He was never alive.

To be fair, if God is truly omnipotant, he is neither alive nor dead, as his omnipotence renders the notion of life irrelevant.

At 2/2/15 11:43 PM, Camarohusky wrote: To be fair, if God is truly omnipotant, he is neither alive nor dead, as his omnipotence renders the notion of life irrelevant.

QED, god is a mineral.

Sir, let me ask you something, how would you know if God was never alive and he doesn't die?

At 2/3/15 11:38 AM, X-Gary-Gigax-X wrote:

At 2/2/15 11:43 PM, Camarohusky wrote: To be fair, if God is truly omnipotant, he is neither alive nor dead, as his omnipotence renders the notion of life irrelevant.

If you use the bible as a reference, He is also trans-dimensional, able to operate in multiple dimensions simultaneously, even ones not yet discovered. As well as a being Who exists both inside and outside the realm of time, or at least how our cerebrum contemplates time.

Quite the interesting being to have been thought up by a bunch of Bronze Age goat herders, eh?

;;;
Actually, If you look at the old gods, those of civilizations/peoples long gone...they were natural gods.
Sun, Moon, Natural conditions they didn't understand, like lightning.
Earth was seen as a mother, in many cultures & early symbols found , whether carved, painted etc.

In reality, in todays world...right this minute.
The small yellow dwarf star this planet circles is god for us humans. Because without it, life as we know it on this planet would end. Turn it off, nothing catastrophic....just let it stop throwing light & heat at us & almost every living thing on this planet would die, bacteria, a few organisms that survive in inhospitable parts of the deepest oceans would survive & live on ...but for how long, is a guess.

SO sun worshippers Way Way Way back when, they got it right, for all intents & purposes if "god" is what grants life...the sun is god.

Pretty wild for peoples who didn't even have a written language ~;p

At 2/4/15 07:18 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

SO sun worshippers Way Way Way back when, they got it right, for all intents & purposes if "god" is what grants life...the sun is god.

Pretty wild for peoples who didn't even have a written language ~;p

That's why it's intended to be "The SUN of God" not "The SON of God" . What was one of Jesus nick names ... "The bringer of Light" etc.

God damn this thread is edgy.

....God....

There's a something, is it or isn't it?

Personally, if you meet him, gimme a nudge

Cos i got bones to pick with him, firstly his nose....too many people have died in his little garden of eden, im the fuck off this warhorse, i'll believe on what i see.....screw god....i tried prayers.....so screw him too.

Not to be confrontational ofcourse, i'm atheist, i regard most gods and dieties as scum....they dont seem to give a naff about wiping us lot out aparently, so i'm punching god at the pearly gates if i them.....or in deepfry hell and i'll kick the devils head in frankly.

sorry man, i ain't saying god's there, but if he is that's what the heck i'm doing

If God was dead, you would have to find his body.

At 2/7/15 11:08 AM, Ericho wrote: If God was dead, you would have to find his body.

he's not
because he was never alive

At 2/7/15 09:17 PM, Ilssm wrote: Man what a well thought out and thought provoking thread.

A perfect political discussion.

It's a troll thread LOL. As are most opinionated BS threads on these forms ... that are typically trolled by a few institutionalized shills ... (CamH) I mean you that think the American Government is they savior LOL.

At 2/7/15 10:03 PM, Ilssm wrote:

It's a troll thread LOL. As are most opinionated BS threads on these forms ... that are typically trolled by a few institutionalized shills ... (CamH) I mean you that think the American Government is they savior LOL.

The hell?

Keep eating things that ... (god) did not intend you to eat and you will get sick as fuck. As CamH hes currently going thru some shit that his Government is putting him thru. We are all gods however it's your ability to tap into the source energy that dictates the quality of signal/energy you receive.

Guys, this is a literal statement. God doesn't exist, according to my arrangements of axioms, which disproves his omnipotence, and thus his need for existence. Thus he is not dead, because he never could have been alive.

At 2/8/15 10:43 AM, LazyDrunk wrote:

At 2/7/15 11:19 PM, joe27 wrote:

Thus he is not dead, because he never could have been alive.

I'd like to think of God as Schroedingers cat if I'm going to be cynical.

good way to look at it.

At 2/7/15 11:19 PM, joe27 wrote: Guys, this is a literal statement. God doesn't exist, according to my arrangements of axioms, which disproves his omnipotence, and thus his need for existence. Thus he is not dead, because he never could have been alive.

