• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

I assert that it is POSSIBLE there are gods…

OrphanSlug said:
But you have offered nothing new at all. In a way just spammed the forum with another thread arguing the same point that perhaps got too derailed in the other thread(s) on this same exact subject.

Why do we need a new thread on this? What new philosophical point are you trying to discuss?
Click to expand...

There is no need for you to be here. Go away if you want not to be here.

There are several people here discussing the issue.

There are dozens of threads discussing all sorts of very similar topics here. Take a count of how many directly are about what a scumbag Hillary Clinton is!

Now I have created TWO on related, NOT IDENTICAL topics...and you are giving me a lecture about it????

Get off it.
 
Nilly said:
s4Xbi.gif


It's possible that you're right Frank. It's also possible that you're wrong.
Click to expand...
Why do atheists say Frank is wrong, they say there is no creator(s), yet they say they don't use faith to come to this conclusion?
 
cabse5 said:
Why do atheists say Frank is wrong, they say there is no creator(s), yet they say they don't use faith to come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...

Frank is correct. However, as I have asserted many times, the possibility of the existence of a creator does not include the possibility that any of our god-myths are correct. Those have all been debunked. It is very likely that those opposed to Frank's assertion here are simply conflating the two. But, IMO, no reasonable person can say with certainty that a creator of some type cannot possibly exist.
 
Quag said:
Nope the one I have repeatedly pointed out as being incorrect is..... incorrect.




Post #4
Click to expand...

Baloney.

In the other thread, I wrote:

It is POSSIBLE, Quag...that gods exist.

It also is POSSIBLE that they do not.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-15.html#post1065546129

You responded:

It COULD be possible Frank. You just need to modify your claim for it to be correct.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-15.html#post1065546140

I responded:

My claim is correct as stated.

It is POSSIBLE that gods exist; it also is POSSIBLE that no gods exist.

Not sure why you cannot see that...but it is so.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-15.html#post1065546153

You responded:

Your claim is correct when written as I stated. Not sure why you refuse to modify your stance to the correct one.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-15.html#post1065546164

I responded:

My comment is correct as I stated it.

It is POSSIBLE there are gods; and it is POSSIBLE there are no gods.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-16.html#post1065546202

You responded:

You have just changed your statment
Click to expand...
http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...theists-and-christians-16.html#post1065546513

At that point, I realized you were being petty and just playing a game and created this thread.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Do you disagree that it is possible that gods exist...and it is possible that no gods exist?
Click to expand...

You keep answering everything by just repeating the same phrase. This is starting to feel like the creationism vs evolution thread.....

Your statement can be interpreted 10 different ways.

Are you saying that the existence of gods is possible but not necessary? That the universe we are in can exist with or without gods? I could see how their actual existence would be irrelevant there. Even if gods do exist, it is still possible for them not to. Gods could die or change into something else I suppose, leaving none.
 
Frank Apisa said:
…it is also POSSIBLE that there are no gods.

Quag disagrees.

Rather than clog up the thread where we were discussing it, I am opening this new thread devoted specifically to that topic.

It is POSSIBLE gods exist...it is also POSSIBLE there are no gods.
Click to expand...

The possibility serves no purpose to me. I don't get the necessity of it.

Why would we need to believe in them - or their possibility?
 
Frank Apisa said:
My comment has NOTHING whatever to do with what anyone "believes" or guesses.

Either there are gods...or there are no gods.

It is POSSIBLE there are gods; it is also POSSIBLE that no gods exist.
Click to expand...

I agreed with you; you must have been reading sideways if you didn't notice.
 
shagg said:
You keep answering everything by just repeating the same phrase. This is starting to feel like the creationism vs evolution thread.....

Your statement can be interpreted 10 different ways.
Click to expand...

No it cannot.

I am saying it is POSSIBLE there are gods; and it is POSSIBLE there are no gods. It is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is possible no gods exist.


Are you saying that the existence of gods is possible but not necessary?
Click to expand...

I have said nothing here about whether it is necessary.

To me, it is obvious it is not necessary for gods to exist.

So what. It is not necessary for humans to exist...but the do.

