How were Trojans stupid enough to fell for it?
Thank God for Christianity, pagans were so fucking retarded and superstitious.
>>563253
It wasn't IRL anon
Thought it was just a story? what the fuck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMhVh6edP_k
FOR TROY!!
>>563258
>false flagging this hard
>>563279
>ancient Greeks spoke British
>>563258
Christianity is the best Trojan horse ever though.
>>563285
Butthurt atheist detected.
>>563253
Because nobody had ever done it before ya fuckin idiot
>>563287
would you rather have them speak broken ancient greek and add subtitles?
>>563279
all this over some pussy
>>563288
>thinking religion is just about style/culture
It's about the Truth you fucking retard.
Jesus Christ is the Way, Life and the Truth.
He is the Son of God.
>>563293
The Passion did it with Latin and friggin' Aramaic
>>563288
You best not be advocating paganism then.
>>563299
Its also an Asian Religion.
>>563304
That's because based Mel is an extremely dedicated autist and the movie wasn't made with a big studio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ62frK74u0
GOAT swordfight
>>563299
And the truth is there is no god.
>>563318
Proof?
>>563324
There is no detectable indication whatsoever that god exists.
Thus the obvious conclusion is that god does not exist.
>>563279
jesus this is terrible
how'd they manage to make this scene so boring
>>563330
Argument from Cause
Argument from Morality
Argument from Design
Argument from Creation
>>563330
>in the beginning there was nothing
>..and then it exploded!
This is literally what atheists believe.
>>563330
Read "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis you retard.
>>563342
That is not proof, those are autistic abstractions that have been conclusively disproven.
>>563293
Yes.
>audience has to be able to relate to the movie
Hence why 99% of historical movies are dogshit.
>>563341
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpLtXIlkyYA
>>563350
>they are not proof because i say so
They are valid arguments. You have no counter-arguments.
According to Occam's Razor, it's more logical to believe in God than not to.
>>563349
I have, and I disagree with C.S Lewis' conclusions.
Just because someone wrote a book doesn't make them right.
>>563350
>disproven
source?
>>563358
Why have you not provided any alternative?
No smart person ever believed in a literal god as described by any religion ever conceived. What god actually exists is so beyond the man made descriptions of any religion. Dumb fucks cannot figure this out. They take mythology for truth and separate themselves from what god is. Smart fucks don't make these mistakes.
>>563356
My counter-argument is that the universe does not need a create as it is indeed possible for something to come from nothing. Furthermore Thomas Aquinas' argument hinges on Aristotleian metaphysics which with the advent of relativity we know is false.
Additionally there is no universal morality. To take C.S Lewis' example of the Nazis, whilst they're morally reprehensible as far as we are concerned now at the time in Germany what they doing wasn't just considered morally permissible but morally justified as a righteous cause.
>>563372
You still have no provided any alternative, source or citations.
You just sound like an edgy 15 year old atheist.
it's pretty hard to convince your fellow citizens that the idea is bad when everytime you try to speak up, a God sends some ocean snakes to kill you which gets interpreted as you being a blasphemer. Or in Cassandra's case, no one gives a shit what you say.
>>563374
>it is possible for something to come from nothing
Atheists are THIS retarded.
In examining the existence of God, the first question that should be asked is: "Why does anything exist?" Subsequent questions are: Why are we here? Why is there something rather than nothing? In considering the question of God's existence, there are three popularly proposed answers as to why there is something rather than nothing: (1) The universe is all an illusion, nothing actually exists, (2) The universe has always existed, is self-existent (3) The universe was brought into existence by something/someone that is self-existent. Which is the most plausible solution?
The idea that reality is an illusion is primarily a tenet among Eastern religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism. The "reality is an illusion" option was disproved by the philosopher Rene Descartes who argued that if he is thinking, then he must "be," "I think, therefore I am." In other words, "I think, therefore I cannot be an illusion." Illusions require something that is experiencing the illusion. If nothing exists, neither does the illusion. Philosophically, doubting your existence actually proves your existence. "Reality is an illusion" is a self-defeating argument.
There are then only two choices—an eternal universe or an eternal Creator. Something exists. Something cannot come from nothing. Therefore, something has always existed. If the existence of God is denied, an eternal universe is the only other option. To date, all key scientific and philosophical evidence points to the universe having had a beginning. Whatever has a beginning has a cause, and if the universe had a beginning, it had a cause. The fact that the universe had a beginning and is not eternal is demonstrated by evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics, the radiation echo of the big bang, the fact that the universe is expanding, and Einstein's theory of relativity.
>>563382
Further, how could an impersonal, purposeless, meaningless, and amoral universe result in beings who are full of personality and obsessed with purpose, meaning, and morals. Only mind can create mind. Non-life cannot produce life. Unconsciousness cannot produce consciousness. The only logical and reasonable conclusion is that an eternal Creator is the one who is responsible for the creation of the universe. The concept of an eternal universe has been philosophically and scientifically disproven. Therefore, an eternal Creator exists.
