(May 16, 2013 at 8:33 am)Ben Davis Wrote:

(May 16, 2013 at 4:12 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Hmmm STILL no proof!

...not even a coherent argument.

Hm, I found Schopenhauers argument quite convincing: Basically Schopenhauer states that causality is the primary function of the mind (Verstand) and the dimensions within which causality takes place have to be time and space, because without time no two events could follow one another and without space two or more events could not happen at the same time. He reduces energy and matter to causality, basically everything we can ever perceive must be in this realm of time/space and causality.

Now, if God is inside this causal chain we could perceive God and God would itself be subject to the laws of causality, basically is not a God at all but just some kind of a bigger animal (K'thulu? Bigfoot?). And if God was outside this realm of causality then God has no role to play in our lifes, which are completely within this realm. So either we can point at Him/Her and say "that's God" (and we can't) or He/She is either of no relevance to us or simply doesn't exist.

Might not convince you, it's good enough for me and my domestic use.

Quote:Because we only know/understand what is inside the universe, even our languages doesn't support words to describe what is outside the universe.

So why did you start this thread talking in english about god which according to you lives outside the universe?

---

Quote:So the First event is just single from a single source
(That's why scientist call is Singularity)

You say god was the singularity?

---

Quote:After the first event (creating the Universe) any actions can/must have time (Because other events are taking place)

Ok so how can god take time to create things if he is outside of time?

Muslim Scholar Wrote:Part III

[...]

The only religion that gives a matching model for God is ISLAM

Ok, but let's expand the list with attributes about God stated by the Islam.

1. God is omnipotent
2. God is omniscient.
3. God is a loving god.
4. The reason for theodicy is that God wants us to take a test.

The contradiction in the fundament of Islam is very obvious.

There is only a need for a test when you want to find out something, e.g. how the being tested reacts to pain (this is how theodicy is justified in Islam). But is it possible at all that an omniscient being finds out something? No, I really don't think so, because finding out something requires that you don't already know the fact considered.

So the premises 2) and 4) imply that there is no reason for the suffering in our world and that God tortures people 'just for fun'.

And does this conclusion work with premise 3)? No, it doesn't. So the Islam is disproved by contradiction anyway.

(May 15, 2013 at 8:36 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(May 15, 2013 at 7:33 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: If you went to this point then you must have accepted 2 things:
1- The concept of disjoint

Maybe go into a little more detail there, I ain't gonna put words in your mouth.

It is very simple, if you defined/accepted two mutually exclusive definitions; then they cannot exist in the same object at the same time.
It has nothing to do with power or ability, even God cannot make a circle with edges or a square with non-equal sides.
Because you defined the words.

Quote:

Quote:Which means that G started the first event by either creating the universe from nothing or changing it from something static to the dynamic universe we know now.

And now your task is to prove that G is a conscious entity, and beyond that, that G is specifically your chosen god and not any multitude of other entities.

My proof doesn't include that!
I just proved that the universe had a creator, and he is
Unique (nothing similar to him/it)
One
External to the universe
Beyond time
Has no Image

Then I commented (not proved) that this model is only matched in Islam.

24 pages of absolute nothing!

Muslim Scholar

Having the last word does not mean that you won the argument.
You lost that on page one.

(May 16, 2013 at 9:57 am)paulpablo Wrote:

Quote:Because we only know/understand what is inside the universe, even our languages doesn't support words to describe what is outside the universe.

So why did you start this thread talking in english about god which according to you lives outside the universe?

We cannot describe how God do things or how he looks like, but we can use English to explain things about God that we can know from the Universe.

Quote:

Quote:So the First event is just single from a single source
(That's why scientist call is Singularity)

You say god was the singularity?

No, I just mean that scientist agree that there must be a first/singular event, Which support my proof.

Quote:

Quote:After the first event (creating the Universe) any actions can/must have time (Because other events are taking place)

Ok so how can god take time to create things if he is outside of time?

He is outside time, because he created the first event
His actions (after the first event) is just like any events that can be related to other events thus take time.

---

(May 18, 2013 at 4:24 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: 24 pages of absolute nothing!

Muslim Scholar
Having the last word does not mean that you won the argument.
You lost that on page one.

This is a typical answer from a person his religion is Atheism
You just blindly believe in Atheism, and reject any other "Religion"

(May 18, 2013 at 4:26 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: He is outside time, because he created the first event
His actions (after the first event) is just like any events that can be related to other events thus take time.

This explains nothing!

If here is no time for anything to exist in how can god exist?
If there is no space to exist in how can god exist?
If something has no space to live in or any time to exist in then they cannot exist.

You can't get get around this with "well god could" without any supporting evidence or even an idea of a mechanism.

(May 18, 2013 at 4:22 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: My proof doesn't include that!
I just proved that the universe had a creator, and he is
Unique (nothing similar to him/it)
One
External to the universe
Beyond time
Has no Image

Then I commented (not proved) that this model is only matched in Islam.

Alright, awesome: so your thread title, "proving god's existence" is entirely false, since you've only proved a creator.

... And you haven't even proven that, because just saying that events had a beginning doesn't entail a creative force, let alone a conscious creator being. So... at most, you've just proved the big bang...

(May 18, 2013 at 4:46 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(May 18, 2013 at 4:22 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: My proof doesn't include that!
I just proved that the universe had a creator, and he is
Unique (nothing similar to him/it)
One
External to the universe
Beyond time
Has no Image

Then I commented (not proved) that this model is only matched in Islam.

Alright, awesome: so your thread title, "proving god's existence" is entirely false, since you've only proved a creator.

... And you haven't even proven that, because just saying that events had a beginning doesn't entail a creative force, let alone a conscious creator being. So... at most, you've just proved the big bang...

I said that names cannot be proved, names are just assigned, I called him G not God

I proved the must for a creator (just read the proof again)
I also proved some attributes for this creator
Calling him God or G is a matter of choice (within the context of this proof)

(May 18, 2013 at 4:46 am)Esquilax Wrote: So... at most, you've just proved the big bang...

He didn't even prove that... he simply asserted it, based on the prior knowledge that the big bang is proved.