Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Fairy Tail RPG

Staff Members:

神 Administrators:
{{Inara Serra}}
{{Mazohyst}}

主 Global moderators:
{{Ajimeister}}

座 Guild Librarian
{{Fumus}}
{{Sachio Hanabe}}

裁 Mission Moderators:
{{
Kanna}}
{{Reya Starylight}}
{{Hadou}}

司 Librarians:
{{Potato}}
{{Mango}}
{{Grond}}

Fairy Tail Guild RP Current News


Hey everyone, it's me, your Lord and Savior, your Once and Future King, and your new Admin-for-Life Unlimit Sendo. I'm here to drop some turnbuckle-diving elbows and awesome news. There's been some relatively small updates to rulings regarding summon familiars and single summons. Additionally, there's also been a pretty big update in regards to the AP shop which reorganizes it and adds a ton of new stuff. You can find that in the AP Shop section under Item Creation. Check it out.

FTG Staff
Quick Links:

{{Fairy Tail RPG Rules}}

{{Fairy Tail RPG News}}

{{Character Creation Template}}

{{Character Modification Template}}

{{Mission Creation}}

{{Mission Request}}

{{Grading Request Topic}}

{{Guild Members}}

{{Item Creation}}

{{FTG and You: The Guide 3.0}}

{{Project Jumpstart: For Newbies!}}

Add Reply
Lexie Vs Straykey on God
Topic Started: May 19 2011, 03:09 PM (1,956 Views)
THEPUNK101
Member Avatar
Leah
hi mom
Edited by THEPUNK101, Jun 27 2012, 08:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lexie
Member Avatar
You've just been Britified.
((Straykey gave me permission to remake my opening statement, due to the screwed up format :3))

"God is dead"

Nietzsche's words are frequently quoted but rarely understood. What the Madman passage of Nietzsche's book meant when it used those words was the decay and destruction of the original god people believed in. This is the inner truth of God; although he claims much, he is almost always invariably wrong. He claimed he was unchanging, and he has changed. He has claimed that plants were created before the sun, he was wrong. He claimed to resurrect the dead, but this has never happened either.

But before I begin proper, I shall outline that I am rejecting the deist god out of hand. The deist god is a god who does not intervene, and yet started the Universe. The deist god has no evidence for it, and therefore can be discounted without a second thought. Also, said god is useless in the first place so it doesn't really matter if said god exists. If I so choose, I can dismiss all gods on this point too.

After that, I can make my second point. Most people are compelled by the case for God because they are ignorant, this is a simple fact. In the countries with the best education can be found (as defined by IQ scores), the religiosity is lowered. Argument from ignorance is the most common logical fallacy I hear from believers. An argument from ignorance is basically "I cannot think of how this got here, therefore a god did it". If I need to tell you why this argument is fallacious, then I feel you should go read a book on basic philosophy; science has thrived on the assumption that there is an explanation for everything. For an example, see thunder.

On my third point, I would also like to say that I encounter circular arguments a lot too. The first thing a theist often says to me when I debate them is commonly "The Bible says...". That or "The fool has said in his (note his and not their) heart that there is no God". Excuse me, but where do people get off calling me a fool for not believing as they do? And I know, I called people who believe in God ignorant. However, I'm very ignorant when it comes to finances, and piloting aircraft. Being called ignorant is descriptive, not an insult. Admitting to not knowing is far braver than pretending to know everything.

Digression aside, my point is that circular reasoning is another logical fallacy. The Bible says it's the word of god, how do you know it's honest? Because God wouldn't lie, how do you know God's word? It's in the Bible. You see the circular argument? It's flawed because it works for ANY Holy book, and the premises themselves are flawed. Quoting the Bible will get you nowhere in this debate.

Now, because of the inevitability of seeing evolution cropping up in the debate, I'll tell you not to mention evolution at all. Disproving evolution will not prove your god. For details, see Argument from Ignorance. Disproving one would not prove the other. This is not a dichotomy. If evolution is wrong, there may be other answers out there. Evolution being wrong is highly unlikely at this point in time however...do not contest that point, lest I consent to teaching you evolution from the basics up. And I am not a patient teacher.

