(June 18, 2013 at 5:30 pm)bennyboy Wrote:

(June 18, 2013 at 9:29 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: Logic Does, not religion.

If you say, "Nothing we can observe in this universe can ultimately explain why it exists," I will totally agree with you. But then you start wrapping your mythology around it, as though one point of philosophical agreement is solid ground for your entire mythology. Nothing you said about time proves that any Prime Cause that might exist must be sentient, or must be singular.

You are working from the world's worst kind of confirmation bias-- working back from your "hypothesis" to show that all the data arrives at it. This is not the foundation on which good logic should be built.

Your statement is too general
to refute a proof you need to point which part of it exactly fails, then prove it is a failure or it is only probable

By the way; when I wrote the proof, I did not know that it will lead to that conclusion at all, I didn't use the bottom up approach for it, it came as it is.

It was reviewed by a an algorithms expert (holding a PhD and working for Google) and he could not find a flaw in it (he is an Atheist as well).

---

(June 18, 2013 at 1:13 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: MS proves to no one but his own satisfaction that he has proved god.
When he is told that he has failed he says "look at my proof".
And repeat.
for FORTY THREE PAGES.

If it is like so, why don't you stop posting?
It is because you know it is true, but trying to convince yourself it isn't

---

(June 18, 2013 at 12:55 pm)Simsim Wrote: I should read all this topic to participate in it

Can't anyone give a brief summary of what is written in the past 43 pages?

OK .. God exists but I am not convinced of this reality and I am not convinced by believers' arguments. So what?

Here is the summary
I proposed a logical proof of God existence (read the first post)
No one (till now) was able to refuse it, however most people are not accepting it (illogical)
For you, you need to refute it or accept it
If not, God will put you in Hell

Quote:It was reviewed by a an algorithms expert (holding a PhD and working for Google) and he could not find a flaw in it (he is an Atheist as well).

I demand to see proof of this claim.

(June 18, 2013 at 12:19 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: 3) God will put you in hell for not worshiping him

That sounds like a very human and petty motivation for a unique being.[/quote]
Can you prove that?

Quote:An alternative explanation is that we understand you perfectly, but you're wrong.

Assertion!

Quote:The only part of your argument that isn't a premise is the second line. Even your conclusion is just another premise, since it doesn't follow from the line above it

Those statements are not the proof, you need to refute the proof not my statements summarizing it.
Go back read the proof, quote whatever you don't like then disprove what is quoted

---

(June 18, 2013 at 10:21 am)Dragonetti Wrote: And yes, it is true. Allah falls in the same category as Dragons and Unicorns. Just one long fairy tale.

do you have a similar proof for Dragons?
But wait; as an evolutionist you can Mutate anything (Beneficially); so you can develop a dragon from even a Virus

I highly doubt this is even true. I want to see proof with this claim. If this algorithm has been scrutinized so well, why not published and receive your Noble Peace Prize. Also, the proof I want has to come from Google Servers! This mean, this PhD must post on their research.google.com or http://www.youtube.com while holding today's news paper. Since, this is bullshit, and you barely understand Math, Science, and Logic, I will doubt this will happen. Also, we have refute this wannabe algorithm, but you refuse to see your own illogical fallacy. MS all you do is make assertions to the existence of a god. The educational institution should not grant you any type of degree due to your lack of basic logic, math, and science.

---

I do not need to prove Dragons, since I am not making the claim that Dragons exist. Which dragons do not exist, just like Allah.

Obviously, you barely comprehend how evolution works. You are using the same tactics as Christians and other religions (nothing new nor enlightening). How pitiful! Evolution is not a religion, since their is no deity to pray too, nor belief in faith. Plenty of people have pointed out the flaws in your logic and so called proof. Put up or shut up (not logical wannabe proof, but concrete proof), we've heard this babble from other so called people of faith. You cannot prove your god, and you cannot convince others to join the stupid mind control called religion.

(June 19, 2013 at 3:38 am)Dragonetti Wrote: I highly doubt this is even true. I want to see proof with this claim. If this algorithm has been scrutinized so well, why not published and receive your Noble Peace Prize. Also, the proof I want has to come from Google Servers! This mean, this PhD must post on their research.google.com or http://www.youtube.com while holding today's news paper

I'm working on publishing it.

Quote:we have refute this wannabe algorithm, but you refuse to see your own illogical fallacy. MS all you do is make assertions to the existence of a god.

If you really believe in that, you wouldn't have written your first statement.

Quote:I do not need to prove Dragons, since I am not making the claim that Dragons exist. Which dragons do not exist, just like Allah.

Wrong logic, as you didn't refute it, they are still possible to exist.

Quote:Obviously, you barely comprehend how evolution works. You are using the same tactics as Christians and other religions (nothing new nor enlightening). How pitiful! Evolution is not a religion, since their is no deity to pray too, nor belief in faith.

It is like the Zero to numbers

Quote:Plenty of people have pointed out the flaws in your logic and so called proof.

Can you summarize that?

