Thread: The Christian Professor

Are you a troll? Seriously.

You've made threads insulting both atheists and Christians as people, rather than based on how their beliefs work.

I have an argument in there.

Look for it.

It's the same argument every atheist makes... "God can't be disproven because he can't be proven, so he's irrelevant." (or something to that effect)

Sure, everyone knows you're technically right, logically speaking, but the subject totters between logic and philosophy. There are theists out there who would be more than glad to butt heads with you, but your clash will be simply a reenactment of the thousands of previous, identical, heated internet battles that ultimately arrive at a sullen impasse.

Quit while you're ahead, don't start this fight. Come up with something more compelling for both sides, yeah?

perhaps god means to do nothing?

fail

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

perhaps god means to do nothing?

fail

Just to tackle this one point.

If he means to do nothing, why bother creating at all? Just a thought...

he'd create and go with the flow

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

he'd create and go with the flow

You are not see what I'm trying to get at. To create, he needs to be motivated in some way for that creation, so why create if he never meant to do anything with his creation? What motivated him in the first place and then what would cause him to lose the motivation for further creation or interaction?

i don't know what motivated him, i just think he created the earth how it was and let nature take it's course after that, he lets people choose their own path, then whatever happens in the end happens in the end, as for no more motivation, he could be off creating something somewhere else, there's no need for interaction because i believe people take their own path and he doesn't interact in anyway

Originally Posted by Good as Gold

or,

The One Not Copied From Some Silly Glurge

Once there was a professor , whom, like most of the American population, was Christian! This astounded very few, and unfortunately, wasn't the subject of any stories. So why would I tell you this delightfully boring tale? Because one day his world got turned upside down....


It was Monday, the day before Christmas Eve. The professor, drunk on a delicious eggnog made by the chemistry teacher, challenged anyone to disprove God! The students gasped and kept quiet, as most were, of course, Christian. But one bold atheist stood up.

"I can't, sir."

The professor was smug as hell, and let off a drunken smile.

"And why is that, kid?"

"Because there is absolutely shit all proof for him, that's why! You see, to disprove something it must exist in some form or another in the first place. One can only disprove something like a talking banana because it's legs would not support it or something to that effect. God is different. He has shown nothing that can be proved or disproved simply because He hasn't done shit! Everything people thought He did turned out to be explainable phenomena. So there! I have disproved God on the basis that there is nothing to disprove in the first place!"

The class was aghast. They had heard nothing of the sort before!

The student and professor were expelled and fired, respectively. For what? Starting fights and arriving drunk to class, respectively.

The moral?

Don't drink and be Christian at the same time. It only makes you look dumber.

I must admit, this amused me, but not in the way you (the author) intended.

I got a kick out of the original post.

Originally Posted by bluefinger

You are not see what I'm trying to get at. To create, he needs to be motivated in some way for that creation, so why create if he never meant to do anything with his creation? What motivated him in the first place and then what would cause him to lose the motivation for further creation or interaction?

Why do you think a movtivation would have to be a desired aspect of God creating? I can definately say there is an 'intention' and the intention clearly wasn't brought about by anything else, besides motivation couldn't apply as there had to be something previous to motivate and considering there is nothing before God then the statement of motivation is highly invalid.

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

i don't know what motivated him, i just think he created the earth how it was and let nature take it's course after that, he lets people choose their own path, then whatever happens in the end happens in the end, as for no more motivation, he could be off creating something somewhere else, there's no need for interaction because i believe people take their own path and he doesn't interact in anyway

Nothing from that kind of logic can give a reason for the existence of god.



Maybe the universe is god's "accident child."

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Why do you think a motivation would have to be a desired aspect of God creating? I can definitely say there is an 'intention' and the intention clearly wasn't brought about by anything else, besides motivation couldn't apply as there had to be something previous to motivate and considering there is nothing before God then the statement of motivation is highly invalid.

Intention, motivation, purpose... all convey a sense of unrest and eagerness for change. Where does this come from, especially in a God? nitsuJ was making a claim that God meant to do nothing and that he created but then simply went with the flow. I'm challenging that just to see how nitsuJ justifies this opinion, as I'm curious to know.

just because there is "shit proof" of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist

"You see, to disprove something it must exist in some form or another in the first place."

that right there basically acknowledges god could possibly exist because he may "exist in some form or another in the first place"

and since he is the creator of everything, the phenomena was him

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I got a kick out of the original post.

So did I. In fact, you could say it was good as gold.

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Intention, motivation, purpose... all convey a sense of unrest and eagerness for change. Where does this come from, especially in a God? nitsuJ was making a claim that God meant to do nothing and that he created but then simply went with the flow. I'm challenging that just to see how nitsuJ justifies this opinion, as I'm curious to know.

My outlook is probably a little different than Justins in regards to God's begining of creation because I don't actually believe he meant to do nothing.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

My outlook is probably a little different than Justins in regards to God's begining of creation because I don't actually believe he meant to do nothing.

Well, that is quite obvious, knowing your stance on various things. But as for Justin, the question remains...

yeah not all christians think the same thing, that's why there are baptists, church of god, methodist, etc. etc., each have their own beliefs and i believe the baptists and church of god each think each other will burn in hell because of their different beliefs

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Well, that is quite obvious, knowing your stance on various things. But as for Justin, the question remains...

i already said i don't know what motivated him, there wouldn't of been motivation

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

yeah not all christians think the same thing, that's why there are baptists, church of god, methodist, etc. etc., each have their own beliefs and i believe the baptists and church of god each think each other will burn in hell because of their different beliefs

I don't doubt that, but I'm asking for the justification for that claim you made earlier on. Just curious to see how you came to that conclusion.

i already said i don't know what motivated him, there wouldn't of been motivation, as for letting nature take it's course, i think we evolved from the single celled organisms that were the first things on this planet, then he let us choose our own paths in life and lets us make our own decisions, therefore he doesn't interact with us because that would be putting his decision on us hisself and if he did interact with us in anyway then we wouldn't be taking our own path anymore because he'd be intervening with it

What's the point of calling that being "god" then or even pondering its existence to this extent?

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

i already said i don't know what motivated him, there wouldn't of been motivation, as for letting nature take it's course, i think we evolved from the single celled organisms that were the first things on this planet, then he let us choose our own paths in life and lets us make our own decisions, therefore he doesn't interact with us because that would be putting his decision on us hisself and if he did interact with us in anyway then we wouldn't be taking our own path anymore because he'd be intervening with it

Okay, that was all I was looking for, so don't worry too much.

god = the creator of everything, that's why i'd call him god

and don't worry, i won't worry at all lol