Message from @Spartan322

Discord ID: 644327599572647939


2019-11-14 00:05:10 UTC  

tbf we boiled down the core of the argument that took them 25 minutes to get to in less then half a paragraph

2019-11-14 00:05:21 UTC  

people @ me with questions for them

2019-11-14 00:05:31 UTC  

it's very pedantic

2019-11-14 00:05:39 UTC  

It’s boring as hell

2019-11-14 00:05:41 UTC  

another point

2019-11-14 00:05:56 UTC  

Guns are good

2019-11-14 00:06:14 UTC  

I don’t why pius hasn’t brung up the bubble at all in his argument

2019-11-14 00:06:23 UTC  

The bubble?

2019-11-14 00:06:24 UTC  

*bible

2019-11-14 00:06:27 UTC  

Oh

2019-11-14 00:06:34 UTC  

because he's not arguing for the Christian God

2019-11-14 00:06:40 UTC  

This is the problem with trying to scientifically prove that there is God. He is using elaborate words to try to convince someone that doesn’t believe in God

2019-11-14 00:06:41 UTC  

Because theyre talking about proofs for any god

2019-11-14 00:06:43 UTC  

@Theo they've chosen not to debate the character of God at all

2019-11-14 00:06:44 UTC  

he's arguing merely for the God of the gaps argument

2019-11-14 00:07:13 UTC  

Conception in the mental sense is understanding; imagining is creation.

2019-11-14 00:07:26 UTC  

@Spartan322 which technially wins the debate. but is a very pendatic arguement

2019-11-14 00:07:34 UTC  

God exists but not in this terrible way that he is trying to prove.

2019-11-14 00:07:35 UTC  

and doesn't actually say anything

2019-11-14 00:07:36 UTC  

It doesnt

2019-11-14 00:07:50 UTC  

by a technical sense it kind of works, but it means nothing

2019-11-14 00:07:52 UTC  

Oh lol I had them both on Mute. Been here for 10minutes wondering tf going on lmao.

2019-11-14 00:07:59 UTC  

lol

2019-11-14 00:08:15 UTC  

If you accept the premise that something can be infinite, you can just make the universe your infinite. Either that or you have turtles all the way down

2019-11-14 00:08:29 UTC  

How would you prove God is real @lanceleader

2019-11-14 00:08:41 UTC  

An intellectual shouldn’t try to explain God. Never let another man teach you.

2019-11-14 00:08:42 UTC  

You can't debate over.

2019-11-14 00:08:45 UTC  

Thanks power range.r

2019-11-14 00:09:01 UTC  

well I mean it could. it just means that 'god' aka the first mover or contingency is very tiny

2019-11-14 00:09:13 UTC  

tbf arguing for God from the empirical realm won't work because faith is not about empiricism

2019-11-14 00:09:33 UTC  

yeah to be honest I think a better argument is to take God's existence for granted, and argue his character

2019-11-14 00:09:36 UTC  

And so tiny that it practically doesn't matter

2019-11-14 00:09:41 UTC  

If you're willing to modify god to mean anything that could be considered "the first" or an infinite, sure. But then you've said nothing

2019-11-14 00:09:41 UTC  

and without knowing his character makes it double pointless

2019-11-14 00:09:48 UTC  

since that is far more releveant to the actions of day to day lives

2019-11-14 00:10:55 UTC  

anyone even have a question? I don't, this is better left as a discussion and anything I ask will be out of scope

2019-11-14 00:11:12 UTC  

plus it'll just be leading the discussion later

2019-11-14 00:12:02 UTC  

this was cool

2019-11-14 00:12:02 UTC  

I rationalize god being real because the you can look in history and see that the events that happened in the Bible,actually happened

2019-11-14 00:12:04 UTC  

Your very existence is proof of God. God doesn’t have to be this bearded man in the sky. He is a higher being than all of us.

All the unknown will remain a mystery forever because we simply cannot fathom such things. We are lesser beings than God so we can’t try to describe Him.

2019-11-14 00:12:25 UTC  

same. I just feel like Pius is arguing a very pendantic point and I am not read up on the minusca of metaphysics