would resolve the contradiction. :nod: "

:doh:


The issue is that the deity knows what you will do before you do it- which means that your actions are either predetermined, or perfectly predictable- in either case, absolute and inflexible.

In the former case, you are only carrying out a script- ostensibly written by the deity upon creation of the universe- and in the latter, all of your actions are likewise the result of mere causality (such as the environmental variables, or your inherent moral nature), none of which remain a free choice.


To put it another way:

You can choose to sin, or not sin.

But the deity already knows which choice you will make before you make it.

How?

Because the deity knows your moral nature, which is the cause of your choice.

So then your choice isn't a choice, but a direct result of your moral nature?

Yes. But you can choose your moral nature.

Oh, that's good to know.

But the deity already knows which moral nature you will choose.

How?

Because it's part of your supermoral nature, of course.

:facepalm:

I hope you can see how that kind of thing goes on infinitely, until either the deity doesn't know, or you finally realize you don't have any free choices.

Or, in most cases, when the person just gives up asking questions and just accepts the illogical dogma as is.
Reply
:icongarudax:
GarudaX Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
In that case, this person is a complete idiot. [link]

"Instead of it necessarily following from GOD's foreknowledge that you must do an action, it necessarily follows from your free will that you do an action, and GOD's foreknew this action. His foreknowledge is separate to your free will."

He makes a long drawn out algebraic responce only to reach that very conclusion I just showed above.

I understand exactly what you mean. The responce is circular and is only delaying the issue. I had a feeling something was fishy with this guy's argument but I just wanted to confirm it with you first. :)
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Professional General Artist
Oh, yes. I know of that guy; he is a complete idiot.

He pretends to believe in logic, and then directly contradicts himself and displays complete ignorance of the fundamental principles of logic (whenever something about his god is shown to be illogical, he asserts that his god is beyond logic by being 'outside time' as a defense).
Reply
:icongarudax:
GarudaX Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
lol, I hope he realizes saying God exists outside logic is a dead end for him.

I'm guessing you wasted no time on this guy, because he has repeatedly proven himself to be a fool.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Professional General Artist
I just got him to answer a few questions that proved conclusively that he didn't understand anything about logic, and rejected it in practice.

He's delusional- I don't think he ever will realize that.

I have since blocked him, as he is annoying.
Have a look at his blocking policy- I just treated him the same way he claims to treat others.
Reply
:icongarudax:
GarudaX Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
When did this happen?

LOL, I bet he's a troll, I have too much faith in human intelligence that he's being serious.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Professional General Artist
Hmm, maybe four months ago? I'm not sure.

There's a law about that...

Something like 'any sufficiently absurd satire is indistinguishable from religion'

The thing you have to understand about religion is that being caught up in it is very much like a dream.

While you're dreaming, it seems perfectly rational that you're flying around by squirting toothpaste at high velocity and being chased by robotic spoons. It is only when you wake up that it becomes obvious that the entire scenario was completely absurd.

And it doesn't matter how intelligent you are- the dream is still bizarrely believable when you're in that state. It has to do with how the brain works, and compartmentalizes thought.

That's why intelligence doesn't help overcome religious absurdity much- even in such extreme cases as outright denying the validity of logic.

That said, this guy doesn't have much in the way of brain power to begin with, so it's pretty believable to me that he actually thinks that.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconredwallbadger:
redwallbadger Featured By Owner Jul 3, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
This is an interesting journal entry and I'll read it more thoroughly when I have more time. (I also haven’t gone through all the comments, so you might be answering this question for a second + time, sorry!) Just a general question - and this isn't meant to be accusatory, I'm actually interested to see your response - but what do you really define as "logical"? Many things that aren't strictly logical are possible. (As you could probably see from my signature and my profile, I'm a Christian. However, I'm only a teenager so I'm not going to act as if I know everything there is to be known on this topic. xD)

Also, to what would you attribute the fact that the earth is a perfect distance from the sun, as just one example, as well as that humans (and most creatures, really) have extremely complicated bodies/brains/overall structures? My knowledge of athiests isn't extensive, but many athiests (and agnostics, too) believe that we evolved from apes/monkeys - is that what you believe?

If your answer to this is evolution and the big bang, the question I always ask myself (and other people) is what caused the big bang? If there was nothing – (and I mean nothing – yes, things can be created from “nothing” here on earth – but that’s not scientifically possible, according to one of Newton’s laws – “energy cannot be created – only converted”) in existence in the first place, how would it be possible?

(Sorry, this turned into a lot more than just one simple question – it’s an interesting topic and I like asking questions!)
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 3, 2012  Professional General Artist
Hi, and thanks for your comment.

The most important question:

Are you open minded?

Or are you set on sticking to your religion no matter what (no matter if it's true or false, good or bad, or harms others)?

There are those who are Christian, and both humble and open minded- willing to accept new information, and if the truth leads them in a new direction (even a different religion) to follow it for the sake of truth itself and the moral rightness of it [truth].

Then there are those who are Christian, but arrogant and closed minded- they assume they are right no matter what, and while they are happy to tell others about Christianity and question those of other religions, they are only questioning in order to convert, and they aren't really interested in the answers. As soon as things don't go their way, they become aggressive and either leave or lash out.

No offense intended, but before I spend time answering questions, I need to know which type you are :)
Hope you can understand.
Reply
:iconredwallbadger:
redwallbadger Featured By Owner Jul 3, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
No offense taken - I understand that it would be a waste of time to answer the questions of someone who's not even going to consider your answer.

Well, to be perfectly honest, I think I'm in between - I do my best to be humble and open minded, however I did not comment to be pursuaded that Christianity is false - quite the opposite. Though, having browsed through quite a few of your deviantations, I doubt that anything I say will change what you believe. If God sees fit to work through me and make you rethink your beliefs, however, I know he will.

In short, I'm firmly a Christian who (no offense meant here) has no intention of being pusuaded thta God isn't real.

I look forward to your response :)

P.S - I'm hoping this won't escelate into a debate with huge posts - that's not waht I'm looking for, but we'll have to wait and find out how you and I respond to one another, I guess.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Professional General Artist
"however I did not comment to be pursuaded that Christianity is false - quite the opposite"

I didn't mean that you would have commented in order to be persuaded as such- but that when at last I prove it that you will graciously accept that.

Or, if I haven't proved it, then you will demonstrate where my argument is in error.

If you can not demonstrate any rational flaws in my argument, then you will at last accept it (though I don't mean that you have to do it on your own- e.g. if you can't find any errors, you could get help from your pastor, etc. But if they can't find an error either, and all throughout the course of human history no apologist has- then you will accept my arguments).

I wish only to believe what is true- because it is right to do so- so I have no reason to reject Christianity if it were true.

If you presented an argument in which I could demonstrate no errors (or find others who have), I would accept your argument.

I ask only the same from you in return.

"In short, I'm firmly a Christian who (no offense meant here) has no intention of being pusuaded thta God isn't real."

Maybe you don't have the intention- but is it possible, if your god isn't real and I prove that with argument- that you will at last graciously accept the correction with an open mind?

If not, then as you understand, there's no point in my spending time answering your questions.

I offer you that I will accept any sound argument. I expect only the same intellectual honesty in return.
Reply
:iconredwallbadger:
redwallbadger Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Sorry, but I need to get one thing straight here. You're basically saying than unless I'm prepared to abandon my faith, you won't answer my questions, are you not? That's just slightly. . . One-sided.

"I didn't mean that you would have commented in order to be persuaded as such- but that when at last I prove it that you will graciously accept that."

"Maybe you don't have the intention- but is it possible, if your god isn't real and I prove that with argument- that you will at last graciously accept the correction with an open mind?"


Whoa! Nothing in any of your journal entries or deviantations so far has convinced me that God isn't real. Science is full of theories and, while many of them have been proven on a small scale, they cannot ultimately prove that God doesn't exist and that he didn't create the world. Also, I think your belief that religion is "evil" is just a little too radical since you put it out there as if it’s a solid, undeniable truth. Just because that's your opinion, that doesn't necessarily make it true. ;)
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Professional General Artist
"Sorry, but I need to get one thing straight here. You're basically saying than unless I'm prepared to abandon my faith, you won't answer my questions, are you not? That's just slightly. . . One-sided."

I'm saying I don't want to waste my time unless you're open minded- and part of that would be, if your faith is proven wrong, you would change it (or if you like, abandon it and seek a new faith).

Like I already said, I wouldn't expect you to abandon it if it wasn't proven false.

That's not one sided- that's just requesting some basic intellectual honesty.