What does that have to do with the statement "It is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is also POSSIBLE that no gods exist?


That the universe we are in can exist with or without gods? I could see how their actual existence would be irrelevant there. Even if gods do exist, it is still possible for them not to. Gods could die or change into something else I suppose, leaving none.
Click to expand...

I have no idea of what you are talking about.

My comment is: It is POSSIBLE gods exist...it is also POSSIBLE there are no gods.

If you disagree with that...tell me what you disagree with and we can discuss it.

If you want to start a thread about a totally different topic (whether gods are needed to explain anything or not) start a thread on it yourself.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
The possibility serves no purpose to me. I don't get the necessity of it.

Why would we need to believe in them - or their possibility?
Click to expand...

No one would have to "believe in them"...nor have I ever suggested that.

But IT IS POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is POSSIBLE there are no gods.

If you are not interested in that...if it serves no purpose to you...why are you here?
 
Frank Apisa said:
If you disagree with "It is POSSIBLE gods exist; it is also POSSIBLE there are no gods"...please tell me what your disagreement is...and we can discuss it.
Click to expand...

Frank, I clearly responded in post #6, I even numbered it and formatted it, just for you. Why so trolling?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...ssert-possible-there-gods.html#post1065546740

It's like you're so petrified of being wrong that its immobilized your brain, and you just keep typing it.
It's OK to be wrong, it's the freaking philosophy forum, and you're getting input from a lot of other people who know a lot about the topic. I've learned a ton on these forums, what's so wrong about you learning this one?
 
Mach said:
Frank, I clearly responded in post #6, I even numbered it and formatted it, just for you. Why so trolling?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...ssert-possible-there-gods.html#post1065546740
Click to expand...

The only question I would have about your responses so far is:

Do you agree that it is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and that it is also POSSIBLE that there are no gods?

That seems to be the question you have not answered.

It's like you're so petrified of being wrong that its immobilized your brain, and you just keep typing it.
Click to expand...

Why do people like you bring up crap like this?

I am not petrified of being wrong...and when I am wrong, I readily acknowledge that I am wrong.

Do you?



It's OK to be wrong, it's the freaking philosophy forum, and you're getting input from a lot of other people who know a lot about the topic.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with being wrong...and when I am, I acknowledge it. I even apologize for being wrong...when I am.

But I am NOT wrong here.

It IS possible that gods exist...and it also IS possible that there are no gods.

Why not discuss that instead of this personal baiting nonsense you are doing?


I've learned a ton on these forums, what's so wrong about you learning this one?
Click to expand...

I learn here...which is one of the reasons I participate. Why not discuss what is being discussed...rather than this personal nonsense in which you are engaging?
 
Frank Apisa said:
The only question I would have about your responses so far is:
Do you agree that it is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and that it is also POSSIBLE that there are no gods?
That seems to be the question you have not answered.
Click to expand...

HOLY CRAP FRANK.

I responded to your absurd proposition on page #1 (again, second time), and you have not addressed it. How do you propose I show the absurdity of your proposition, if not to write it down, and ask you to read/respond to it?

Simply asking me to respond, seems absolutely insane, when I did so, clearly, and have notified you of this twice now.

We post crap about "why you can't accept it", because I for one have to assume there is some reason you're not able to read, and respond. You seem to be a healthy adult, yet a very basic thing like reading and responding to specific points, is something you 100% avoid as evidenced in this thread, and others.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
HOLY CRAP FRANK.

I responded to your absurd proposition on page #1 (again, second time), and you have not addressed it. How do you propose I show the absurdity of your proposition, if not to write it down, and ask you to read/respond to it?

Simply asking me to respond, seems absolutely insane, when I did so, clearly, and have notified you of this twice now.

We post crap about "why you can't accept it", because I for one have to assume there is some reason you're not able to read, and respond. You seem to be a healthy adult, yet a very basic thing like reading and responding to specific points, is something you 100% avoid as evidenced in this thread, and others.
Click to expand...

Mach...get back in control.

My assertion is NOT absurd; I am not insane. That kind of nonsense is for amateurs. I expect more from you...YOU should expect more from YOU.