With the clear evidence for the existence of God in mind, why are there so many atheists, and are there any grounds for atheism? No, there are not. The essential claim of atheism, "there is no god," is an invalid philosophical statement. Denying the existence of something cannot be proven. In order for it to be proven that God does not exist, someone would have to be in every location in the universe at the same time. In other words, to disprove the existence of God, one would have to be God. The need for an eternal and self-existent Creator can be proven. Atheism cannot be proven.
Another crucial issue to consider is the fact that the acceptance or rejection of the existence of God has more implications for life, action, and morality than any other issue. If atheism is wrong, it will result in unpleasant (to say the least) consequences. With this in view, atheists should produce conclusive and undeniable evidence for the non-existence of God. Atheism cannot accomplish this, and therefore, all atheists can do is hope that they are correct. Eternity is a very long time to be wrong.
>>563383
So, does belief in the existence of God have intellectual warrant? Absolutely. While atheists claim that belief in the existence of God is a psychological crutch, it is in fact atheism that abandons reality in order to fulfill a psychological need. If there is no God, there is no morality, no accountability, and therefore no judgment. If God does not exist, we can do whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want, with no eternal consequences. That is the true motivation behind atheism.
>>563375
You sound like a dumb fuck who believes man-made mythology is the literal truth of reality.
Well, you sound that way because you are.
>>563368
If you want to swap book recommendations I'd recommend Gods Problem by Bart Ehrman since as Aquinas pointed out the problem of evil is the greatest argument against a good god.
>>563380
Welcome to modern physics, you troglodyte.
>>563408
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools"
Enjoy sucking Bill Nye's dick, you retarded Redditor.
>>563356
Occam's Razor is not an indicator of truth fuckbrain
>>563350
>atheist calling someone else autistic
>an eye evolved to be the way it is so that disproves the assertion that there is an intrinsic propensity for life in the universe somehow
Apex kek m8 this is an 18+ board
>>563408
The quantum foam of a vacuum isn't actual, philosophical nothing you fucking mongoloid. Learn what the fuck you're posting about before talking shit and getting hit
>>563408
>being literally stupid
This thread was supposed to be about Troy goddamnit
>>563382
While I agree with you you're fundamentally misunderstanding Buddhism and eastern philosophy
>>563382
How do you go from infinite creator -> morality
>>563427
The eye is horribly designed, son. There's a good reason every other person wears glasses.
If that is the pinnacle of intelligent design, god is a shitty designer.
>>563466
>no you shut the fuck up cosmic dad!
>>563470
>a fucking 3d camera made of jelly and blood is horribly designed
>implying I meant God literally sat down and created eyes in the first place
>completely missing the point
Back to redd
>>563470
Eyes are fucking beautiful, they are the windows to the soul.
Praise God.
>>563408
Oh boy here we go again
another 16 year old who watched a video on youtube about quantum foam and super strings and suddenly he knows everything there is to know about the universe's origin, knows all the different theories and their inconsistencies and comes to /his/ to rebut god with it while ignoring all the problems with sed theories
Maybe this is why moot put off a philosophy board for so long?
>>563477
You see just because something is complex does not make it well designed. However if something breaks all the time and is often faulty from day 1 then it's definitely poorly designed.
>>563472
I'll rephrase it so you have to make less cognitive connections
How do you go from Creator -> Creator who gives a fuck about humans
All your logic has shown is that there was a 'first action', which produced a universe that humans are so far observably an insignificant fraction of. Everything else has an in-universe material cause.
>>563484
>sed
>>563487
When you have a child, why do you care about him/her?
You're fucking retarded.
>>563487
Because the Creator loved us so much that he came into his own creation as a human to teach us in 0~33 AD.
>>563486
Oh my god you fucking retard whether or not the eye is well-designed (like you have some metaphysical standard for eye design anyways) or not is besides the point. the point is the universe has inherent tendency towards life and intelligence and that's extremely suggestive of an originary super intelligence. Evolution and the Absolute are in no way mutually exclusive. Fucking shit like im arguing with a fucking fedora chatbot
>>563495
Literally chemicals in your brain.
You're either a retard or b8 so this is my last post unless you produce something substantial
>>563500
If God doesn't care about us then why the fuck did He die for us on the cross?
I would post a picture of a shrugging, smug anime girl but for some I can't upload photos so please be so kind as to use your imagination for me. Much appreciation.
>>563495
A lot of people have children and do not give a fuck about them, or ever even meet them.
You're assuming god must be benevolent from the outset.
>>563500
>a parents love for its child is chemicals in your brain
>a symphony is just notes, a painting is just oil and color Lmao
The quantitative does not invalidate the qualitative, no matter how many times you marathon Cosmos on a Friday night. Go back to fucking reddit
HOLY FUCKING SHIT THIS THREAD GOT DERAILED SO HARD
>>563507
He didn't ask if it has value, he asked why it happens.
>>563299
I thought the truth is that jesus IS god. is he god or is he the son of god?