I think this thread is retarded no offense to you intended. I think it would be wiser to try and prove God existed in any form because the fact is we have no proof and never will.

At 2/8/15 11:13 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 2/7/15 11:19 PM, joe27 wrote: Guys, this is a literal statement. God doesn't exist, according to my arrangements of axioms, which disproves his omnipotence, and thus his need for existence. Thus he is not dead, because he never could have been alive.

I think this thread is retarded no offense to you intended. I think it would be wiser to try and prove God existed in any form because the fact is we have no proof and never will.

Woah, I'm also atheist. I assert that because "God" is not "dead", this means he never was "alive". Now, in this case, "God" is assumed to be sentient, and because of the axiom which states that sentient things that were never alive don't exist, right? Thus, in this case, he doesn't exist, because he is not dead, because he was never alive.

At 2/8/15 11:59 PM, joe27 wrote:

Woah, I'm also atheist.

I don't like these cookie cutter mass generalization terms. I believe in reality and I believe there are many realities not just the one we are currently apart of as we type here. If someone believes in a God/s and they operate without hurting others and the planet as much as possible then I don't think there is any harm in that even if what they believe in are lies written by man.

At 2/9/15 12:10 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: If someone believes in a God/s and they operate without hurting others and the planet as much as possible then I don't think there is any harm in that even if what they believe in are lies written by man.

Atheism is not in and of itself inherently hostile to theism or it's beliefs. It is merely the opposite side of the coin. The hostility comes from either certain atheists being very militant and aggressive in their views, or theists who feel threatened by the existence of the counter point view.

At 2/3/15 11:38 AM, X-Gary-Gigax-X wrote: If you use the bible as a reference, He is also trans-dimensional, able to operate in multiple dimensions simultaneously, even ones not yet discovered.

I wouldn't doubt it, but what chapters/verses illustrate this?

There are many different gods, just pick the one that you like best. Odin is not a bad choice.

At 2/9/15 10:59 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: There are many different gods, just pick the one that you like best. Odin is not a bad choice.

What about a destroyer of worlds in Shiva or a sex carzed rape maniac in a satyr?

At 2/9/15 07:37 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 2/9/15 12:10 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: If someone believes in a God/s and they operate without hurting others and the planet as much as possible then I don't think there is any harm in that even if what they believe in are lies written by man.

Atheism is not in and of itself inherently hostile to theism or it's beliefs. It is merely the opposite side of the coin. The hostility comes from either certain atheists being very militant and aggressive in their views, or theists who feel threatened by the existence of the counter point view.

Or theists being aggressive toward atheists. Remember the original text commanded it's followers to wipe out any villages that were filled with infidels that could not be converted. Personally I am not theist or atheist I am a spiritual being.

At 2/9/15 11:49 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Or theists being aggressive toward atheists.

Ah yes, because doing to them exactly what they do to is a great way to "show them".

Ain't the atheists supposed to be driven by logic in their decisions?

At 2/10/15 12:19 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 2/9/15 11:49 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Or theists being aggressive toward atheists.

Ah yes, because doing to them exactly what they do to is a great way to "show them".

Ain't the atheists supposed to be driven by logic in their decisions?

Again you as always try and turn this into an us vs them thing. I could care less about some term you call this or that.

At 2/10/15 01:16 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: Again you as always try and turn this into an us vs them thing. I could care less about some term you call this or that.

Wait, what? You're the one who's trying to justify the us vs them attitude many atheist feel. I am merely calling out how stupid the us vs them attitude is.

My point was mocking that small group of atheists who claim to be on the logical and rational side of the coin, yet immediately delve into petty and emotional feuds with the religious. Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins fit this bill.

At 2/10/15 10:24 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 2/10/15 01:16 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: Again you as always try and turn this into an us vs them thing. I could care less about some term you call this or that.

Wait, what? You're the one who's trying to justify the us vs them attitude many atheist feel. I am merely calling out how stupid the us vs them attitude is.

My point was mocking that small group of atheists who claim to be on the logical and rational side of the coin, yet immediately delve into petty and emotional feuds with the religious. Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins fit this bill.

If you read my reply to askew then you would see that I am saying that both atheists and theists should learn to behave and treat each other right.