It is impossible for any human to prove anything about God. It is very arrogant to go around proclaiming you know anything about God. You seem willing to go around making some mighty big claims about God while having no authority nor justification for doing so. No human can prove a single thing about God or that he even exists. Before you go around knocking science, you first need to wake up to the fact that for all your believe about God, you have no evidence to support anything about what you proclaim about God.

You apparently know little about physics. What they did was use quantum tunneling which is nothing new to physics. Technically they didn't make light travel faster then the...

It is impossible for any human to prove anything about God. It is very arrogant to go around proclaiming you know anything about God. You seem willing to go around making some mighty big claims about God while having no authority nor justification for doing so. No human can prove a single thing about God or that he even exists. Before you go around knocking science, you first need to wake up to the fact that for all your believe about God, you have no evidence to support anything about what you proclaim about God.

You apparently know little about physics. What they did was use quantum tunneling which is nothing new to physics. Technically they didn't make light travel faster then the speed of light, the photons used quantum tunneling to make the photons jump ahead which is completely different than making light travel faster then the speed of light through space.

ezsparky,

The dialogue begins with your predispositions that there is no God. Let's breakdown your world view.

Does God Exist - A Philosophical Issue
Before we ask the question "Does God exist?" we first have to deal with our philosophical predispositions. If, for example, I am already dedicated to the philosophical idea that nothing can exist outside of the natural realm (i.e. there can be no supernatural God), no amount of evidence could convince me otherwise. Asking the question "does God exist?" would be pointless. My answer would be "No, He doesn't," regardless of whether God truly exists or not. The question would be impossible to answer from an evidentiary standpoint simply bec...

ezsparky,

The dialogue begins with your predispositions that there is no God. Let's breakdown your world view.

Does God Exist - A Philosophical Issue
Before we ask the question "Does God exist?" we first have to deal with our philosophical predispositions. If, for example, I am already dedicated to the philosophical idea that nothing can exist outside of the natural realm (i.e. there can be no supernatural God), no amount of evidence could convince me otherwise. Asking the question "does God exist?" would be pointless. My answer would be "No, He doesn't," regardless of whether God truly exists or not. The question would be impossible to answer from an evidentiary standpoint simply because anything which God might have done (that is, any supernatural act which might serve as evidence for His existence) would have to be explained away in terms of natural causes, not because we know what those natural causes could possibly be, but simply because a supernatural God is not allowed to exist!

sozoman- I did not say there is no God. I said that it is impossible of any human to prove anything about God, a very different point. I do not try to tell you if there is a God or if there is no God. I tell you that no human can prove anything about God. There are very specific implications to this fact. My intent is not to try and tell you are right or wrong about you beliefs system, just that because you can not prove the system to be from God, you as a human can not draw authority from your proclaimed belief system to dictate to any other human anything about God. If you want to talk to other about what you believe, you must always do so from the stand point that you openly know yo...

sozoman- I did not say there is no God. I said that it is impossible of any human to prove anything about God, a very different point. I do not try to tell you if there is a God or if there is no God. I tell you that no human can prove anything about God. There are very specific implications to this fact. My intent is not to try and tell you are right or wrong about you beliefs system, just that because you can not prove the system to be from God, you as a human can not draw authority from your proclaimed belief system to dictate to any other human anything about God. If you want to talk to other about what you believe, you must always do so from the stand point that you openly know you have no proof for you beliefs. The moment the religious over step this boundary, they are in error and run the risk of assuming too much justification to control the rest of the world.

This is a fact that you can not avoid. As long as you refuse to step back from this error, there is no point talking to you.

Hi Sozo,

I went through your site, and I think you are right. The logic is clean, sharp, and unambiguous leading to the conclusion that morality is as absolute as the laws of mathematics. All one needs is personal honesty to see it. The problem is admitting it! Wouldn't you agree?

I'm assuming you're an honest person even to yourself. How else could you so easily understand the absoluteness of morality in proving god's existence. Brilliant idea!

The example that you gave of child molestation is easy to see. There is NO time when it's right. Ever! Therefore there is an ABSOLUTE morality. Easy, honest, and simple to see.

That's why I know that you can openly ad...

