God doesn't exist (As proven by Mathematics)

[darkota]

Ok I'm gonna get straight to the point. Math is infallible and one of the few things we as humans are mostly sure of.

The chance of any deity existing is 50%, and the chance of any there being no deities at all is also 50%. Now, here's the fun part. Since the chance of "God" existing is 50%, and there are literally thousands upon thousands of gods and goddesses recorded in religions all around the world, from both the past and present(Egyptian Mythology has over 1,000 Gods/Goddesses for example), and each god/goddess must be given the equal right to exist, that means that the chance of any god or goddess existing is far lower than 1% when divided among the 50% chance that any of them could exist.

Basically, this means that the chance of any god from any religion on this planet throughout history existing, is far less than 1% and far, far less than the chance of them not existing. This also leads to the logical answer that all religions and their beliefs are wrong(Majority>Minority) and that while the chance of some omnipotent/present/scient being existing is equal to that of it not existing, the chance of any known religion's belief system being right is negligible.

Hope this helps change people's ignorant and biased belief systems, besides the math, you can also just take your time and really study theology. If you took apart the bible and actually read the various laws made by "god", you'd see that almost all of them(especially in the old testament) promote murder and violence, not love.

[the joint]

Ok I'm gonna get straight to the point. Math is infallible and one of the few things we as humans are mostly sure of.

The chance of any deity existing is 50%, and the chance of any there being no deities at all is also 50%. Now, here's the fun part. Since the chance of "God" existing is 50%, and there are literally thousands upon thousands of gods and goddesses recorded in religions all around the world, from both the past and present(Egyptian Mythology has over 1,000 Gods/Goddesses for example), and each god/goddess must be given the equal right to exist, that means that the chance of any god or goddess existing is far lower than 1% when divided among the 50% chance that any of them could exist.

Basically, this means that the chance of any god from any religion on this planet throughout history existing, is far less than 1% and far, far less than the chance of them not existing. This also leads to the logical answer that all religions and their beliefs are wrong(Majority>Minority) and that while the chance of some omnipotent/present/scient being existing is equal to that of it not existing, the chance of any known religion's belief system being right is negligible.

Hope this helps change people's ignorant and biased belief systems, besides the math, you can also just take your time and really study theology. If you took apart the bible and actually read the various laws made by "god", you'd see that almost all of them(especially in the old testament) promote murder and violence, not love.

Responding sequentially:

1)  Yes, math is infallible, but it's not without limitations (e.g. the problem of undecidability, etc.).  The scope of a purely mathematical approach is insufficient for commenting upon the matter as it leaves us without a means of synthesizing mathematics with the rest of reality.

2)  The chance that God exists is not 50/50.  Either a Creator exists or it doesn't.  Accordingly, the rest of what you say in this paragraph is irrelevant.  Oh, and "chance" is simply another word for "unknown causation" since the probability function(s) guiding so-called 'chance' events is concrete.

3)  This paragraph is also completely irrelevant because it follows your line of reasoning about 'chance.'

4)  You have no idea what you're talking about.  Why are you bringing morality into this when it is totally irrelevant to the question of whether God exists?

Now, I'll ask you something:  If it were demonstrated that reality is a mental construct (i,e, made of/from mind), would you be inclined to believe in intelligent design?  Because, well...I can.

[darkota]

Ok I'm gonna get straight to the point. Math is infallible and one of the few things we as humans are mostly sure of.

The chance of any deity existing is 50%, and the chance of any there being no deities at all is also 50%. Now, here's the fun part. Since the chance of "God" existing is 50%, and there are literally thousands upon thousands of gods and goddesses recorded in religions all around the world, from both the past and present(Egyptian Mythology has over 1,000 Gods/Goddesses for example), and each god/goddess must be given the equal right to exist, that means that the chance of any god or goddess existing is far lower than 1% when divided among the 50% chance that any of them could exist.

