I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?

[Mariosep]

Dear Simon Moon, we have to postpone your desire to resume our exchange, because I have just challenged Stimbo to a one and on exchange – see ANNEX, text in bold.

Now, in the menatime, you can review your textbooks for your information on the kinds of causes.

And also please Simon, no need to react to several points I make in my posts, you just take to the point I want you to react to, like for the present that you say your papa and mama did not cause your existence and life, but the material cause of molecules by they re-arranging themselves; still you do not mention about other causes I am sure you can find in your textbooks.

And also in that connection I want us you and me to work on the what is the proper sense of the word cause; because you say molecules caused your coming to existence and life, not your papa and mama - please see whether you are talking the proper sense of cause or in what other senses you are using the word cause.

But please wait, when Stimbo does not accept my challenge, then we can resume our exchange.

At this point in time I see that Stimbo has not yet responded to my challenge for us she and I to engage in a one on one exchange; but it is still too early, because she is very busy with moderating posts.


ANNEX

Mariosep Online
#906
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
4 hours ago
__________________


See, dear readers here, so far one atheist has sent a post after my last post here on how atheists go into raving mad foul language and personal attacks against their debate opponents, instead of reasoned and calm exchange on causation, evidence, and the concept of God in re God exists or not; nope, no atheist has sent a post except one and she did not go into raving mad foul language and personal attacks.

She just sent over a graphic of a person demanding,
"Stop using foul language at me."

Thanks, Jester.

Now, I am challenging Stimbo to engage us two on causation of babies as evidence of God existing in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Well, dear readers, let us all sit back and await with bated breath what is going to happen, now that I have issued a formal challenge to Stimbo, for us two to engage in the causation of babies by their papas and mamas, as evidence to the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

This is really, thanks to the founders and owners and operators of Atheistforums.org, that I am having a thrilling and delightful adventure in the examination of atheists' way of dealing with the issue, God exists or not - which is no way they will go into it at all, but they will always in effect find a way and a means to eschew, although dear readers you have to read carefully to notice it, to eschew together altogether from the issue itself of God exists or not.


Later.

---

Dear atheist colleagues here, please let us wait for Stimbo to show up.


In the meantime, I will just bring up again my observation how what are called internet atheists are raving mad with foul language and personal attacks against their debate opponents in the web - which is not called for, at all.

The way I see it, it must be because, dear atheist colleagues here, if I may, you are possessed by a strong drive of defiance, and it is only in the anonymity afforded by the internet that you can throw up your defiance with foul language and personal attacks against your debate opponents.

What is the ground of your defiance?

And also if I may, you are into an inner conflict, because as atheists you put yourselves in a situation in which you have what I call a negative thesis.

And without your knowing it, it a negative thesis is an abnormal epistemological position.

See if you can ever get to have a project for a masteral thesis or even up to a doctoral dissertation, proposing to do a negative research, like there is no purpose in life, or in our context, there is no God.

I think the school will tell you, you have got to choose a positive thesis or research, it is absurd epistemologically, to do research on a negative idea.

I could be wrong though, but I am just talking from my own observations on how people talk meaningfully at all: always in the positive or affirmative direction, not in the negative or having no point to propound - unless you are issuing a prohibition to people under you, to not do something, which is into not doing, not into not knowing.

This is quite some subtle insight, though.