I read through that nonsense you wrote earlier which essentially was a crass, rude dismissal of me from my own thread...and I do not see a specific answer to my question. You hinted at agreement...but you didn't have what it takes to simply say, "Yes, Frank, you are correct."

So I'll ask it again.

Do you agree with my assertion that it is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is POSSIBLE that no gods exist?

Take your time, Mach. We are in a thread devoted to this question, so we are not sullying someone else's thread. We've got all the time in the world.
 
Frank Apisa said:
No it cannot.

I am saying it is POSSIBLE there are gods; and it is POSSIBLE there are no gods. It is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is possible no gods exist.
Click to expand...

"possible" is synonymous with several other words depending on the context. Every weird idea I've thrown at you over this is another interpretation.

I have said nothing here about whether it is necessary.

To me, it is obvious it is not necessary for gods to exist.

So what. It is not necessary for humans to exist...but the do.

What does that have to do with the statement "It is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is also POSSIBLE that no gods exist?
Click to expand...

Excellent example, humans.

It is possible that humans exist, and it is also possible humans do not exist. We know humans exist, so it is not possible that humans do not exist. I think this might be the context in which you made your initial statement, we just don't know whether or not gods exist.

It is possible for humans to exist, and it is possible for humans to not exist. This is what I meant by necessary. It is not necessary for humans to exist, so it is possible for humans to not exist. Their actual existence is irrelevant, this is talking about their potential to not exist.

If you had this in mind with your initial statement, God could come down and share a cup of tea with you, and it would still be possible for there to be no gods at some point in the future or at some point in the past, the statement is actually saying a godless universe is possible even if gods can exist. Which is, I think, not what you're trying to say, which is why the reasoning behind your statement would be appreciated. Otherwise this is just a superficial game of words.

I have no idea of what you are talking about.

My comment is: It is POSSIBLE gods exist...it is also POSSIBLE there are no gods.

If you disagree with that...tell me what you disagree with and we can discuss it.

If you want to start a thread about a totally different topic (whether gods are needed to explain anything or not) start a thread on it yourself.
Click to expand...

I'm feeling my way around a dark room, trying to figure out exactly what you're getting at. I'm not even sure if I agree with you or not at this point, as I don't feel confident I understand your statement the way you intended it.
 
cabse5 said:
Why do atheists say Frank is wrong, they say there is no creator(s), yet they say they don't use faith to come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...

Thanks you, Cabse.

Seems to me that sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander, here. But obviously some of the atheists here don't agree.
 
shagg said:
"possible" is synonymous with several other words depending on the context. Every weird idea I've thrown at you over this is another interpretation.



Excellent example, humans.

It is possible that humans exist, and it is also possible humans do not exist. We know humans exist, so it is not possible that humans do not exist. I think this might be the context in which you made your initial statement, we just don't know whether or not gods exist.

It is possible for humans to exist, and it is possible for humans to not exist. This is what I meant by necessary. It is not necessary for humans to exist, so it is possible for humans to not exist. Their actual existence is irrelevant, this is talking about their potential to not exist.

If you had this in mind with your initial statement, God could come down and share a cup of tea with you, and it would still be possible for there to be no gods at some point in the future or at some point in the past, the statement is actually saying a godless universe is possible even if gods can exist. Which is, I think, not what you're trying to say, which is why the reasoning behind your statement would be appreciated. Otherwise this is just a superficial game of words.



I'm feeling my way around a dark room, trying to figure out exactly what you're getting at. I'm not even sure if I agree with you or not at this point, as I don't feel confident I understand your statement the way you intended it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how to make it any plainer, Shagg.

If something comes up that I think may clarify it more for you, I will do so.
 
It's possible that there are no gods, but to believe that would require me to discount my own experiential memories of deity-- and thus my own grasp of reality.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
It's possible that there are no gods, but to believe that would require me to discount my own experiential memories of deity-- and thus my own grasp of reality.
Click to expand...

I am not dealing with what anyone "believes" or guesses or speculates about here, Rat.

I am merely stating an obvious truth.

It is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is POSSIBLE that there are no gods.
 
Mach said:
HOLY CRAP FRANK.