Basically, this means that the chance of any god from any religion on this planet throughout history existing, is far less than 1% and far, far less than the chance of them not existing. This also leads to the logical answer that all religions and their beliefs are wrong(Majority>Minority) and that while the chance of some omnipotent/present/scient being existing is equal to that of it not existing, the chance of any known religion's belief system being right is negligible.

Hope this helps change people's ignorant and biased belief systems, besides the math, you can also just take your time and really study theology. If you took apart the bible and actually read the various laws made by "god", you'd see that almost all of them(especially in the old testament) promote murder and violence, not love.

Responding sequentially:

1)  Yes, math is infallible, but it's not without limitations (e.g. the problem of undecidability, etc.).  The scope of a purely mathematical approach is insufficient for commenting upon the matter as it leaves us without a means of synthesizing mathematics with the rest of reality.

2)  The chance that God exists is not 50/50.  Either a Creator exists or it doesn't.  Accordingly, the rest of what you say in this paragraph is irrelevant.  Oh, and "chance" is simply another word for "unknown causation" since the probability function(s) guiding so-called 'chance' events is concrete.

3)  This paragraph is also completely irrelevant because it follows your line of reasoning about 'chance.'

4)  You have no idea what you're talking about.  Why are you bringing morality into this when it is totally irrelevant to the question of whether God exists?

Now, I'll ask you something:  If it were demonstrated that reality is a mental construct (i,e, made of/from mind), would you be inclined to believe in intelligent design?  Because, well...I can.

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

Morality plays a huge role in God's(Using the Abrahamic God as an ex) intended role, in the bible he is characterized by his followers as being a loving god, when in actuality, his actions (particularly in the Old Testament) show otherwise. That in itself puts doubt on the probability of God's existence or nature. Look, if you haven't at least studied Theology, then don't bother trying to argue, you look foolish, and frankly like a child with no schooling trying to appear intelligent.

I'm also not sure where you come up with Absolute Truth for. Absolute Truth is wrong, if anything Relative Truth is more accurate. Nothing is 100%, so you cannot state either or, you must use probability, and that makes it impossible for us to know whether "reality" is a construct of our minds or not. Where are you going with this? Lol.

[pedrog]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

[darkota]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

[the joint]

Ok I'm gonna get straight to the point. Math is infallible and one of the few things we as humans are mostly sure of.

The chance of any deity existing is 50%, and the chance of any there being no deities at all is also 50%. Now, here's the fun part. Since the chance of "God" existing is 50%, and there are literally thousands upon thousands of gods and goddesses recorded in religions all around the world, from both the past and present(Egyptian Mythology has over 1,000 Gods/Goddesses for example), and each god/goddess must be given the equal right to exist, that means that the chance of any god or goddess existing is far lower than 1% when divided among the 50% chance that any of them could exist.

Basically, this means that the chance of any god from any religion on this planet throughout history existing, is far less than 1% and far, far less than the chance of them not existing. This also leads to the logical answer that all religions and their beliefs are wrong(Majority>Minority) and that while the chance of some omnipotent/present/scient being existing is equal to that of it not existing, the chance of any known religion's belief system being right is negligible.

Hope this helps change people's ignorant and biased belief systems, besides the math, you can also just take your time and really study theology. If you took apart the bible and actually read the various laws made by "god", you'd see that almost all of them(especially in the old testament) promote murder and violence, not love.

Responding sequentially:

1)  Yes, math is infallible, but it's not without limitations (e.g. the problem of undecidability, etc.).  The scope of a purely mathematical approach is insufficient for commenting upon the matter as it leaves us without a means of synthesizing mathematics with the rest of reality.

2)  The chance that God exists is not 50/50.  Either a Creator exists or it doesn't.  Accordingly, the rest of what you say in this paragraph is irrelevant.  Oh, and "chance" is simply another word for "unknown causation" since the probability function(s) guiding so-called 'chance' events is concrete.

3)  This paragraph is also completely irrelevant because it follows your line of reasoning about 'chance.'

4)  You have no idea what you're talking about.  Why are you bringing morality into this when it is totally irrelevant to the question of whether God exists?

Now, I'll ask you something:  If it were demonstrated that reality is a mental construct (i,e, made of/from mind), would you be inclined to believe in intelligent design?  Because, well...I can.

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

Morality plays a huge role in God's(Using the Abrahamic God as an ex) intended role, in the bible he is characterized by his followers as being a loving god, when in actuality, his actions (particularly in the Old Testament) show otherwise. That in itself puts doubt on the probability of God's existence or nature. Look, if you haven't at least studied Theology, then don't bother trying to argue, you look foolish, and frankly like a child with no schooling trying to appear intelligent.

I'm also not sure where you come up with Absolute Truth for. Absolute Truth is wrong, if anything Relative Truth is more accurate. Nothing is 100%, so you cannot state either or, you must use probability, and that makes it impossible for us to know whether "reality" is a construct of our minds or not. Where are you going with this? Lol.

Responding sequentially:

1)    So then, what's the probability that you exist?  Still 50/50?  You either exist or you don't.  Arbitrarily ascribing probabilities as you did increases the absurdity of your argument by 67%.

Seriously, though, I have absolutely no idea why you think you can just randomly ascribe some probability to something you haven't even confirmed to exist in the first place.  That's just all kinds of weird.

Think of it this way: consider a probability function as a law governing so-called 'chance' events.  Because we can observe these events but not the probability function itself,  things can appear random or probabilistic.  But really, the probability function itself is the causal mechanism for these events.

2)  The point here is that whether you agree or disagree with the morality of any given religious text says absolutely nothing about whether God exists.  Liking or disliking something does not cause things to exist or not exist.

I'd hold off on the trite comments if I were you.  Your ramblings are almost as incoherent as they are contradictory, and I'd like to remind you of the irony in using the contents of the Bible to support your argument when your argument calls the contents of the Bible into question.  That's what tends to happen when people are ignorant yet take pride in their belief they are not.  I would hold off on your assumptions about me and redirect your focus back onto your horrid line of reasoning if I were you.  That's the issue you need to address, not me.

3)  When you say "absolute truth is wrong," are you saying that absolutely or relatively?  On one hand, if you claim to be making an absolute statement, then you contradict your own argument.  On the other hand, if you claim to be making a relative argument, then you skip completely past contradiction and straight to irrelevancy (because you wouldn't be making a claim one way or the other about absolute truth).  Again, I would listen if I were you.

The existence of absolute truth is simply demonstrated, for any attempt to deny absolute truth only reaffirms its existence.  Saying "there is no absolute truth" is equivalent to saying "it is the absolute truth there is no absolute truth."  Similarly, saying "truth is only relative" is equivalent to saying "the absolute truth is that truth is only relative."  Furthermore, saying "there is more than one absolute truth" is equivalent to saying "it is the absolute truth that there is more than one absolute truth."

This is what you need to understand:  Absolute truth is absolute, relative to conditional phenomena, and conditional phenomena is relative to both other conditional phenomena and to absolute truth.

[the joint]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.  Sorry for the ad hominem, but seriously...are you reading what you're typing?

Edit: Here, I'll help point out your flaw.  It would be true if you said that, due to your lack of individual knowledge on the subject, the chances of you guessing correctly whether God exists is 50/50.  But, the truth is that God either exists or doesn't, and chance is completely removed from consideration.  You're confusing your ability to wager on God's existence with whether He in fact does or does not exist.

As an analogy, let's say I take two cups and place a penny under one of them; you don't see me do this.  Then, I invite you into the room and ask you to guess what cup is hiding the penny.  What is certain is that I placed the penny under cup A rather than cup B, but only I know this and you don't.  The chances of you correctly guessing which cup is hiding the penny is 50/50, but it is 100% certain that the penny is actually under cup A. 