>>563498
It doesn't.
By what appears to be exceptional circumstances life has emerged on a sum total of 1 planet out of the entire known universe. If anything this shows that the opposite is true, the universe has a tendancy against life and intelligence.
>>563518
>giving primacy to the void and space rocks because 'theres more of it
>trying to explain away the being that knows itself as Being as some fluke by pointing at space rocks
>still can't explain how a dumb, deaf, and blind universe still managed to fart out consciousness, feeling, and life
What a shit argument.
>>563518
lol look at this retard.
>believes in evolution
>believes in heliocentrism
credibility lost.
>>563514
>implying he can't be both
I'm getting kind of bored BTFOing Christfags over and over again on this site. Could you guys reply with or link me to every 'good' argument for God/ morality / my special snowflake religion's truth and existence so I can just make a website destroying everything at once?
>>563288
Damn, I actually never thought about that. In Europe, unless you're some edgy metal fan, most people don't really care about our pagan ancestors and despite the fact Christianity is as much of a sandnigger religion as Judaism and Islam, people see it as a normal European religion that is good for us. It's funny that in hundred years white European muslims will look back at the current process of the destruction of Europe and won't care about us and think that their life is better now. Perhaps we should just give up and start to embrace Islam.
>>563526
I did explain, and the answer is pure coincidence.
>giving primacy to the void and space rocks because 'theres more of it
Obviously, the thing in question here is the universe. And when 99.9999999999999999999999'% is inhospitable chaos the fact that one small irrelevant planet has by astronomical luck given birth to life seems less compelling.
>>563514
Water can be both a liquid, solid or gas.
Space, time and matter are 3 things.
They are all essential, you can't take away 1 of them or else reality wouldn't function.
Congratulations!
You just understood the Trinity.
>>563324
burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. by your logic everyone, the media, academia, scientists, must except and acknowledge that i was abducted by aliens until some one proves i wasnt. the legal system is now "guilty until proven innocent"
seriously do you just troll by really have no interest in the argument but you see the athiesm/go/allah argument going on in some thread and you know posting "proof?" will get you responses?
ITT: atheists getting BTFO by Christians
>>563545
I already provided arguments proving God.
You haven't provided nothing but shitposts.
>>563542
That's modalist heresy
>>563541
You can't explain the potentiality for life . Coincidence is not an argument you goober, especially since its something you're taking on faith. And ESPECIALLY the forces that actuated life are derived from the same laws that govern the universe on both macro and microcosmic scales. It's all one, but you're trying to tell me the most miraculous part of it is a fluke because it makes you look cool and dark on the internet
Fuckin a can the fedoras on this site celebrate their collective 18th birthday already so we can get some real arguments
>>563356
the failure of occams razor is it relies on the definition of "simple." people interpret simple in different ways. god made everything in the universe sounds simple but the bible can sound really contradictory so in the end science's explanation (which never included god) may sound more simple. the word "simple" is the problem
>>563566
Yes, it is a fluke.
When we have millions of barren space-rocks that seemingly exist for no reason, and 1 planet with intelligent life it can't be chalked up to anything else.
Unless god made the universe unnecessariy vast and empty just for the banter.
>>563577
>thinks the earth is a ball
I can't take you serious anymore.
>>563538
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/
A extremely large collection of 'good' arguments for me being a special snowflake along with links to more websites with collections of probably 'better' special snowflake religion arguments.
Go for your life
>>563577
It's not a fluke if it's derived from the same laws that make everything that isn't a fluke up you absolute fucking mongoloid. There is absolutely no correlation with then fact the universe is a big place and earth is small with "it's all arbitrary chaos Laffo". How many times do I have to repeat myself? If anything you're taking what I'm saying and going the whole other direction, so what makes you right? Because it's 2016?
>>563540
no, jesus encouraged us to act more civilized. muhammad encourages us to act like wild monkeys. google/wiki murder of farkhunda. killing her is essentially what islam teaches. she wasnt killed by extremists. she was killed by you average muslim
>>563597
He's a nihilist, just ignore him.
Atheists believe in subjectivism, relativism and nihilism. They are a self-destructive liberal cult.
>>563549
you mind linking your arguments because i dont see them anywhere. that a weird argument stategy, shutting down my argument not really by logic but claiming you once did it.
>>563546
>Christians being delusional and making claims without real evidence
What a surprise.
>>563549
so this proof you have: im assuming youve shown this to people and now all of academia, obama, the chinese government, everyone in the wold acknowledges it just like everyone today doesnt doubt newtonian mechanics.
>>563610
>Don't believe in god and recognize the observable reality of the universe
>Must be a nihilist
kek
>>563597
I don't get what you're not understanding here. The source of the argument was saying that the universe is naturally inclined towards life and intelligence.
I simply pointed out that it isn't.
>magical sky man created everything
santa is real but every kid is naughty.
