Following on from the >>God has been evicted from cosmology . . .<< thread.

[RATTER15]

OK, imagine this: It has been proven beyond any doubt with categoric proof that there is no Gods, anywhere or ever has been. even al the religious leaders worldwide have accepted this.

What now?

How would the world take shape?

I think the more extremist cultures and faiths like Muslims would need to war against something, I actually think that if it happened overnight some parts of the human race would never cope and would go into meltdown without their Gods.

Of course I know this could never be proven but just an interesting thought.

[naomi24]

Keyplus, where did beso say that? I can't find it.

[beso]

Keyplus orignal quote //And people who have got out of this delusion .... //

[naomi24]

Yes, that's the only bit I could find, beso.

[keyplus90]

Have I really come across some people who can’t see? OK, let’s analyse.

Here is a portion from the original post by Beso at 01:01 on Friday 23rd September 2011,
By Beso : ////Religion is the greatest mass delusion in the history of mankind.////

Me, keyplus repeated Beso’s words in my post at 15:33 on Friday 23rd September 2011,

And here seconded by another one known as Naomi at 17:45 on Friday 23rd September 2011,
By Naomi in the above mentioned post: //Religion is the greatest mass delusion in the history of mankind. //

By Naomi in the above mentioned post: Beso, it's also the greatest lie ever told.

Here Same person Beso again at 04:01 on Saturday 24th September 2011
By Beso in the above mentioned post: Headline: Keyplus admits religion is a delusion!

By Beso in the above mentioned post: beso ////Religion is the greatest mass delusion in the history of mankind.////

Perhaps you people should stop posting that late at night when you are drunk.

[naomi24]

Keyplus, perhaps you should stop being so damned rude.

//And people who have got out of this delusion are so satisfied and have so much inner peace that GPs have stopped prescribing antidepressants and pharmacists have sent all of the stocks back.//

Beso didn't say that - you did.

[LogicA]

This post shows a very interesting mental defect, a logic error that is almost unbelievable. Follow me : If you put the 'argument' in a syllogism and you examine the assumptions, poster is claiming 3 things ;

1) Reason cannot tell when it is seeing error versus truth. Why ? because it follows of necessity that if there can be categoric proof it can be iether way, yet poster says nothing is categoric unless it comes down on the non-existence side.

2) If reason were completely discredited in the way poster says, then poster would be the one in a meltdown because his whole case -- he thinks -- is based on reason !!

3) Does it make any sense to say that God could make the universe and no effect of that creation would lead back to a cause !!!
" A thing can be self-evident in either of two ways: on the one hand, self-evident in itself, though not to us; on the other, self-evident in itself, and to us. A proposition is self-evident because the predicate is included in the essence of the subject, as "Man is an animal," for animal is contained in the essence of man. If, therefore the essence of the predicate and subject be known to all, the proposition will be self-evident to all; as is clear with regard to the first principles of demonstration, the terms of which are common things that no one is ignorant of, such as being and non-being, whole and part, and such like. If, however, there are some to whom the essence of the predicate and subject is unknown, the proposition will be self-evident in itself, but not to those who do not know the meaning of the predicate and subject of the proposition. Therefore, it happens, as Boethius says (Hebdom., the title of which is: "Whether all that is, is good"), "that there are some mental concepts self-evident only to the learned, as that incorporeal substances are not in space." Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists," of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject, because God is His own existence as will be hereafter shown (3, 4). Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature — namely, by effects"

[naomi24]

Well, as convoluted and long-winded as that is I think it amounts to 'we don't know how it happened so God must have dunnit!' Speaking of 'a very interesting mental defect', and a 'logical error that is almost unbelievable', there's reason for you!