[(oYo)]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

The lottery ticket analogy is actually incorrect. Both tickets can lose, since the outcome is not based on choosing one of the tickets as a winner but a random sequence of numbers, which neither ticket holder may have chosen. Even though there are only two tickets in said scenario, the probability of either one winning remains the same if there were 10 or 10,000,000 tickets. But the lottery example is not a valid comparison to something like the existence of god, since there is an equal chance for any possible sequence of numbers to be picked for the lottery, yet all the possible arguments for or against the existence of god are not equally valid and therefore do not deserve equal consideration.

Here's a simple example of what I mean. One could argue that Santa Clause may or may not exist as well. Just because there are two possible answers does not equate the probability of him actually existing as being 50%. It only means there are two possible answers. In actuality the real possibility of him existing is 0%.

[polarhei]

Before the proven. In the far east, We don't think the being exists.

[pedrog]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

The lottery ticket analogy is actually incorrect. Both tickets can lose, since the outcome is not based on choosing one of the tickets as a winner but a random sequence of numbers, which neither ticket holder may have chosen. Even though there are only two tickets in said scenario, the probability of either one winning remains the same if there were 10 or 10,000,000 tickets. But the lottery example is not a valid comparison to something like the existence of god, since there is an equal chance for any possible sequence of numbers to be picked for the lottery, yet all the possible arguments for or against the existence of god are not equally valid and therefore do not deserve equal consideration.

Here's a simple example of what I mean. One could argue that Santa Clause may or may not exist as well. Just because there are two possible answers does not equate the probability of him actually existing as being 50%. It only means there are two possible answers. In actuality the real possibility of him existing is 0%.

I was trying to demonstrate how probability works, it was not meant to be an analogy, in lottery read raffle and now it is correct...

[darkota]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

The lottery ticket analogy is actually incorrect. Both tickets can lose, since the outcome is not based on choosing one of the tickets as a winner but a random sequence of numbers, which neither ticket holder may have chosen. Even though there are only two tickets in said scenario, the probability of either one winning remains the same if there were 10 or 10,000,000 tickets. But the lottery example is not a valid comparison to something like the existence of god, since there is an equal chance for any possible sequence of numbers to be picked for the lottery, yet all the possible arguments for or against the existence of god are not equally valid and therefore do not deserve equal consideration.

Here's a simple example of what I mean. One could argue that Santa Clause may or may not exist as well. Just because there are two possible answers does not equate the probability of him actually existing as being 50%. It only means there are two possible answers. In actuality the real possibility of him existing is 0%.

I see your point. The arguments for or against determine the probability of their existence of lack of...In that case, the arguments against say, God's or Santa Claus's existence heavily outweigh the arguments for their existence, which would make the probability of either of them existing lower than 50%...

But, can't it be looked at both ways? For ex: Timmy believes the tooth fairy exists, Johnny doesn't. While the arguments against the toothfairy's existence outweigh those for it's existence, wouldn't you still be able to say, just Timmy believing in the tooth fairy and Johnny not believing, make both beliefs equal since it's practically their opinion and something that may not be grounded in fact. Or, I may just be thinking too much in abstract terms, when I think about the for or against the existence of God debate, I think that since nothing is 100% sure, then all arguments for or against are equal. But, then again it may be irrational of me to think that way.

[Malin Keshar]

maths say nothing about reality. There is no way to proof anything about reality using only mathematical arguments, so your topic is useless

[darkota]

maths say nothing about reality. There is no way to proof anything about reality using only mathematical arguments, so your topic is useless

Your sentence and a half makes no sense. What is reality? Oh yea, that question is virtually unanswerable. If you can't even say what reality is with 99% surety, then you have no basis for saying "maths say nothing about reality"...

Math is one of the few things in this world that we're mostly sure of, hence why it's the foundation for a large array of scientific theories, inventions, etc. It's practically the starting point or base(Because we are sure of it's validity) upon which other things are formed...

[the joint]

maths say nothing about reality. There is no way to proof anything about reality using only mathematical arguments, so your topic is useless

Your sentence and a half makes no sense. What is reality? Oh yea, that question is virtually unanswerable. If you can't even say what reality is with 99% surety, then you have no basis for saying "maths say nothing about reality"...