(June 19, 2013 at 3:11 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: Your statement is too general
to refute a proof you need to point which part of it exactly fails, then prove it is a failure or it is only probable

I'm too busy right now, but I can sum it up:
-your axioms, specifically the definition of time, are too speculative to be treated as axioms. If we were to debate, I'd ask you to prove that time is what you think it is.
-your conclusions do not follow from your axioms. I can accept a Prime Cause as a philosophical conclusion based on your ideas about time. I cannot accept that it must be Allah.
-your "solution" (i.e. God) is special pleading. You allow an entity to embody those characteristics by which you refuted any other idea of existence.

I'll try this weekend to make a more exhaustive list. I also challenge you to a 1 vs. 1 debate if you are willing. As a declared agnostic, you should find it easier to convince me than the physical monist atheists here, methinks.

No, your logic is false. That is not how logic works! I do not have to prove something doesn't exist, as that does not make any sense what so ever.

You analogy about the number zero never makes any sense either. It is easy, just look at the past post on this and your other proofs.

Also, whom are your trying to publish pitiful work? Islams/Allah is real journal? Because, I highly doubt American Journal of Algorithms and Computing will publish such rubbish, and not that Tehran bullshit either.

(June 19, 2013 at 3:11 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: Here is the summary
I proposed a logical proof of God existence (read the first post)
No one (till now) was able to refuse it, however most people are not accepting it (illogical)
For you, you need to refute it or accept it
If not, God will put you in Hell

Thanks. I read your argument about the existence of God. I will not debate it although I have many scientific and logical reservations. But let neglect all of this and discuss only the conclusion that this God is the Islamic God.

You jumped to that God is that of Islam without any reasonable deduction. Of course I know it is easy to give arguments for the existence of God, but It is almost impossible to prove that a specific religion is true.

Can you prove that this god is not a deistic one. I can put many versions of God which is more sufficient than the Islamic one. For example:

1- A god who created the universe and he is unique, having no image, etc ... but he don't speak to people.

2- A god who created the universe who meets all the criteria you mention but will not resurrect us after death.

3- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us but he is not interested in our beliefs but only our acts. (This would be pretty more reasonable than your Islamic version)

4- A god who created the universe just for entertainment. You may say: entertainment? are you kidding? How come God does that?
but maybe it is much better than hiding from people and testing them if they can expect his existence (not only his mere existence but also his characteristics and the certain religion he belongs to !!!!!) and if they can't he will put them into an eternal hell. Entertainment is more reasonable, I swear.

5- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us after death but he will put all of us in Hell.

6- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us after death but he will put all of us in Hell for only 700 lunar years to purify us then send us to Paradise for eternity.

7- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us after death but he will send us to Paradise directly but not in one place (degree).

8- A Christian Unitarian God and all the verses in the bible which contradict your criteria should be reinterpreted to meet them (You will find many who can do that)

9- A god who meet all your criteria but he loves atheist people only because they were so brave that they claim him to be non-existent, so he will resurrect only atheists for remunerating them and will let the rest dead.

10- etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....

Why should we jump to your conclusion that the Islamic god is the only option? What is the logical or scientific evidence that God will punish those who are not Muslims or not convinced of Islam? Can you make another algorithm for that?

I can even say that this characteristic (Punishment of unbelievers and remuneration of believers) contradicts your criteria of God which you deduced previously because these actions are surprisingly human.

(June 19, 2013 at 5:42 am)Simsim Wrote:

(June 19, 2013 at 3:11 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: Here is the summary
I proposed a logical proof of God existence (read the first post)
No one (till now) was able to refuse it, however most people are not accepting it (illogical)
For you, you need to refute it or accept it
If not, God will put you in Hell

Thanks. I read your argument about the existence of God. I will not debate it although I have many scientific and logical reservations. But let neglect all of this and discuss only the conclusion that this God is the Islamic God.

You jumped to that God is that of Islam without any reasonable deduction. Of course I know it is easy to give arguments for the existence of God, but It is almost impossible to prove that a specific religion is true.

Thank you for participating!
While this proof scope is not to prove the Islamic religion, it refuted most of other religions
Proving the religion itself cannot be done by logic only
Because Quran or Mohamed are not a logical or a scientific must

Quote:6- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us after death but he will put all of us in Hell for only 700 lunar years to purify us then send us to Paradise for eternity.

7- A god who created the universe and meets all the criteria and will resurrect us after death but he will send us to Paradise directly but not in one place (degree).

These options are possible in Islam (but very weak)

Quote:Why should we jump to your conclusion that the Islamic god is the only option?

I didn't claim that!

Quote:What is the logical or scientific evidence that God will punish those who are not Muslims or not convinced of Islam? Can you make another algorithm for that?

The algorithm will go like that:
Prove God existence
Prove Possible God's models

Prove the authenticity & integrity of Quran
Prove the divinity of Quran
Then by default everything in it is proved

(June 19, 2013 at 3:11 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: Here is the summary
I proposed a logical proof of God existence (read the first post)
No one (till now) was able to refuse it, however most people are not accepting it (illogical)

Some dumbass named Einstein disagreed with your conception of time. He did this 100 years ago. Try again.

Quote:For you, you need to refute it or accept it
If not, God will put you in Hell

Threat of hell, that's original.

Allah better enjoy nose porn. If he tries to put me in hell I'm going to target one of his nostrils and commence furious face fucking.