If something I believe is proven wrong, I change my beliefs- because I respect truth. I'm prepared to believe whatever is true- I'm not irrationally attached to any beliefs. If they aren't true, I won't believe them.

I would be prepared to accept your faith if it was proven true.

I'm asking only the same honesty.

I wouldn't expect somebody to answer my questions if I had no intention of listening to, considering, and if they are logically sound, accepting the answers.

THAT would be one-sided. And that seems to be what you're asking for her.

You want to have blind, unreasoned faith that stands regardless of all proof and evidence- but I have to be reasonable, and accept proof, and be open minded to accepting your arguments if they are true?

Frankly, that's insulting to me.

I would actually listen to your arguments, and if they are sound I will accept them. I'm only asking for the same honesty and courtesy in return.


"Nothing in any of your journal entries or deviantations so far has convinced me that God isn't real."

I know. You have questions, and I'm willing to explain them so you can fully understand them.

And maybe you'll find a mistake I made- and if so, I will graciously accept that. But if there are no mistakes and my arguments are fully sound, I expect the same honesty in return- that you won't insult all of my efforts and your own intelligence by denying absolute proof.


"Science is full of theories and, while many of them have been proven on a small scale, they cannot ultimately prove that God doesn't exist and that he didn't create the world."

That's a very arrogant claim. Do you claim to know everything about every single field of science?

If not, then you can not know that. You're only guessing. It could well be that there is science of which you are unaware that does prove that your god doesn't exist.

Please have some humility on this subject- and an OPEN mind.

In one sentence you've already dismissed most of my arguments without first taking the time to understanding them- that is the mark of a very closed mind.

"Just because that's your opinion, that doesn't necessarily make it true."

It's not my opinion; It's based on objective moral fact.

I can't just have the "opinion" that the sky is blue, grass is green, and the moon is largely composed of stone- and likewise I can't have the "opinion" that the sky is green and grass is pink and the moon is made of cheese- those would be true and false facts respectively. They're not opinions.

We can't choose our facts and call them true regardless.

I believe only truth, and that leads me to the understanding (whether I like it or not) that most religion is evil; it derives from its inherent moral nature, which is as real and absolute as 2+2=4.

If you would like to take the time to understand it- with an open mind- I would explain it to you.

I hope we can be friends, but please don't insult me with closed mindedness when I have opened my mind to you. That's just not nice. :(
Reply
:iconredwallbadger:
redwallbadger Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
I'm sorry for insulting you; that was not my intent. I just get frustrated - and I hope you can understand this - by people saying "God's not real" when it isn't a fact. If it was fact, wouldn't there be far less churches in the world, and most people would be atheists? Wouldn't those of us who have a religion be written of as stupid/ having mental problems?

I'd love for you to explain why most religion is evil - I have to admit, I've never come across that opinion/sentiment before, or at least, no-one has said it outright.

I can't prove that God is real; however, I don't need to. I would be amazed to find a person who could prove that God is real to everyone and make hem believe - the whole thing about Christianity is that we have to have faith that God is real, rather than trying to use theories to show that he does. If God showed himself to everyone before the world ended, that would prove that he was real - but as soon as he left, people would say that he had only be an apparition, that they had dreamed him, etc. I can't prove with hard, cold fact that God is real - but that doesn’t mean he's not.

I was not intending to be arrogant, and it was somewhat thoughtless of me to make such a radical and finite statement - I apologise. It's just that you seem to be saying that science has the answers for everything, and that always gets to me; it makes our very existence rather chancy.

I'm willing to be open-minded to a certain extent; if you've lived your whole life believing in something, it's extremely hard for someone to cause you not to believe it, even if they've proven that it's not true/real, If you know what I mean. That's my dilemma, as well as the fact that I don't want to go to Hell, and that I love God and believe that he is good. (I'm not meaning to cause offense here, I'm speaking about myself and not implying anything).

You know a lot about science and religion in general, but (and I'm not trying to challenge you here), how many everyday people, ordinary people such as myself, do you meet who are religious and in particular, Christian? As I type this I'm listening to a local radio station that is run by Christians, and so they only play songs that would be suitable for little kids to listen to. Also, if you search on the internet or on place like iTunes for Christian themed music, you'll find that it's essentially uplifting and encouraging.