Math is one of the few things in this world that we're mostly sure of, hence why it's the foundation for a large array of scientific theories, inventions, etc. It's practically the starting point or base(Because we are sure of it's validity) upon which other things are formed...

As stated, he is correct by virtue of the word "only."  You need to go back and read what I posted in response to you. I specifically mentioned that pure mathematics is plagued by (for example) the problem of undecidability.  The scope of philosophy is more general than the scope of pure mathematics and thereby carries a greater capacity for comprehensive explanation.  However, it is true that any and all theories and conclusions are mathematical constructs.   But, an overarching philosophy is required to apply mathematics to, and relate it with, the rest of reality.

[BADecker]

Math is simply a language devised by people, as a method that they can use for describing and working with nature and the universe. As people are flawed in everything they do - as can be seen by the many mistakes they make - even so math is flawed as well. Consider, man hasn't been able to find the answer to pi using math. He hasn't even been able to determine if there is an answer or not... not with certainty, that is. So, how can math determine whether or not God exists... with certainty, that is?

[ObscureBean]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.  Sorry for the ad hominem, but seriously...are you reading what you're typing?

Edit: Here, I'll help point out your flaw.  It would be true if you said that, due to your lack of individual knowledge on the subject, the chances of you guessing correctly whether God exists is 50/50.  But, the truth is that God either exists or doesn't, and chance is completely removed from consideration.  You're confusing your ability to wager on God's existence with whether He in fact does or does not exist.

As an analogy, let's say I take two cups and place a penny under one of them; you don't see me do this.  Then, I invite you into the room and ask you to guess what cup is hiding the penny.  What is certain is that I placed the penny under cup A rather than cup B, but only I know this and you don't.  The chances of you correctly guessing which cup is hiding the penny is 50/50, but it is 100% certain that the penny is actually under cup A. 

@the joint Hey I'm reading your comments in this thread and I see you haven't made any progress outside your comfort zone since our last bout. Your ego seems to have grown a bit though 
Anyway I'm not here to start another session (unless you're ready to enforce your theory in which case I'd take you seriously ), I just thought I'd chime in on this one specific point. While I cannot know the thought processes that led darkota to his comment about the 50-50 chance of God existing, superficially his words allude to a logic slightly more 'fundamental' than the one you're using here.
Unrelated: One thing I couldn't help notice, your analogy in the last paragraph seems to imbue you with some rather special knowledge indeed 

[Lethn]

I know how to prove God doesn't exist, I can't see him, currently due to this blatant lack of evidence sun worshippers currently have more credibility than most major religions combined. If God truly existed they would show him off every opportunity they got. Also, as George Carlin once rightly pointed out, if God is all knowing and all powerful then why the fuck does he need so much money? Even people who say they believe in God should at least be able to wake up and smell that bullshit but they still have no problem pissing away all their money to some organisation that goes around molesting children and interfering in politics.

I also enjoy how when something horrible happens God is suddenly out of the picture and somehow incapable of helping, the devil makes a great scapegoat for this kind of thing and it seems considering the amount of bad things that happen out in the world that he has more pull around here than God does so what does that say about the prick? In all seriousness darkota your arguments have been made before, it's the same thing about praying, there's a 50/50 chance that it will actually do something and what happens is religious people deliberately choose to ignore all of this.

[darkota]

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

It is called a true dichotomy, the probability for each result does not have to be 50%, for example, you bought a lottery ticket, you either win the lottery or you do not win the lottery, the probability of each result is not 50%, unless there are only 2 tickets.

You cannot calculate the probability of a god to exist because we don't have any bases to support such calculation.

You answered it yourself with the lottery ticket analogy, there are only 2 sides of the equation, god exists or he doesn't, which makes the probability of either one, 50%.

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read.  Sorry for the ad hominem, but seriously...are you reading what you're typing?

Edit: Here, I'll help point out your flaw.  It would be true if you said that, due to your lack of individual knowledge on the subject, the chances of you guessing correctly whether God exists is 50/50.  But, the truth is that God either exists or doesn't, and chance is completely removed from consideration.  You're confusing your ability to wager on God's existence with whether He in fact does or does not exist.