Hi Sozo,

I went through your site, and I think you are right. The logic is clean, sharp, and unambiguous leading to the conclusion that morality is as absolute as the laws of mathematics. All one needs is personal honesty to see it. The problem is admitting it! Wouldn't you agree?

I'm assuming you're an honest person even to yourself. How else could you so easily understand the absoluteness of morality in proving god's existence. Brilliant idea!

The example that you gave of child molestation is easy to see. There is NO time when it's right. Ever! Therefore there is an ABSOLUTE morality. Easy, honest, and simple to see.

That's why I know that you can openly admit that it was morally wrong for Yahweh to order Moses to kill every man, woman and child, except the young virgin girls to keep for themselves in Numbers 31:14-18; it states:

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Num 31:17-18 (KJV)

Keep the women "children" alive for yourselves!

Never mind the other atrocities committed, allowed, or ordered by Yahweh, THIS ALONE proves (according to your beautiful absolute morality argument) that Yahweh cannot be god!

sozoman - Because child molestation is traditionally considered to be “morally wrong” globally among human cultures, it does not follow that this is an absolute truth and in no way provides proof of God. The human culture could have just as easily developed such that child molestation was culturally expectable. If I remember correctly, there have been cultures in history in which sexual acts with children have been expectable.

I personally think that child molestation is wrong. The source of my authority to make this claim stems solely from a human derived standard that has arisen from the traditions of human culture. This tradition is solely the product of human culture. You may try...

sozoman - Because child molestation is traditionally considered to be “morally wrong” globally among human cultures, it does not follow that this is an absolute truth and in no way provides proof of God. The human culture could have just as easily developed such that child molestation was culturally expectable. If I remember correctly, there have been cultures in history in which sexual acts with children have been expectable.

I personally think that child molestation is wrong. The source of my authority to make this claim stems solely from a human derived standard that has arisen from the traditions of human culture. This tradition is solely the product of human culture. You may try to argue it comes from religions. Religions are apart of human culture and you would be correct to say that religion played a part in developing the tradition of not molesting children. It does not follow though that because religion may have played a part in developing this tradition, it comes from God. Going back to the point I have made again and again, because no human can prove that any religion or writings of religion are from God, you can make no claims that they are from God. This includes any moral or non moral traditions which religions may have infused into some of the traditions found in the global human culture.

I do believe that there is an ultimate truth, God. I also know that it is beyond the capability of any human to prove anything about this ultimate truth. Because of this, I know that I can not justify making any claims about what the absolute is. Even though I may except there can or may be an absolute truth, it does not change the fact that it is impossible for me or for anyone else to prove anything about it. Again, because this, no human can prove anything about God, no human has the right, authority, or justification to be proclaiming any about God.

You will not be able to develop a line of logic leading to a proof for anything concerning God

You will not be able to develop a line of logic leading to a proof for anything concerning God. People have a tried for thousands of years with no success. If anyone had ever been successful, everyone would know about it. As long as no proof is given, the only rational thing to conclude is that it does not exist. As long as no proof is given, no human has the authority or justification to proclaim what the absolute truth is. This means no human has the authority or justification to tell any other human what God thinks, wants, expects or commands. Most important of all, no human has the authority or justification forcing another human to do or not to do anything based on what they procl...

You will not be able to develop a line of logic leading to a proof for anything concerning God. People have a tried for thousands of years with no success. If anyone had ever been successful, everyone would know about it. As long as no proof is given, the only rational thing to conclude is that it does not exist. As long as no proof is given, no human has the authority or justification to proclaim what the absolute truth is. This means no human has the authority or justification to tell any other human what God thinks, wants, expects or commands. Most important of all, no human has the authority or justification forcing another human to do or not to do anything based on what they proclaim God wants, expects or commands. As long as people keep attempting to make such claims, I will aggressively call them on this error.

If you want to do the religion thing, that is great. You just need to except that everything you believe in concerning your chosen religion is not provable. You also must let this realization changes how you practice your religion. Stop telling people “this is the way it is” to “this is the way we choose to believe it is”. The reason that people of religion do not want to accept this is because it removes all the authority from what they say when they proclaim to the world what they believe what God says. Proclaiming that you believe a book is the word of God does not make is so. If you think you can gain justification to use a book as a source of absolute truth based on you proclaiming the book to be the true word of God, you are in error. Faith does not impart authority into a book proclaimed to be the word of God. If you have been treating it like is does, you are in error. Only if you could prove that the book is the true word of God, could you ever draw authority from it.