I'll do my bests not to be quick-tempered and close-minded toward your comments in the future. I really don't want to have an argument about this whole thing, I was just (and still am) interested to know why you believe such things. :)

Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2012  Professional General Artist
Thank you, apology accepted.

Fact and opinion are commonly confused- but they're inherently different.

Both "god doesn't exist" and "god exists" are facts- one of them is true and the other is false (because they can't both be true). But whether they are true or false can also be unknown.

Whether we know a fact or not is a different matter- but it's still a fact. Commonly, people confuse "unknown fact" and "opinion"- but they're very different creatures.

An opinion is something that is always relative- like "Chocolate is delicious"

One person experiences it as delicious, another person experiences it as disgusting. Neither of them are right or wrong objectively, because "delicious" is naturally relative to experience. There's no such thing as "deliciousness" in reality- it's a perception which is relative to individual experience.

So, "Chocolate is delicious" is an opinion
But, "Chocolate exists" is a fact (this is a matter of reality, not only relative to experience)

Likewise, "Unicorns are beautiful" is an opinion
But, "Unicorns don't exist" is a fact


Something like 'existence' is objective. While something can not be delicious or disgusting by nature, it can exist or not exist by nature.

"There's a teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars" ( [link] )

This is a statement of existence- so it is a statement of factual nature.

However, it may or may not be a true fact.
Facts can be true, false, or their nature unknown.

Frankly, in the case of the tea pot, we don't know- and we don't have the technology to find out if it's true or not yet. Teapots are very small, and there's a lot of space to look in.


I think what you want to say about the existence of a god is that it is a fact- but it is an unknown fact.

That doesn't make it an opinion- not in the least.

However, the fact of a god's existence is not entirely unknown- it's just unknown to most people.

"If it was fact, wouldn't there be far less churches in the world, and most people would be atheists? Wouldn't those of us who have a religion be written of as stupid/ having mental problems?"

It is a fact- the matter is that most people just don't know whether it is a true fact, or a false fact.

Some people, not knowing, like to "play it safe" and build churches just in case and assume that a god exists.

Some people are confused, and not understanding logic, have convinced themselves that a god is proven true- and that it is a true fact. Those people, likewise, go for religion.

Some very few people examine the concept of a god logically, and find contradictions.

Now, in order to understand the first thing about logic- and about rational discourse in general, you have to understand the law of non-contradiction:

[link]

In order to understand why that is imporant, you have to understand the laws of thought:

[link]

With a proper understanding of these concepts, you will see why logic is necessary in order for us to form coherent thoughts and have productive discussions.

Whether logic is "true" or not, if you don't assume it is, you can't think a rational thought or ever have anything resembling a rational conversation with another human being. It's necessary for the whole of philosophy, and for the existence of thought itself.


Now, back to the issue of contradiction:

Some very few people examine the concept of a god logically, and find contradictions. And a contradiction, if that contradiction is true, must mean that such a god can not exist.

Sometimes contradictions have logical explanations- or are based on misunderstandings. Sometimes they do not, and are legitimate contradictions.

In order to tell the difference, you have to examine each of them, and the explanations people have tried to provide to determine if they are a sound proof, or not- and that follows the rules of formal logic.


"I can't prove with hard, cold fact that God is real - but that doesn’t mean he's not."

Yes, but that isn't the issue.

The issue is this:
There are logical proofs that show that such a god can not possibly be real- they do this by showing that the concept of such a god contains a contradiction (making it necessarily false).

If, in fact, such a god is not contradictory, then the job of the apologist is not to prove that a god exists- but first and foremost to show where those logical proofs that a god does not exist are in error. To explain how such a god could exist without creating a contradiction.

The first step is only to show that a god might exist, by disproving those arguments that otherwise prove that such a god could not in any way possibly exist.


"it's extremely hard for someone to cause you not to believe it, even if they've proven that it's not true/real, If you know what I mean. That's my dilemma, as well as the fact that I don't want to go to Hell, and that I love God and believe that he is good."

One of the things you need to understand about the logical disproofs of gods, is that they focus on specific god ideas- or specific traits or actions a god is said to have or have done.

If you believe a particular thing about your god- and a logical proof shows that's impossible due to a contradiction- you have two honest choices:

1. Stop believing in your god in general

or

2. Change and "evolve" your idea of god to one which is not against logic- one which is not contradictory.

#2 may involve rejecting some claims made in the Bible, or some common Christian beliefs- so, many Christians aren't willing to do that. The general attitude is often "All or nothing".