As an analogy, let's say I take two cups and place a penny under one of them; you don't see me do this.  Then, I invite you into the room and ask you to guess what cup is hiding the penny.  What is certain is that I placed the penny under cup A rather than cup B, but only I know this and you don't.  The chances of you correctly guessing which cup is hiding the penny is 50/50, but it is 100% certain that the penny is actually under cup A.  

@the joint Hey I'm reading your comments in this thread and I see you haven't made any progress outside your comfort zone since our last bout. Your ego seems to have grown a bit though  
Anyway I'm not here to start another session (unless you're ready to enforce your theory in which case I'd take you seriously ), I just thought I'd chime in on this one specific point. While I cannot know the thought processes that led darkota to his comment about the 50-50 chance of God existing, superficially his words allude to a logic slightly more 'fundamental' than the one you're using here.
Unrelated: One thing I couldn't help notice, your analogy in the last paragraph seems to imbue you with some rather special knowledge indeed  

I came to the 50/50 chance because of the reason that nothing can be 100% sure, then we must give equal say to the arguments for and against God, no matter how stupid some may seem(especially the ones for). In that case, that would mean while there's a 50% chance of God either existing or not, the chance of any god/goddess from any known religion in the history of the world existing is far, far lower than 50% since you have to divide them all equally amongst that 50% chance they have of existing.

[darkota]

Ok I'm gonna get straight to the point. Math is infallible and one of the few things we as humans are mostly sure of.

The chance of any deity existing is 50%, and the chance of any there being no deities at all is also 50%. Now, here's the fun part. Since the chance of "God" existing is 50%, and there are literally thousands upon thousands of gods and goddesses recorded in religions all around the world, from both the past and present(Egyptian Mythology has over 1,000 Gods/Goddesses for example), and each god/goddess must be given the equal right to exist, that means that the chance of any god or goddess existing is far lower than 1% when divided among the 50% chance that any of them could exist.

Basically, this means that the chance of any god from any religion on this planet throughout history existing, is far less than 1% and far, far less than the chance of them not existing. This also leads to the logical answer that all religions and their beliefs are wrong(Majority>Minority) and that while the chance of some omnipotent/present/scient being existing is equal to that of it not existing, the chance of any known religion's belief system being right is negligible.

Hope this helps change people's ignorant and biased belief systems, besides the math, you can also just take your time and really study theology. If you took apart the bible and actually read the various laws made by "god", you'd see that almost all of them(especially in the old testament) promote murder and violence, not love.

Responding sequentially:

1)  Yes, math is infallible, but it's not without limitations (e.g. the problem of undecidability, etc.).  The scope of a purely mathematical approach is insufficient for commenting upon the matter as it leaves us without a means of synthesizing mathematics with the rest of reality.

2)  The chance that God exists is not 50/50.  Either a Creator exists or it doesn't.  Accordingly, the rest of what you say in this paragraph is irrelevant.  Oh, and "chance" is simply another word for "unknown causation" since the probability function(s) guiding so-called 'chance' events is concrete.

3)  This paragraph is also completely irrelevant because it follows your line of reasoning about 'chance.'

4)  You have no idea what you're talking about.  Why are you bringing morality into this when it is totally irrelevant to the question of whether God exists?

Now, I'll ask you something:  If it were demonstrated that reality is a mental construct (i,e, made of/from mind), would you be inclined to believe in intelligent design?  Because, well...I can.

You're not making any sense. " Either a Creator exists or it doesn't", that's called probability and the chance has to be equal. This is basic math you learn from elementary/primary school...

Morality plays a huge role in God's(Using the Abrahamic God as an ex) intended role, in the bible he is characterized by his followers as being a loving god, when in actuality, his actions (particularly in the Old Testament) show otherwise. That in itself puts doubt on the probability of God's existence or nature. Look, if you haven't at least studied Theology, then don't bother trying to argue, you look foolish, and frankly like a child with no schooling trying to appear intelligent.