Because child molestation is traditionally considered to be “morally wrong” globally among human cultures, it does not follow that this is an absolute truth and in no way provides proof of God.

Yes, you are right. But in Sozo's false alternatives he only allows a yes or no; and if you pick "no" to the absolute moral, it just takes you back to the previous question "as if" you made a mistake.

So I used his own logic with the limited alternatives since he cannot see another alternative than his own absolute choices of yes / no.

So in his world, if morality is absolute, then his god cannot be moral, or cannot be god. He allows no other options in his logic. So I leave it him ...

Because child molestation is traditionally considered to be “morally wrong” globally among human cultures, it does not follow that this is an absolute truth and in no way provides proof of God.

Yes, you are right. But in Sozo's false alternatives he only allows a yes or no; and if you pick "no" to the absolute moral, it just takes you back to the previous question "as if" you made a mistake.

So I used his own logic with the limited alternatives since he cannot see another alternative than his own absolute choices of yes / no.

So in his world, if morality is absolute, then his god cannot be moral, or cannot be god. He allows no other options in his logic. So I leave it him to chose if his god is no different than a devil, or not a god.

From there I'm hoping he can see the logical dishonesty of his comparisons. 2+2 = 4 is not a choice, it's an objective truth.

Judgement, on the other hand, as in a moral, is purely a choice, usually based on culture or tradition.

sozoman - Yes I do, that is why I made the statement.

The proof falls on the one who is making the claim that God exists. Clear cut proof does not exist!

The issue here is you can not prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God. Even if you could prove the existence of God, you still will not be able to prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God.

"I have supernatural evidence that science can't explain away."

What you call "supernatural evidence" is not evidence. If there exists a "something" which you can not explain, it does not follow that it is "supernatural" or from Go...

sozoman - Yes I do, that is why I made the statement.

The proof falls on the one who is making the claim that God exists. Clear cut proof does not exist!

The issue here is you can not prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God. Even if you could prove the existence of God, you still will not be able to prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God.

"I have supernatural evidence that science can't explain away."

What you call "supernatural evidence" is not evidence. If there exists a "something" which you can not explain, it does not follow that it is "supernatural" or from God. If there exists a "something" science is not currently able to explain, it does not follow that it is "supernatural" or from God.

"I have archaeological evidence."

You do not have archaeological evidence that proves what you profess to be from God comes from God. That is an out right lie.

"I mathematical evidence."

Again, you do not have "mathematical evidence" that proves what you profess to be from God comes from God. This again is an out right lie.

"Great men have tried to prove there is no God and failed. Certainly you are as bright as C.S. Lewis."

It does not follow that their failure is proof that what you profess to be from God comes from God.


AGAIN:
The issue here is you can not prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God.

Even if you could prove the existence of God, you still will not be able to prove that what you profess to be from God, the bible and anything else you dream up, is from God.

sozoman - "I urge you to have an open mind and research deeper to see if there is a God that wants to have a personal relationship with you instead of just immersing yourself in all that philosophy you currently put your faith in."

I have an open mind. Having an open mind does not require giving up rational thinking.

As far as a personal relationship with God, STOP telling me you know what kind of relationship God wants with me or that it is even possible to have a relationship him. You can not such a thing so STOP trying to tell me that I should be doing anything. What gives you the right, authority or justification to tell me anything about God or how to relate to him.

Also, stop a...

sozoman - "I urge you to have an open mind and research deeper to see if there is a God that wants to have a personal relationship with you instead of just immersing yourself in all that philosophy you currently put your faith in."

I have an open mind. Having an open mind does not require giving up rational thinking.

As far as a personal relationship with God, STOP telling me you know what kind of relationship God wants with me or that it is even possible to have a relationship him. You can not such a thing so STOP trying to tell me that I should be doing anything. What gives you the right, authority or justification to tell me anything about God or how to relate to him.

Also, stop assuming, and worse, stating you know what I immerse myself or put faith in. You can not know such things about me. You seem to have a bad habit of professing things you can not possible know.