Quote# 140385

To contemplate the idea that there is no God would be equivalent to me contemplating my own non existence. The fact that I exist, and am aware of my existence is entirely sufficient for me to realise that this awareness of existence comes from God - not from an aimless, purposeless materialistic process.

Alan Burns, Religion and Ethics 12 Comments [9/12/2018 1:43:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: NearlySane

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 | bottom


Alan Burns (in an "I'M the one in the know here, even if you are OFFICIALLY the 'expert'" voice to an astronomer): "The fact that it's called light year, and you don't measure distances in years is entirely sufficient for me to realise that this IS a unit of time - not of distance."

9/12/2018 2:36:49 AM


Yet another regurgitation of the cosmological argument. They never get tired of saying arguments that have been refuted centuries ago by actual believers in God.

9/12/2018 2:51:38 AM


You found evidence that fits the conclusion you already hold. That's the acme of logical arguments!

Or maybe bullshit. Yeah, let's go with bullshit.

9/12/2018 4:09:19 AM

Doubting Thomas

No, you BELIEVE this awareness of existence comes from God. Animals are sentient, too.

I mean, how do you know that you're really not just a brain in a jar and being fed all your daily experiences through a computer?

9/12/2018 6:04:34 AM


If there is a God, I suspect he's an non interventional one at most.

9/12/2018 6:19:54 AM


Nope. To contemplate the idea that there is no God is the equivalence to contemplating the idea that there is no Shiva, or no Flying Spaghetti Monster.

How do you get from "I'm aware" via "there must be a god" to "it must be this particular god"?

Are plants, fungi and bacteria aware of their existence? If not, does that mean that there is NO god, just an "aimless, purposeless materialistic process"?

9/12/2018 6:32:43 AM

Dr. Razark

"The fact that I exist... is entirely sufficient for me to realise that this... comes from God"

I am, therefore I AM?

Your existence is really only evidence for your existence. Nothing more.
The fact that you can't come up with anything other than magic sky wizard did it is a complete failure of your imagination.

9/12/2018 6:53:28 AM


That's enough for you? Well, that's entirely subjective, so think what you like. That doesn't constitute objective truth, of course; that's just your own sense of importance leading you astray.

9/12/2018 7:14:26 AM


Cogito ergo sum.

It's your 'God's turn now, Al.

It's okay, we can wait...!

9/12/2018 8:01:47 AM

Churchy LaFemme

The only evidence I've seen that you, Alan Burns, exist is a series of words appearing on my computer. I'm sorry, but in order for me to believe that you do exist, I'm going to need more proof, such as you appearing in person in front of me. Until that happens, I continue to doubt your existence.

There, I've run rings around you logically.

9/12/2018 8:36:27 AM


Yeah, Alan is just repeating the same fallacious nonsense that was rebutted the last time he asserted this same basic crap six months ago.

My awareness of my own existence is sufficient evidence for me to know that God exists, because without God I could not possibly exist.

I will therefore, in kind, repeat my comment at the time.

I have yet to see one conviction held by Alan that is not blatantly propped up by a logical fallacy.

9/12/2018 11:49:24 AM


This argument is correct in a very narrow, superficial sense: The person who Alan Burns is today could not exist without the idea of an omnipotent, interfering God being real. Therefore believing in an "aimless, purposeless materialistic process" isn't realistic possibility for him.

That's clearly not the "truth" which he intended to imply, but it's an entirely reasonable interpretation of his words.

9/12/2018 3:32:38 PM

1 | top: comments page