Onto my fourth point, which is to say that God is a very...clumsy idea. Now, we shall take the Christian doctrine that God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient. That is to say, knows everything, can do anything and knows everything. Fair enough, sounds impressive. Except that all three innately contradict each other. For instance, how do you square God's three traits with the existence of heinous evil? I do not mean human evil, but the evil of the cosmos. The cosmos wants to kill us all. Badly. There is a comet called Apothis, Eygyptian God of Death and Darkness, which will crash into Earth (probably) and utterly level the entire eastern seaboard of America and the Western coast of Asia. Now...is God REALLY going to smash his favourite creations with a meteor that will kill thousands, maybe even millions? Sorry guys, that doesn't sound like all-loving to me.

The concept of God is flawed in of itself, if we're talking about the Theistic God. I think that the Theistic god is innately irrational. Look at the billions, and I mean BILLIONS of galaxies in the Universe each one of those galaxies contains BILLIONS of stars. And those are just the galaxies we've mapped! The Universe may yet be bigger than we yet realise. And you want to tell me that a God takes an interest in US? C'mon, be serious!

Which brings me to my 5th point. And this is quite honestly my most devastating point against the Christian God. Seeing as I am debating two Christians, I hope my friends of other faiths will allow me this indulgence. My experiences in the past have left me rather bitter towards Christian dogma I'll freely admit. I will close with a paraphrase from Christopher Hitchens, a prominent atheist thinker and writer who is battling with oesophageal cancer. Consider this a form of tribute.

Let's assume the human race has been on this planet for 250 thousand years. Some scientists think it's 100 thousand, some think it might be more. But whatever, let's assume 250 thousand. Now, to be a moderate Christian this is what you have to believe;

For 248 thousand years, the Heavens watch with indifference as our ancestors rape, kill, commit genocide and die in childbirth or of their teeth, usually by the age of 25. Now, 2000 years ago Heaven FINALLY decides that it should do something, by sending a man down to Earth to be sacrificed in the place of humanity for the atonement of a sin committed by a man who, by the Catholic Chruch's admission, did not even exist in the first place. Are you joking me? Jesus died for the sins of a man that had not even existed? And even if that were so, why is God holding us responsible for his sins in the first place? To think that such a capricious, cruel, malevolent, homophobic, genocidal, infantile, jealous, foolish, baby-killing, species-killing, favouritist and vindictive ass is the creator of the entire Universe is not only insane, it's downright immoral to think that this is moral and correct.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you have read carefully and looked closely at my evidence, then nobody can but conclude that the arguments of the Christians and, indeed the religious at large, are vacuous and fallacious. If there is no evidence for something, disbelief is the only option. The most over-appreciated "virtue" is faith, the willingness to believe what you were told as a child.

There, that would be my intellectual broadside written in a bad mood.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
THEPUNK101
Member Avatar
Leah
You Madge you say opening points (something like Specified and Irreducible Complexity) cause I Really want to refute this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Madge
Member Avatar
The Dragon of Grimiore Heart
Regardless of who gave who permission, a debate is a debate. I don't think it's proper to go ahead and say "Oh wait, I messed up, let me re-read my previous statements (Opening statement) , but clean them up, since I've already seen what your response was."

I'm out of this debate, It just lost it's appeal in my eyes.
Edited by Madge, Jun 29 2011, 10:21 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Alpha Werewolf
Member Avatar
D-Class
Straykey
May 26 2011, 08:22 AM
Hebrew word for circle can be used for the Hebrew word for sphere
I know I'm technically not supposed to post here, but I don't think anybody in the debate knows hebrew; Anyway, this is false. In Hebrew, circle is "Igul" (עיגול) or "Ma'agal"(מעגל) while sphere and ball are the same word - "Kadoor" (כדור). Neither of the words for circle can be used for sphere.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
THEPUNK101
Member Avatar
Leah
actually yeah i believe you :)
Edited by THEPUNK101, Jun 27 2012, 08:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Debates · Next Topic »
Add Reply

NSRP One Piece Explore Pokemon Godai TOGETHER WE FALL: A NON-CANON NARUTO RP FF:Adventure Scarlet Night Overtale, A Post-Pacifist Undertale RP Red Like RosesSengoku HorizonRorupurei
[ Copy this | Start New | Full Size ]