I responded to your absurd proposition on page #1 (again, second time), and you have not addressed it. How do you propose I show the absurdity of your proposition, if not to write it down, and ask you to read/respond to it?

Simply asking me to respond, seems absolutely insane, when I did so, clearly, and have notified you of this twice now.

We post crap about "why you can't accept it", because I for one have to assume there is some reason you're not able to read, and respond. You seem to be a healthy adult, yet a very basic thing like reading and responding to specific points, is something you 100% avoid as evidenced in this thread, and others.
Click to expand...

What is he saying that is so upsetting?

I may not agree with his use of the word "gods," because I believe all the gods known to man have been debunked, but I can easily see how it is possible that a god-like energy source could have set the universe in motion. After all, no one--I repeat no one--has a frigging clue how the big bang occurred or why or from where or what that bundle of energy sprang. So, it is possible that some thing (I refuse to use the word gods) created the universe.
 
calamity said:
What is he saying that is so upsetting?

I may not agree with his use of the word "gods," because I believe all the gods known to man have been debunked, but I can easily see how it is possible that a god-like energy source could have set the universe in motion. After all, no one--I repeat no one--has a frigging clue how the big bang occurred or why or from where or what that bundle of energy sprang. So, it is possible that some thing (I refuse to use the word gods) created the universe.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Calamity.

Your initial question is right on the mark!
 
Frank Apisa;1065548180[B said:
]I'm not sure how to make it any plainer[/B], Shagg.

If something comes up that I think may clarify it more for you, I will do so.
Click to expand...

Apparently, since all you've done is repeat the same statement word for word. I've given you half a dozen different ways to give context to your statement, and all I've gotten in response is the thread title over and over.


answer me these:

Does the actual existence of god matter?

Are you talking about possibility from potential or from ignorance?

How does your statement differ from "Gods might exist" in meaning?
 
Frank Apisa said:
Thank you, Calamity.

Your initial question is right on the mark!
Click to expand...

Sure. After all, what you are saying, in principle, is correct. We may or we may not agree on the details, but what is an absolute certainty is that as of today we have no idea what lies beneath our reality. It is entirely possible that there are things there--be they some unknown energy, a gaggle of super-beings, a supreme being, a combination of them all, whatever---which we would choose to define as gods. No one knows. Hence, it is possible.

Now, of course, I do not believe any of that is out there....except for the unknown energy. I do believe that is there.
 
shagg said:
Apparently, since all you've done is repeat the same statement word for word. I've given you half a dozen different ways to give context to your statement, and all I've gotten in response is the thread title over and over.


answer me these:

Does the actual existence of god matter?

Are you talking about possibility from potential or from ignorance?

How does your statement differ from "Gods might exist" in meaning?
Click to expand...

You are reading way too much into what I have been saying here.

I am saying that it is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is POSSIBLE that no gods exist.

Deal with that.
 
cabse5 said:
Why do atheists say Frank is wrong, they say there is no creator(s), yet they say they don't use faith to come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...

I don't know many atheists who flat out state there is no creator (and I probably know more than you).

Many atheists say there is no god as described in the bible (myself included).

The two statements are completely different.

shagg said:
Apparently, since all you've done is repeat the same statement word for word. I've given you half a dozen different ways to give context to your statement, and all I've gotten in response is the thread title over and over.


answer me these:

Does the actual existence of god matter?

Are you talking about possibility from potential or from ignorance?

How does your statement differ from "Gods might exist" in meaning?
Click to expand...

The trick is in accepting Franks statement as being one devoid of any value, use or meaning. Then it's easy to accept. That's the only conclusion I've been able to come to based upon page after page of the exact same discussion by one member after another.
 
Last edited:
Frank Apisa said:
You are reading way too much into what I have been saying here.

I am saying that it is POSSIBLE that gods exist...and it is POSSIBLE that no gods exist.

Deal with that.
Click to expand...

thank you again for repeating the thread title and not making even the slightest effort to help me understand it. I gave you clear cut questions aimed at demystifying your statement, and you responded with the thread title again. Enjoy your troll thread frank. I hope you had a good laugh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom