Can you actually disprove the Abrahamic God using science? I don't think you can, actually.
>>16889791Can you disprove any god? If religion were falsifiable, then it wouldn’t last, because it would be disproven.
>>16889804I cannot disprove nor prove any God
>>16889791Quite the contraryAtheists in 1200's debated Thomas Aquinas saying that God is non needed because time is eternal anywayThen a priest discovered the primeval atomAnd atheists coped, saying that it's a ridiculous Big BangToday, NDE research is at an all time high
>>16889828NDE is the final cope of the theist.
>>16889977*atheistIt's been growing hard lately, you knowA single lab grew from 12 neuroscientists in the 90's to over 300 todayScience was never on your side
>>16889828Hi again faggot. Just another reminder, that NDEs are fully, completely, unambiguously, without and beyond a doubt, totally explained by the release of DMT of the brain during deathI cannot imagine how absolutely devastated theist copers were when science proved this. Their last fall back, after every single book of the bible was proven to be a lie, was the seemingly unexplainable mysteries of NDE. Nope, faggot, just hallucinations. When you die and that NDE is over, guess what happens? Eternal void. Nothing, absolutely nothing. Every cope resulting in the same outcome, annihilation. All the suffering, for no reason. No reward. No heaven, no joy. Nothing. Just death.Life is a dark tunnel, and there’s no light at the end, at the end of the tunnel your consciousness just dissipates, and it’s as if there was no tunnel in the first place.No matter how much you cope you know this is true, and you can try to convince yourself it’s not but it’s just going to torture you even more when it’s lodged in your unconscious awareness. Prepare for a torturous life of denial ending in suicide. You’re simply not cut from the same cloth that NPC boomer christian sheep are, only they can be christian. You cannot, because the atheist mind virus has already claimed you. HAHAHAHA
>>16889791>Can you actually disprove the Abrahamic God using scienceYeah, unlike you think random parts of his books are allegorical or that he would decieve people to think the world is older than it isand if that fails, russels teacup
>>16889998It's been wildly recorded event since 1850'sAnd studies have revealed that such a thing should be IMPOSSIBLE because1. Brain activity confirmed dead2. Heart is dead for 20 mins3. Able to have information that should not be available (conversations from the other room)4. Met loved ones they do not even know are deadAnd lastlyComplete identical testimonies across all cultures and timeThey even tested itThe NDE reported everything that was going on in the room. They were able to dictate very advanced medical procedures and protocols with extreme accuracy, right up to the conversations of the surgeonsTo test this, they had random subjects that just closed their eyes and then made guesses as to what the researchers were doing. None of them were able to match the accuracy of NDEsIn another instance, an NDE case says that he found a small lunch box on the top of the locker. They confirmed that it is there, completely untouched for years. He has never been to that hospital but he saw it because he claimed to have been floating above his bodyAll done by the hundreds, if not thousands scientists all across the globe. Scientists that you worship so muchScience was never on your side.
>>16888278
>>16890062And of course no studies link. But I shouldn’t be surprised the theist thinks just trust me bro is a valid piece of evidence when that’s literally the basis on which you believe in your religion. They even have a name for it FAITH
>>16890839https://www.researchgate.net/search?q=near+death+experienceSorry, lad but purely materialistic view of the world only came recently and will end soon
>>16889791Yes, but Spinoza did this better than pretty much everyone else:>If God is infinite, then there can be nothing outside of God. He can have no limits or boundaries. This means there cannot be a world external to Him. The world must be contained as part of the infinite substance that is God.>1) No two substances can share the same attribute or essence.>2) God is a substance that has (or is comprised of) infinite attributes.>3) To exist separately from God, any other substance would have to possess attributes or an essence that is different from one of the infinite attributes or essences of God, which is impossible.>4) Therefore, no substance can exist separately from God.Or, in other words:>Every substance has at least one attribute. (Premise 1, E1d4)>Two substances cannot share the same nature or attribute. (Premise 2, E1p5)>God has all possible attributes. (Premise 3, Definition of ‘God’, E1d6)>God exists. (Premise 4, E1p11)>Therefore, no other substance other than God can exist. (From 1-4, E1p14)>That is, there is only one substance which has all possible attributes, and that is God.https://iep.utm.edu/spinoz-m/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/#GodNatuhttps://reasonandmeaning.com/2019/12/13/summary-of-spinozas-philosophy/Basically, God definitely exists, but the traditional Abrahamic understanding of God is so warped that it actually negates belief in God (because it undermines the infinite nature of God). I'll elaborate in one follow-up post.
>>16889791>>16890938Even though great minds like Parmenides, Ramanuja, Dolpopa and Zeno figured this out long before Spinoza, I think he really does explain it in the most succinct and logical way. Anyway, as should be apparent to anyone familiar with history, the so-called Monotheistic faiths inherently seek to negate all other conceptualizations and expressions of the sacred that exist outside of their paradigms. Monotheism is one of the most pernicious lies humanity has ever faced, in that it claims the existence of an ultimate, all pervading oneness, yet that oneness is presented as necessarily separate from us. Monotheism is, in essence, subversive dualism.God is the meta-substance of all reality and perception. God is infinite - without beginning or end - self-causing, and ultimately indivisible, therefore nothing can exist aside from God. To proclaim that God is separate and outside of anything, or vice versa, is fundamentally dualistic.Further, monotheism inherently suggests the negation of God's very existence, as by nature, God is unfettered, boundless, and cannot be restricted. In this way, monotheism is the forebear of atheism, which is precisely why the proponents of these two falsehoods are so persistently at odds with one another.I guess that is more reason than science, but science actually does line up with Monism quite nicely. There isn't truly empty space, as all - even black holes - are part of one energy field: https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/faq.htm | https://youtube.com/watch?v=Jdgp84m8jck The unquantifiable aggregate of this (processes, perceptions, actualities, and all of space-time, past, present and future), is God. Therefore, God exists, but the Abrahamic idea of God is on the same level of retardation as atheism. God is not just some being, and the very nature of God is not external. This also means, literally, that God is the greatest, as no one temporal modality can be greater than the unquantifiable aggregate.
