Is God a Delusion?2/12

Moot: Is God a Delusion? Bill Cooke, Senior Lecturer, Manukau Institute of Technology and William Lane Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Religion
• Philosophy
• Humanism
• Atheism
• God
• Theology

[ginganz13]

@longlivethemorrow @longlivethemorrow - Describing what we can't understand by calling it 'god' or 'atemporal intelligence' has a long, well understood history that has only one really consistent feature - it explains nothing. Having any certainty about the existence of this ‘entity’ while being unable to describe it's nature or how it might have completed such a task seems not even remotely reasonable.

[tipoomaster]

@TYLERJB777

So you think that people should be judged by what they believe, rather than what they do?

[wachnathan]

It always comes down to arugment from ignorances because you still "can't" prove it who are we to say how things work in the universe all this information still does not justifiy christianity.

[wachnathan]

Why don't they debate on how this god was even invented we know full well this god never showed up in history tell the bible was created thats just one clue its not real even the first christians didn't just believe in one god.

[DiatonicSoul]

WLC destroys Atheists with logic, science, philosophy, and mathematics. NEXT

[eddybrox]

@ginganz13 Nothing cant be explained,cause nothing has no properties.So how to explain something,that does not need space or time and therefor exists over nothingnes?You cant,cause it is impossible.There4 it is god.Would you be able to explain god,you would probably not explain god himself,cause you can not (as you said) understand it.You want to explain an uncaused cause.That is beyond of your and mine menthal, cognitive and intellectual ability. Though Shalt Not Make Graven Images

[eyeammi]

WLC ignores that the physical constants are only 'constant' in the context of our observed physical laws. However, varied constants could in fact cause an entirely new set of laws. There is no way to determine the direction of causality from within the universe itself. You can change the constants, the laws or both. This allows for an ∞ number of possible universe models & thus, no conclusion can be made as to how all possible changes in the constants impact the probability of life developing.

[BassP86]

@mjpitche

Possibly wrong? So because there's a possibility they could be wrong, then his arguments don't stand? That's a fallacy called an appeal to probability, which is where you say because something could happen it means it WILL happen, meaning if the arguments could be invalid, it means they ARE invalid = wrong.

No offense, but do you know how science works, dude? That's just lazy, anti-theistic thinking on your part. If it didn't point to God, you wouldn't even be claiming such a thing.

[BassP86]

@ginganz13

Simply SAYING we don't understand something, doesn't mean it's true that we don't understand it. Nice strawman.