I have known some very few Christians who are open to the idea that they don't know everything about their god, and that they may have misunderstood some things (or even that the Christian bible could be wrong about some things). That kind of belief is much less fragile, in a way.

If you don't have that "all or nothing" attitude most Christians have, it will be much easier for you to simply change and adapt your understanding of what 'god' must mean in order to be possible, without losing your belief.

"how many everyday people, ordinary people such as myself, do you meet who are religious and in particular, Christian?"

Many thousands. And I have been involved with religious groups and social activities in religious centers- from Jewish, to Christian, and Buddhist and other religions. From the more strict orthodoxy, to the progressive and liberal.

I hope the above helped clarify some things, and gives you something to think about.

If you understand all of that, I can show you some of the basic proofs, and we can discuss whether they are logically sound, and if they are, if they mean that a god doesn't exist- or simply that most people are quite wrong about their assumptions of the nature of such a god.
Reply
:iconredwallbadger:
redwallbadger Featured By Owner Jul 3, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
((Random emoticon on my comment is random - was just playing around with them))
Reply
:icongodofirony:
GodOfIrony Featured By Owner Jun 19, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Are you aware of the universal constants?
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2012  Professional General Artist
"Are you aware of the universal constants?"

Yes, good point. Universal constants also prove that a god doesn't exist.

However, universal constants prove it empirically, and only in the context the their true universality. I'm mostly talking about strict logical proofs that are absolutely certain, whereas empirical proof is subject to perception.
Reply
:iconlucelic:
lucelic Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Student Artist
you should read 'the screwtape letters' by CS Lewis.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
CS Lewis is a great writer of fiction

I have read some of his apologetics- it is clear that he has little to no grasp of logic.

Great story tellers do not necessarily make even adequate philosophers.
Lewis does not make any valid arguments- he just tells stories.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
I read The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, by C.S. Lewis, if that's what you mean.

You might remember that the book is fiction.

"again, logic is in the mind."

That's not at all true- you need to learn the basics of logic before you comment on it.

"you dont know everything; neither do i. but God is omnipotent."

Some definitions of YHWH define it as being omnipotent (which means all powerful)- some also define it as being OMNISCIENT, which means "all knowing", which is probably what you meant.

I can say "A wuzzlewubble is omniscient and omnipotent"

That doesn't mean that a wuzzlewubble exists, just because I said it did.

The same way, just because some bronze age goat herders say YHWH exists, doesn't mean it does.

In fact, being defined as omniscient and omnipotent are why we KNOW it doesn't exist, because those traits are illogical.

"[there's a nice big word for you. hopefully i wont need to explain it]"

It's hilarious that you used the wrong word, not understanding its definition, and think you can explain it to me.

Genuine Irony is rare. I have to make a deviation about this :)
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
Note the post by lilstarbird152 below this one.

[link]

You can't make this stuff up...
Reply
:iconlucelic:
lucelic Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Student Artist
he doesnt start arguments, not like you. he is simply pointing things out. have you seen "The Dawn Treader"? did you see the end?

again, logic is in the mind. you dont know everything; neither do i. but God is omnipotent. [there's a nice big word for you. hopefully i wont need to explain it]

so it is our job to believe. but you can quit if you like. just dont expect a payday.
Reply
:iconlucelic:
lucelic Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Student Artist
i feel so sorry for you
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
Some say "ignorance is bliss"

By following logic, maybe I'm missing out on some of that "bliss". If so, it's a bliss I do not want. I will favor truth and morality, instead of deception and immorality.

If that's why you feel sorry for me- don't.

Ignorance is only blissful for those who are suffering from it, because they don't know they're ignorant. The same ignorance is harmful to those around said sufferers- I feel sorry for those the ignorant people harm in their ignorance.

I prefer to be a good person, and happy with my life because of that, instead of a bad person who is happy because he's ignorant of the facts.

Knowledge is a good thing- don't be so afraid of it. You could become a better person by understanding the truth of the world.
Reply
:icontrainman142:
trainman142 Featured By Owner May 5, 2012
At this point I can say only one thing: I could not have put forward a better argument if I tried, well done sir!

Regards, a fellow atheist
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner May 5, 2012  Professional General Artist
Thanks, I hope it gives you some ideas for debate when you end up in one.

You might also have a look at my "How I know a god doesn't exist" Journal:

[link]
Reply
:iconinkyshade:
InkyShade Featured By Owner Apr 24, 2012  Student
That's sooo true!!!
There is no God and never will be one who "watches over us" and if he does(what he definitly NOT does) he renders really bad work because how much (young)people/animals die every day??
Reply
:iconaryamay:
AryaMay Featured By Owner Apr 15, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Bravo, bravo. I agree with you on this, but I'm an agnostic. I believe that all religion is false despite the fact that it is possible that there is a higher being- because simply out of the fact that all religions contradict one another and turn people upon each other. If there really was a true religion, it should bind all components instead of the opposite way around, not serve as a catalyst for war and destruction. We humans by nature, deify what we cannot explain. It is just how our minds work. How do we know that Jesus was indeed the Son and not a fraud who managed to fool everyone by some handy tricks of his own with the intention of starting a cult of himself? Exactly. We do not know. Religion is based on the reliance of faith and in turn- the reliance of a desire to look away from all that threatens that faith despite whether it might be irrational- or more commonly, pure logical reasoning.

Each person needs to find the concept of "Heaven" in their own way, not have it forced into them. Personally, I think that most people are even religious at all because they fear that they might revert back to the premise of nothingness after they die. It's not out of love for god. It's fear. A religion based on fear and threats is not a religion, but a lie.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Apr 16, 2012  Professional General Artist
You should look into "Ignostic"; it's a newer term, more consistent and logical than "Agnostic".
Reply
:iconkyrarah:
Kyrarah Featured By Owner Apr 10, 2012  Hobbyist
P: I'm atheist. Since always I guess.

Sorry for the poor comment, just felt like I needed to say something.
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Apr 13, 2012  Professional General Artist
Thanks.

Though, I'm not sure that I quite understand what you mean?
Reply
:iconkyrarah:
Kyrarah Featured By Owner Apr 13, 2012  Hobbyist
I felt like I needed to comment because for me it's rare to find another atheist with good proofs/reasons to be atheist. Some people are atheist just because they want to challange their parents. At least in Brazil.

So that's basically why I needed to comment, if that's the expected answer for your question. :3
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2012  Professional General Artist
Oh, yes. That is common of teenagers.

I'm old :P Adults don't usually have that reasoning.

I think you would find in Brazil that many if not most educated adults are atheists, but that for political and business reasons they will say they believe in the church. Closeted atheists are very common in conservative religious countries.

Only children are free to admit without fear of career consequences that they are atheists- but those same children are usually not equipped with the knowledge and critical thinking skills to articulate their beliefs.


Thanks for the comment :)
Reply
:iconkyrarah:
Kyrarah Featured By Owner Apr 14, 2012  Hobbyist
Well, that's true.

I used to be ashamed of being an Atheist They looked at me like if I was le non-existent demon but then I started showing everybody I was like God? Ahnnn no thanks. And the I stopped again, because, in somehow it could damage my parents in they social and professional life.

No, here in Brazil, even the most educated adults believe in god. Like most of my sister's university professors. Which is a shame because that helps the poor health sistem of our country to continue poor. For example, the association of priests and bishops are making a scandal because the deputies are approving a law of optional abortion for moms that have brainless kids. They are making campaignes against this.

Thank you for the comment, too. It was great to discuss with someone that is atheist for true and logical reasons. c:
Reply
:iconmisty-and-ash-4ever:
misty-and-ash-4ever Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
i think gods more of an entity than anything else really
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2012  Professional General Artist
What do you mean by entity?
Reply
:iconmisty-and-ash-4ever:
misty-and-ash-4ever Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
like
not physical
but like
floaty
o.o
Reply
:iconvepurusg:
vepurusg Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2012  Professional General Artist
What's it made from?
Reply
:iconmisty-and-ash-4ever:
misty-and-ash-4ever Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
im supposed to know
i dont even believe in god
but hey
if he was real thats wut i think
Reply
:iconericforever:
Ericforever Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2012
Also I would like to ask you if you could see, touch, taste, and feel your brain if you can't then you have to put faith in doctors that they are showing the truth, but then again you never denied faith so never mind.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconvepurusg: More from vepurusg


Featured in Collections

Journals by GarudaX


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
February 22, 2012
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
4,751 (2 today)
Favourites
17 (who?)
Comments
137
×