>>16890938>>16891001Tldr: Atheists, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Gnostics, Buddhists that do not accept Shentong, and Hindus that do not accept Advaita or Vishishtadvaita, eternally BTFO by reason and science. By extension, troons have been forever BTFO as well.
>>16889791Science can. It has. But, that's not even necessary.Besides. Why are you asking a philosophy board about what science can do?
>>16889791>universe is more than 6000 years old>bible says the Abrahamic God created everything in 7 days 6000 years agosorted
>>16891204dont know how it took this long for the easiest answer to come up
Eh but who created God, again? Big God Bang? >he is le eternalWhy the singularity before Big Bang can't be eternal then? Why God needed?
>>16890913>Puts NDE into searchbar>This is evidence that immaterial souls existI’m starting to think you’re a LARPing atheist trying to make theists look retarded
>>16891507>Just… because!
Well we need to look at what the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament says because that's the foundation of any discussion about an 'Abrahamic God'Historically I think you only need to look at the events which occur in the Hebrew Bible to refute the Abrahamic GodScientifically the creation sequence is incorrectYou can't disprove the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent timeless creator God and in fact in light of scientific knowledge you ought to accept him
>>16891518He asked for researchThere is no conclusion yet but it's not in the favor of unbelievers.Never was
>>16889791well maybe if you were to find a way to get into Heaven or beyond material or come back from the land of the dead and find a note or something that God left then maybe you could begin asking real questions, but until then it may remain an unknown in a Western Empirical sense.
>>16889804>If religion were falsifiable, then it wouldn’t last, because it would be disproven.or it would be proven true.
>>16892215When someone asks you for the research, they're expecting you to post specific studies which you think support your point, retard. You didn't do that because you haven't read any, you've just been on NDE enthusiast blogs which claim such studies exist.
You can't look at this world and say that a good deity created it. That's it. Evolution itself contradicts the very foundations of Abrahamic faith.
>>16890012Since Christians have been proven wrong every time, isn't it more like Russel's teabag?
>>16891550>omnibenevolentdude what
>>16889791Even haploautism disproves it
>>16889791>>16889804>>16889812>>16892255Everybody talks about proving, disproving, God, but I don't think people *actually* want to live under the pressure of consciously knowing that God exists as an objective fact. I think that state of vague plausibility/deniability is exceedingly important in the same way everybody tells you to not bang on the fish tank glass or how insects will actually only cannibalize their mate when observed and not in the wild. Do people actually want to *objectively* know they're being observed and judged 24/7? No. And they live lives that reflect that. Do people actually want to *objectively* know they're soulless meat computers that don't possess free will and death permenant? No. They can't live like that either.Neither of these positions are healthy, nor are they intellectually honest to people's realities. This is the ideation of schizophrenics.
>>16889791>"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage">Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!>"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle — but no dragon.>"Where's the dragon?" you ask.>"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon.">You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.>"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air.">Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.>"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.">You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.>"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick.">And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.>Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.
>>16889791All praise to the Goddesses and to the Gods of history. Let us pretend they exist not. Cheers!
>>16892487You are looking at them right now, though
>>16889791The problem is not establishing experimental parameters, the problem is god is indefinable. Even if you had an experiment that showed there was no god, the definition of god would change.
>>16889791>Can you actually disprove the Abrahamic God using science?Yes, very easily in fact: The Bible was written by humans.There, done.
>>16892602"Wholly good"
>>16889791>can the study of the material disprove something that's allegedly immaterialwhat do you think, idiot?
>>16889791excuse me, in this concentration camp.there are no swimmingpools
>>16894122Bot.
>>16894107yes but, i'm sceptical of the notion
>>16894142so I'm a bot for noticing the extreme judeocuckery in your post and spitting on (((You)))?
>>16894124No, you're a bot for dumping out off-topic /pol/nigger brainfarts.
>>16894415>>16894214*
>>16890109This
>>16894198Wdym
>>16891067>By extension, troons have been forever BTFO as well.can you elaborate on this?
>>16895505It's self-explanatory.
>>16889791The abrahamic God devours forskins >Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” Gensis 17:9
>>16895510it's not please explain
>>16895631Just a Venn diagram meme>Abrahamic religions spread due to the demands of delusional people>The notion that gender is merely a social construct and that one can actually transition from being a man into a woman or vice versa spread due to the demands of delusional people
>>16891067>Buddhists that do not accept ShentongDolpopa's shentong, specifically. Revisionist shentong that turns it into spicy rangtong is just as cringy.
>>16889791An all powerful, all knowing and all loving God is debunked by common sense. No need for science.
>>16889828Quantum physics are also going towards a theistic answer, really interesting stuff>>16889998>reddit spacing>wall of textlmao
>you can't prove my schizophrenic hallucinations aren't real!okay retard
>>16895691>Dolpopa's shentongThe only Shentong for me my friend.
>>16895677oh okay a strawman
>>16889804>Can you disprove any god?Yes...you become their superior, they then die by their own hand.
>>16895310all things considered, this universe doesn't seem very benevolent at all
Actually its really easy.All the miracles, things that defy the natural world, are all lies fabricated by ancient people to push their religion further.We now know for sure that you are a mentally ill schizo if you see angels and devils. Its called psychosis.Gods arent real, theyre all made up.
>>16889791There are other gods, anon, and even beings out of your measurements and calculations.