>>563636
>physical laws give us life, universe has a tendency towards and potentiality for intelligent complexity
>the universe is a big place... So the universe doesn't have a tendency towards life lmfao
Dude you just can't grasp my argument, stop flailing
>>563253
Europeans fell for the refugee meme so it's hardly surprising.
atheists getting REKT hard
>>563653
It's not just that the universe is a big place. It's that the universe is a big place virtually devoid of any kind of life whatsoever, it simply isn't there.
All the life there is as far as we know is on this one small planet. Saying the universe has a tendancy towards life because a minute fraction of it has life is like saying bleach has a tendancy towards not killing germs because it only kills 99.9% of germs.
>>563479
>that picture
This thread is awful and you Europeans should feel awful.
>>563671
It's also saying the earth doesn't have a tendency to evolve sapient primates because for thousands of years we only existed in Africa and the rest was wilderness. Your argument is incoherent
Also the fact the possibility for life can't be actualized in inhospitable conditions proves absolutely nothing you mongoloid. Jesus Christ how many times I have to say it. You have a hydrogen cloud? OK cool That shits gonna just float around for eternity according to its atomic behavior. you got some organic molecules and a hospitable environment? Cool that shits gonna pump out humans in a few billion years according to ITS atomic interactions. Same laws, different results. The laws give us space as well as life. Universe has a tendency towards life. Chaos that is chaos at its pith absolutely cannot give us order and intelligence. You haven't refuted shit.
>>563671
As much as I dislike siding with an ahtiest, he's right. I'm as Christian as the next guy but I honestly can't sit here and keep reading this.
>Saying the universe has a tendancy towards life because a minute fraction of it has life is like saying bleach has a tendancy towards not killing germs because it only kills 99.9% of germs.
This is an extremely valid argument to what you're saying
Stop before you make us look even worse than westbro already has. It's just that your argument has far too many intrinsic flaws to it that can be explained through natural selection. If you're going to use an argument make sure it has no loopholes/isn't falsifiability and follows a logical concision from it's equally reasonable/logical premisses
>>563716
Yes, it doesn't. Humans likewise only exist because of exceptional circumstances. Had things gone ever so slightly differently something else would be the apex predator. Additionally much of the planet can't sustain human life given that there's more barren wasteland and ocean than there is fertile land.
>Chaos that is chaos at its pith absolutely cannot give us order and intelligence.
Yes, humans are not nearly as intelligent as we often think we are. Our intelligence comes solely from our senses that developed out of a need for survival amongst the chaos. And we're limited solely to perceiving the universe with those senses. There's a reason some animals can see things that we can't and it's because we never hadthe utilitarian need to see such things.
We don't have total universal order and intelligence in the way you're implying.
>>563253
Well, its easy to laught about how obvious the trick was, three thousands years later, but that was the first time ever.
>>563773
>that can be explained with natural selection
>missing the point this hard
You're not getting it either lol. Oh and I'm not even Christian, I don't need your support, go back to Sunday school
>>563279
i thought Ajax went insane and split himself in half with his own axe or something
>>563656
If can't tell if this is the same guy but I'm not sure if it's because I have autism or the guy who made the image has autism.
>>563786
I'm gonna try this one nor time cause you're babbling about completely irrelevant shit
Billiard balls smacking around for eternity will never, ever spontaneously arrange themselves into a complex structure unless there is an ruleset inherent to the billiard balls/particles themselves that actualizes when the conditions are right to produce this complexity. Otherwise they would just smack around for eternity and that's it.
You absolutely cannot deny or handwave this ruleset, this tendency, potentiality, whatever you want to call it, away because we exist so it exists. Your argument is incoherent because it's saying "this thing that obviously happens isn't really a thing because it hasn't happened enough/everywhere"
>>563828
There is a ruleset to the universe, and it's called physics.
However you're making this out to be anthropocentric when really it is totally indifferent to the development of intelligent life. It's not as if intelligent life is anything more than a side effect of the structure of the universe.
The fact that most of the universe, or even this planet would kill you stone dead if you tried to venture into it even with the best technology we have to offer should tell you how much the universe has a tendancy for life.
>>563859
Oh marone you really are a retard. I say physics gives us life and you say "no, that's physics!" I say meaningless chaos cannot give us complex electrochemical structures that know and feel themselves as alive, you start vomiting some bullshit about natural selection like the argument isn't the existence of natural selection in the first place. I'm telling you hostility to life doesn't refute this tendency, you just keep repeating yourself. I can just as easily say the void and space rocks are actually by-products of what's really important, but of course you won't buy that.
I've rephrased this argument 5 fucking times, given you examples and analogies and you still just don't get it. You really earned that fedora m8
>leave a skateboard somewhere
>give it 8 billion years and it will evolve into a plane
This is what atheists literally believe.
>>563898
I'll let you in on a secret, if no one is getting your point but you perhaps it's not because no one is as smart as you but because it's a shitty point.
As I said, life is a side effect of physics. Saying that the universe has a tendency for life because it can potentially emerge given the most exceptional circumstances is like saying the best way to fix a car is to smack it with a hammer. Because maybe, just maybe, by a 1 in a trillion fluke it will correctly align all the parts. Except that's even more likely than life coming into existence in the universe.
>>563814
Because you have bad eyes
Look at his left cheek
The trojan horse could be a true physical concept or a very messed up sociological conception. From a physical aspect it was a way to easily conceal. From a sociological conception it can mean that the greeks in order to enter troy created a device. In order to get the people of troy to say, gee we were always greeks.
>>563925
Tendency towards life doesn't imply benevolence towards life you dip. And nice job pulling those figures out of your ass
>>563933
It shows how the greeks may have entered troy and set up their education for it to finally fall to troy.
>>563942
I never said it did, I simply said it doesn't have a tendency for life in any way whatsoever.
>>563925
The fact it can even emerge in the first place is the whole argument oh my goooooooooood you mong
>>563950
Your whole argument is "shit on earth can kill you and life is kind of rare, boom life debunked" you fucking dipshit goddammit am i being trolled Jesus christ
>>563956
The fact that life can exist is the ultimate evidence for the Christian god as described in the bible?
>>563956
As I said earlier it's possible for bacteria to survive bleach, this does not mean bleach has a tendency for not killing bacteria.
There's a million and one things that are possible, this does not mean they happen because of anything more than exceptional luck.
>>563253
A few were skeptical of Greeks bearing gifts, but Poseidon sent serpents to de our those nay-sayers.
In the Odyssey many of the Trojans could here the rattling of spears and sheilds coming from inside the horse, but they just wanted the war to be over so bad that they pushed it out of mind.
>>563963
I've never argued once for a personal, Christian god as described in the Bible. Don't go propping up straw men. The only words I've ever used were "originary super intelligence"
>>563971
You keep harping about the rarity of life's actualization when my argument is about it's potentiality in the first place. You're. Not. Fucking. Getting. It.
>>563984
> the point is the universe has inherent tendency towards life and intelligence and that's extremely suggestive of an originary super intelligence.
Your arguments after this have been mostly terrible but you're basing it all on this point which makes no sense anyway
Can you explain how the fact that life can exists points towards that it must have been created (by an intelligence that is alive or not??)
>>563961
Life isn't just kind of rare. Life is so exceptionally uncommon that you'd have better odds of curing a headache by lobotomizing yourself than life developing independently.
It's no wonder some people chalk it up to a miracle. Because the universe is so incomprehensibly inhospitable the birth and survival of life is nothing short of astonishing.
>>564000
Did I say life itself was created? Can you explain to me how a fundamentally chaotic and non intelligent universe creates mind? It can't you dip, there must be intelligence inherent in the cosmos in the first place for intelligence to be actualized
>>564016
First of all stop talking like you actually know how much life there is or isn't in the universe. Second of all you keep repeating the same shit. Tendency towards life does not imply benevolence towards life. You got a fax number I can send this too? Jesus Mary and joseph
>>563999
I am getting it. You just don't understand why it's a stupid argument.
I fully own up to the potential of life, I'm just saying it's an exceptional side-effect that's even more incredibly unlikely that smoking a joint curing cancer. It's obviously not built into the universe like it's supposed to happen, otherwise it wouldn't be so rare.
>>564020
>there must be intelligence inherent in the cosmos in the first place for intelligence to be actualized
That sentence makes no sense, think about it
I would also suggest that the very minuscule chance of order being created temporarily in a system of chaos makes more sense than what you're suggesting. I'm still not really sure what you're suggesting though, that there was an intelligence that didn't create anything but was a source for other intelligences? Please explain your thoughts
>>563716
Why do you think life is such a special phenomena in the grand scheme of things (beyond value we ascribe to it) if you agree it is just the sum of physical interactions just like anything else?
>>564039
And once again, tendency towards life is not proved by proliferation of life, but the existence of life itself. Your argument does not follow
>>564024
>First of all stop talking like you actually know how much life there is or isn't in the universe.
As far as we know there is one planet that life has emerged on. And given what a stroke of luck that was we're almost certainly not going to find another one.
As I've said, there is no tendency of life, as a matter of fact the opposite is true. What there is, is an infinitely tiny potential chance of it maybe emerging which is about as relevant as the 0.01% of bacteria that survives cleaning the toilet.
>>564042
It is impossible for true, honest-to-god chaos cannot create order because that's what fucking chaos means. X is not Y. Life evolved according to laws that actuate it when the conditions are right. CHAOS CANNOT DO THIS.
>>564048
Because it exists in the first place, in a universe that was "meant" to just be billiard balls smacking around. which absolutely does not follow. oh my goood
>>563984
The straw man is a fascinating theory. Lets put this theory in play. Instead of religion lets talk about money. Instead of God lets talk about who has the most money. Physical not spiritual. So you are well of, you have two children. For the most part no one sees you as having money because you preserve the custom. Its like ehh, thats nothing. So one child says I want my inheritance in the living. The other one doesnt pay attention nor seems to worry. So the one that wants money begins to trouble you psychologically so as to form a dependence. Sooner or later he has you believing you had nothing. And never have so as to keep forming a psychological dependence. Then to make himself feel good he pays for everything. This is the plate of jacob and in reality the one that was kept in the dark was Esau. Jacob was to busy looking over his shoulders into the finances of the patriarch, Esau was doing what he always did. Be with the wilderness. Jacob took Esaus soup and did a trade off. Because he already had taken over the finances.
>>564051
The bit you seem to be struggling with is this.
You seem to think the fact something happens at all, no matter how rarely, means there's a tendency for that thing to happen. I'm saying that's retarded because the universe makes it as hard as possible for that thing to happen, so it's no more of a tendency than any other rare side effect.
If life was relatively common, then there would be a clear tendency for life. But this is observably not the case.
>>563479
>Carrots help your eyesight
that's wrong though.
>>564076
This isn't his argument dude.
As far as I can tell he's saying "The laws of physics exist, therefore someone must have designed them."
>>564076
And you still don't get the fact were not talking some simple statistical anomaly, a literal fluke of nature, like frogs raining on some bumfuck village, in which case you'd be perfectly right. You still can't tell me why this incredibly hostile universe should have a ruleset for life in the first place. We're not talking just rare natural phenomena, we're talking something that is the complete antithesis to the system that produced it in the first place. Life isn't a frog storm. It's being that knows itself as being. Consciousness is a phenomenon of an absolutely higher order, that runs counter to entropy. And a universe producing a phenomenon like that when it's just supposed to be clouds and space rocks floating around for eternity is an absurd proposition.
You must explain this potentiality in a better way than "hurr I die if I don't eat anything hurr" or you must concede life has a bigger role than you're granting it
Is there a sticky for learning ancient greek or historical languages in general?
Any recommended books?
>>564110
1. Life is not as special as you think it is
2. Intelligence existing does not mean that there had to be an intelligence present when the universe began (if it ever began). Who created that intelligence?
>>563479
No nigga if you're diabetic you should stay off carbs to be cured.
>>563540
I respect our pagan ancestors. But Christianity carried Europe to its height. It's possible to be one and respect both.
>>564134
Oh yes it is. Philosophically speaking. Quantitative giving rise to the qualitative. Dead, inert matter giving rise to living, feeling matter. Nonmind giving rise to mind. Even from a scientific standpoint this is absolutely a phenomenon that begs for a root explanation, not simply descriptions of how it evolves and develops over time.
It does not prove it but it suggests it. far more intuitively and reasonably than this reality were living in suggesting bland arbitrary chaos at the heart of things
Hey, now were getting somewhere. I don't know what's outside the closed system that is the universe, but I think it is fundamentally of the same nature as consciousness. As above, so below
>>564110
Not that guy but I think you're making an extremely subjective appraisal of consciousness and life.
To me, life and consciousness just appears to be another set of chaotic interactions, to you it seems to be indicative of design and order.
We really don't have enough knowledge regarding how material produces consciousness to be certain about one or the other. Hence the whole mind-body problem.
>>564126
No sticky, but if you want to learn Ancient Greek, go to amazon and get the books Reading Greek.
t. Classics student.
>>564153
My whole argument hinges on the apparent differences and irreconcileability of consciousness with inert, dead matter you goof. Way to misintepret
>>564156
Cheers
>>564110
That universe doesn't have rules that have been imposed on it. The universe has naturally occurring patterns that we has humans describe and explain with the laws of physics. You're looking at it backwards, because we're just trying to explain what we see with our very limited senses rather than discovering that the universe has rigid laws.
And on that note human consciousness isn't a higher order. That's similar to what I was talking about earlier when I said humans think they're a lot more intelligent than they really are. And this is because of those limited senses, we only perceive the universe in a way that would have been beneficial for survival rather than as any kind of supernatural gift.
>And a universe producing a phenomenon like that when it's just supposed to be clouds and space rocks floating around for eternity is an absurd proposition.
I totally agree. The fact that life has emerged in such a hostile environment is nothing short of absurd. It's truly so mind-bogglingly astonishing absurd really is the word for it.
>>564152
I guess we just disagree on the nature of consciousness and how likely/unlikely it is that it just happened to be a random fluke
If this post>>563716 was you are you saying that you don't think "some organic molecules and a hospitable environment" would ever come about without an originating intelligence? The post itself admits that life is an unavoidable consequence of that system
>>564152
>I don't know how consciousness and qualia form, therefore God
This is lightning bolts = Zeus tier thinking. You're filling in gaps in knowledge with God.
I don't claim to be certain that the universe is 100% physicalist, (who knows maybe a God is the designer of consciousness?) but there really isn't anything there to suggest a higher power
>>564179
Conditioned material reality cannot account for its existence. "Naturally occurring patterns" is no argument. Of course to thebuniverse everything proceeds naturally, but we have no idea why what is natural should be this way instead of another way.
The appraisal of consciousness as a higher order is not based on subjective valuations of human intelligence but the very existence of qualitative states in a dead universe in the first place
>>564189
No.
>I don't know how consciousness and qualia form. Therefore consciousness
>>564201
By God I meant this "higher consciousness" you've been speaking of, no religious connotation
>>564187
I never, ever once argued God literally came down and created life on this planet or any other one. Everything occurs naturally according to patterns of behavior we conceptualize as physical laws. What conditioned these patterns of behavior must be of the nature of the intelligence these behaviors are "tuned" to spit out, otherwise you're telling me a dumb universe spit out what shouldn't exist. nothing is a fluke when we are speaking of reality and its underlying rulesets, everything is conditioned and life is as conditioned as hydrogen clouds
>>564216
Well yeah then. If science can intuitively explain and demonstrate how consciousness is derived from dead processes, though I can't imagine you that's the case, I'll concede the point but from where im standing right now, It's your position that is the stretch
>>564196
Yes it can, we've known about this thing called natural selection for quite some time now.
>Naturally occurring patterns" is no argument.
That wasn't my argument, my argument was that you seem to be looking at the laws of physics in reverse. As laws that are imposed on the universe, rather than manmade descriptions of the universe. Which is simply a fact. The reason the universe has patterns to begin with is because all particles more or less behave the same as others of their type. Giving the universe a very strong level of symmetry that can be accounted for in short formulas. The shocking homogenity of the universe means that's it's not that hard to imagine that a mass of matter gradually aligned itself like this. As opposed to if the whole universe was composed intelligently like a painting, there would be much more diversity to it, that could only be described with formulas as long as novels.
>The appraisal of consciousness as a higher order is not based on subjective valuations of human intelligence but the very existence of qualitative states in a dead universe in the first place
As I say, it's astonishingly impressive that life has emerged. But it's not as special as you seem to think.
>>563600
Yeah, Christianity was never violent. Jesus never advocated taking up your sword against your family.
>>564264
That's not what he meant.
What that passage meant was that the advent of Christianity would cause much division and violence (which it did) rather than that Jesus wants much division and violence.
>>564261
Oh man.
For 100+ posts I've been arguing that the issue is what conditioned these particles to behave they do in the first place. I never said physical laws exist outside of scientific models. What they describe, however obviously exists. I'm fucking baffled at how thick you are.
>>564238
I doubt you can explain what this "higher consciousness" consists of and how it begat human consciousness though.
IMO physicalism and intelligent design are on equal ground. It seems to me inclination towards one or the other is mostly arbitrary which is why people have argued about the mind-body problem for years
>>563253
>Homer's historical fantasy fiction
>truth
>>564278
I can tell you but then we'd be getting into my personal metaphysics and mysticism, which is not within the scope of this argument
>>564276
They don't need to be conditioned.
Sometimes things are as they are because it's the only way it can be.
>>564288
Cop-out. Literally the fedora "god did it"
>>563479
This is neato in a synpathetic magic kind of way.
>>564299
At this point there's two options.
>They are because there is no other way
Or
>God exists
>God did it.
The former is the better option given it makes the fewer assumptions.
>>563253
What language did Troyans speak?
It's strange that they've never found any script in such a huge city (the site which is supposed to have been Troy)
>>564285
So in terms of the purely objective is this whole thing just "Intelligent creation might exist because we don't know how some things happen but it's not any more likely than any other explanation"? Because I'd say everyone except the most fedora of atheists would agree with that.
>>564307
No, it just handwave everything else. An eternal universe explains the lack oforigin, but it doesn't explain it's own existence. Once again, conditioned materiality cannot will itself into existence, or you're telling me there's an infinite chains of contingent causes which is on absurd
>>564312
Greek I assume.
We used to say. A Roman told Jesus to explain to him the existence of divinity. Jesus said fine, I'll write you a book. The Roman quipped, "a book?" Jesus said, God is so powerful he could write a book through man. So Jesus went back and wrote a book. And filled it with sin, transgressions, lies, moral deceit, history, corruption. See Jesus said to the Roman, "here is the book." The Roman returned and said Holy Crap, all this led to the conception of the Son of God? The Roman asked Jesus who helped you edit this book? Jesus said " a Greek. But remember there is a curse in this book about editing. " So years passed and passed and Christians still maintained oral traditions, and they laughed and laughed. The book had passed society from hand of king to king.-- All omitting themselves by way of washing away their sins and lies. Whosoever corrects Jesus's testament is to suffer the loss of their Kingdom. --
>>563408
If it's possible for something to come from nothing, it's possible for god to come from nothing. Retard.
I'm agnostic btw
>>564325
Man to wash their own sins, made the sinfully displeasing, pleasing.
>>564319
Yes, but while it might not be more likely than some incomprehensible quantum shit that both mystics and fedoras are completely off the mark about it, it is definitely more likely than "what was supposed to be a dead universe through and through magically violated it's own incontrovertible laws to spit out what should not exist"
>>564326
Holy missing the point Batman
>>564331
The Son of Morning, couldn't get sunshine.
