Quote:Okay, I will return in one hour's time, so let you colleagues here, think up something on the issue God exists or not, and we will get to it.

And doubtlessly with the same tired line of shit.

(October 24, 2016 at 8:30 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Okay, I will return in one hour's time, so let you colleagues here, think up something on the issue God exists or not, and we will get to it.

It doesn't work that way.

We do not need to defend the case that a god, or gods, do not exist.

You are the one that has come here to provide your case that a god does exist. It is up to you to prove your case. You have the burden of proof.

At its most basic, atheism is a response to theistic claims. And all that we have to defend, is that you have not met the burden of proof.

So, can you do that?

If your first (fallacious) argument is any example, it would seem not. Hopefully you didn't open with your strongest argument.

(October 24, 2016 at 8:30 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Okay, I will return in one hour's time, so let you colleagues here, think up something on the issue God exists or not, and we will get to it.

God does not exist. Despite technology vastly increasing the power of our perception, there is still not one shred of evidence for any god claim; not one. All you have are rationalizations meant to give credibility to unsupported ideas spread through indoctrination and fear.

Ok, some arguments (in "prose") against the Creator God (as defined by most Christian theists):

God cannot create something out of absolute "nothing". In order for God to have created anything, there must have already been some preexisting material from which the created things were made. This means some portion of reality independent of God has always been. Conclusion: God did not create all of reality.

God cannot timelessly create. In order for God to have created, time must have already been. Conclusion: God did not create time.

God cannot timelessly exercise his mind. In order for God to have created anything (including time), he must've either exercised the divine mind to plan the creation or it was spontaneous. However, if there was no time prior to its creation, then there was no act of exercising the divine mind prior to creation (for no act can occur in the absence of time). If somehow it was possible for God to spontaneously timelessly create (hint: logically speaking, it's not possible), then God's act of creation was a spontaneous act. Conclusion: If it must be argued that God created time nevertheless, then God mindlessly created the created portion of reality.

It can be argued that, logically speaking, (1) God did not create all of reality, (2) God did not create time, and (3) even if God somehow created time, then God mindlessly created the created portion of reality. This is no different from a mindless entity that has the capacity to randomly generate things within a form of reality that's always been. Therefore, the Creator God is not logically necessary. Conclusion: God cannot exist as the Creator.

(October 24, 2016 at 7:30 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: What about: There is an intelligible and rational universe. If it was made by a God, then God is also intelligible and rational.

But that formula is also opposite the direction of causality -If there is a God that created the universe, it came first, not the universe.

And whence this god?

Crap, we're down to forty minutes, guys. Someone start thinking fast!

Thanks everyone for your presence and posts.

I told Jesster, Your friendly neighborhood heathen, that I will let her direct me so as not go astray from whatever she wants to think that I am going astray, in order not to bear the burden of proving God exists.

So, Jesster, I am back, and here is my OP:

Quote:I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
Yesterday, 17:27

This is my proof for God existing.

1. Formulate the information of the concept of God, thus:
"God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning."

2. Look for instances of causation in reality outside of concepts in our mind.

3. We find countless examples of causation in reality outside of concepts in our mind.

4. From the countless instances of causation in reality, we infer to the existence of a first and ultimate cause.

5. We find that the first and ultimate cause of all instances of causation in reality corresponds to our information on the concept of God, namely, the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Quote:6. Conclusion: God exists in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

So, dear Jesster, what point do you want us to go together on, so that we will be one on one, and resolve the issue God exists or not, with me of course bearing the burden of proving, but you have to also bind yourself to think on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

And I thank you that you profess yourself to be Your Friendly Neighborhood Heathen, nowadays, we are just one click away from each other, no walls to scale to get to each other.


Dear guys here, thanks a lot for your posts, but I cannot be with you because I am going to be very busy with Jesster, she is a lady, and you know the courtesy rule, Ladies First.

Tell you what, when Jesster has left me, then you can propose that I exchange thoughts with you on your most accustomed point against God existing, of course no burden from your part to prove, but you have to practise thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

(October 24, 2016 at 10:49 pm)Mariosep Wrote: I cannot be with you because I am going to be very busy with Jesster

No, probably not. I'm less interested in this than others who have posted because I thought the original argument was circular and involved too much presupposition. Others have already stated so and I don't feel the need to add to what they have already told you. Unless you have something else to add to that, I'm not going to go around in circles with you on this. I only posted to show the flaw in where you were going with your later posts.

(October 24, 2016 at 10:49 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Thanks everyone for your presence and posts.

I told Jesster, Your friendly neighborhood heathen, that I will let her direct me so as not go astray from whatever she wants to think that I am going astray, in order not to bear the burden of proving God exists.

So, Jesster, I am back, and here is my OP:

Quote:I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
Yesterday, 17:27

This is my proof for God existing.

1. Formulate the information of the concept of God, thus:
"God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning."

2. Look for instances of causation in reality outside of concepts in our mind.

3. We find countless examples of causation in reality outside of concepts in our mind.

4. From the countless instances of causation in reality, we infer to the existence of a first and ultimate cause.

5. We find that the first and ultimate cause of all instances of causation in reality corresponds to our information on the concept of God, namely, the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Quote:6. Conclusion: God exists in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

So, dear Jesster, what point do you want us to go together on, so that we will be one on one, and resolve the issue God exists or not, with me of course bearing the burden of proving, but you have to also bind yourself to think on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

And I thank you that you profess yourself to be Your Friendly Neighborhood Heathen, nowadays, we are just one click away from each other, no walls to scale to get to each other.


Dear guys here, thanks a lot for your posts, but I cannot be with you because I am going to be very busy with Jesster, she is a lady, and you know the courtesy rule, Ladies First.

Tell you what, when Jesster has left me, then you can propose that I exchange thoughts with you on your most accustomed point against God existing, of course no burden from your part to prove, but you have to practise thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

I have given you something to debunk. Forget about Jesster and let's put my arguments to the test. Or is this sexism talk just a clever way for you to save face while you chicken out?

Dear Jesster, you say: "We have nothing to prove in this topic."

May I just submit that you have to demonstrate that you think on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas, of course not in support of the claim God exists, but in support of your reasoning that God does not exist - that is not any burden at all, but it is what you owe yourself for having the use of reason and intelligence: for I submit that being an atheist is no exemption from thinking at all as to be without any rational grounding for taking up the identity of an atheist.

That is the positive part incumbent upon all atheist persons, namely, the keen concentration to examine any claim made by people with an idea to prove, in the present context that God in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, exists in objective reality outside and independent of our mind.

Then also important, negatively to abstain from all kinds of distracting utterances, like all instances of flippancy, unwelcome remarks bordering on what might be called cuss language, and you know what I mean.