I'm also not sure where you come up with Absolute Truth for. Absolute Truth is wrong, if anything Relative Truth is more accurate. Nothing is 100%, so you cannot state either or, you must use probability, and that makes it impossible for us to know whether "reality" is a construct of our minds or not. Where are you going with this? Lol.

Responding sequentially:

1)    So then, what's the probability that you exist?  Still 50/50?  You either exist or you don't.  Arbitrarily ascribing probabilities as you did increases the absurdity of your argument by 67%.

Seriously, though, I have absolutely no idea why you think you can just randomly ascribe some probability to something you haven't even confirmed to exist in the first place.  That's just all kinds of weird.

Think of it this way: consider a probability function as a law governing so-called 'chance' events.  Because we can observe these events but not the probability function itself,  things can appear random or probabilistic.  But really, the probability function itself is the causal mechanism for these events.

2)  The point here is that whether you agree or disagree with the morality of any given religious text says absolutely nothing about whether God exists.  Liking or disliking something does not cause things to exist or not exist.

I'd hold off on the trite comments if I were you.  Your ramblings are almost as incoherent as they are contradictory, and I'd like to remind you of the irony in using the contents of the Bible to support your argument when your argument calls the contents of the Bible into question.  That's what tends to happen when people are ignorant yet take pride in their belief they are not.  I would hold off on your assumptions about me and redirect your focus back onto your horrid line of reasoning if I were you.  That's the issue you need to address, not me.

3)  When you say "absolute truth is wrong," are you saying that absolutely or relatively?  On one hand, if you claim to be making an absolute statement, then you contradict your own argument.  On the other hand, if you claim to be making a relative argument, then you skip completely past contradiction and straight to irrelevancy (because you wouldn't be making a claim one way or the other about absolute truth).  Again, I would listen if I were you.

The existence of absolute truth is simply demonstrated, for any attempt to deny absolute truth only reaffirms its existence.  Saying "there is no absolute truth" is equivalent to saying "it is the absolute truth there is no absolute truth."  Similarly, saying "truth is only relative" is equivalent to saying "the absolute truth is that truth is only relative."  Furthermore, saying "there is more than one absolute truth" is equivalent to saying "it is the absolute truth that there is more than one absolute truth."

This is what you need to understand:  Absolute truth is absolute, relative to conditional phenomena, and conditional phenomena is relative to both other conditional phenomena and to absolute truth.

I hoped you realized by now that I've stressed the point, that nothing is 100% on this world. Therefore, Absolute Truth may be unknowable or not exist(Read the word "may" again please..)

Using the bible to show the irony presented in their is perfectly logical, your arguments are not however. If according to the bible Jesus Christ is God, and promotes Love which strictly contracts with the rules and commands by the God of the Old Testament, then I can say something is wrong there, for how can someone who is apparently one and whole with the other, be so different.

I can also infer, based on that, that the "God" of the bible is either not 100% Good(Based upon his atrocious commands in the Old Testament) or he does not exist.

Again, you cannot be sure of something 100%, so you Cannot say "You either exist or you don't". You Must use probability. I don' think you understand that nothing we know can ever be assured 100% as fact, or truth, therefore probability must come in to play with everything we do. If anything, the only Absolute Truth may be that "Nothing is ever 100% assured of", as that reflects that we as humans cannot make a claim of anything as being a 100% (Which is what you're trying to do).

Your arguments are incoherent...

Let's get a record of what you've argued so far,

1) You've argued that there must "and" "or", which is not true since nothing is 100%, and we must use probability in every decision we make.
2) You've argued that I cannot use morality of God for whether he exists or doesn't, again, which isn't true as if God is praised and looked upon as being a being capable of doing only good, and the exact opposite is shown throughout the holy text meant to represent his "goodness", I can safely say that there is some hypocrisy there, and that God is not all good(In the bible) which would a test to his very existence.

[nsimmons]

Your arguments are incoherent...