The living were thrown to the dead, to live amongst the dead by the cruel creatures.
>>564323
>or you're telling me there's an infinite chains of contingent causes which is on absurd
Maybe 1000 years ago when Aristotleian metaphysics was king but now that we have relativity we can recognize that, that very thing happening is entirely possible and as a matter of fact is probably more likely than one unmoved mover.
>>564369
Yeah nigga citation needed
>>564350
Once again, quantum foam is still something. original anon had no idea what he was talking about
>>564379
Take two mirrors and face them towards each other and you can visibly see an infinite chain of contingencies.
>>564418
Kicked off by the initial act of my putting two mirrors together
>>563656
You know we dont have a choice in militia conscription
>>563479
the sun and my left testicle are both round! they must be correlated!
fuck me that picture is dumb.
>>563330
Not defending the biblefucking shitposters but
>absence of evidence is evidence of absence
You have to be 18+ to be on this site
>>563347
No it isn't. You lack a basic understanding of the big bang.
>>564560
It is. Contrary to christfag platitudes.
>>563479
this is satire, right?
...right?
>>564584
>there's no evidence the queen of England exists in my house
>ergo, the queen of England doesn't exist
No it really, really isn't you retard
>>563279
>Greek
>not Achaeoi
This keeps triggering me. The Trojans were Greek too.
>>564612
Okay, that would be very true if the entirety of known existence was your house. If all that existed was your house then it would be safe to say the Queen doesn't exist.
However, in reality we're talking about the universe and god. Since all we know to exist is the universe and there's no evidence of god in it, it's safe to conclude god doesn't exist.
This kind of unrealistically hard postivism is only ever applied to god. If we applied this dumbfuck logic to everything we'd all be solipsists.
>question about Trojan war
>Hurr God doesn't exist *tips
This is why no one likes atheists.
Thread went in crazy but I actually liked Wolfgang Peterson's take on Homer's tale
>>563279
>>563296
Paris was such a pussy and piece of shit seriously
>decides to piss of a [SPARTAN] king by fucking and stealing his wife
Have to fight for the death for her and to stop a war
>run like a bitch when you're losing and go back on your word putting Troy in serious danger
Like seriously fuck this guy.
>>564636
Reality is the evidence. That's what you autists will never get
What the fuck is this bullshit?
I go into this thread expecting an entertaining discussion about ancient Troy, and instead I get a bunch of fucking AUTISTS arguing about fucking god.
Go kill yourselves you faggots what the fuck is wrong with you nobody cares about your religion bullshit fuck all of you.
>>564656
You realise it was the God boys who started this right? Both sides are equally retarded. NOBODY GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OR LACK THEREOF NOW GO KILL YOURSELVES>
>>563253
Most copies of the Iliad omit it, but in the original the horse came with a tablet saying that their previous giant horse was outdated and the new one needed to be installed right away or Poseidon wouldn't protect them from Greeks anymore.
Some scholars suggest that maybe the Iliad is occasionally embellished with things that made it sound better than it actually was, but given the documentary evidence supporting the rest of the story (for example, the core of the golden apple was discovered in 1855 by Malaclypse the Elder, who immediately concealed it behind a bird-cage to protect humanity from further warfare) it is clear that the Iliad is unvarnished (or at the most slightly stained) truth.
>>563288
Holy shit are neopagan nazis really this deluded?
>>563330
There is no detectable indication whatsoever that you ought be inclined to trust your faculties, yet you use them none the less?
You live as if there is a God.
You just don't like it.
What if one lived as if there were no mathematical axioms because they didn't like them.
Bertrand Russel never really got over this...
Anyways, your disingenuous when you apply irrational scrutiny to one subject and not the other.
>>563253
How is Europe stupid enough to fall for this?
>>563380
Different atheist (I have faith in the conservation of energy) here.
Do we have any actual evidence that there was nothing?
A dimensionless, undifferentiated, superenergetic point is simpler than a conscious entitity, while still being a 'something' capable of creating at least one universe.
>Only mind can create mind.
Accepting this as an axiom implies that the Creator is not, indeed *cannot* be eternal, for the Creator has a mind and therefore must have been created by a mind.
> If atheism is wrong, it will result in unpleasant (to say the least) consequences.
We cannot conclusively disprove Huitzilopochtli's existence; therefore, if we stop his worshippers from conducting the rituals essential to assure the continued rising of the sun, we risk destroying all life on Earth. The stakes are too high for any other option than devoting the entire might of the Spanish empire to the protection of Montezuma the Second and his successors.
>>564636
But that's exactly the point, mate
>anon's house = observable universe
>buckingham palace = the absolute unobservable aka outside of the universe
>>565216
What a pushover bitch. I'd be tempted to punch a few of those bastards.
>>563385
>we can do whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want, with no eternal consequences.
You should try that and see what happens, then you'll remember why people don't do that shit.
