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

[Mariosep]

Brian says: "If you want to prove that God is the creator of the universe, you can't use 'God created the universe' as a definitional premise. Boob."

That is very good, but tell me how are you going to get to know what you are talking about?

You see, that is the concept in our mind, then we will go forth into the reality of objective existence to search for evidence of an entity that corresponds to the concept in our mind.

Now you will continue with saying that it is circular reasoning.

What is wrong with circular reasoning? that is what we do in our mind, otherwise we will not even know in our mind what we are thinking about.

When you know both the subject and the predicate of a thought in your mind, i.e. a sentence in your mind, that is a circular thought, but it is useful to proceed to search for the object as thought of correctly, namely, that one word or several words stand for one another or several other words, in terms of concepts in our mind: otherwise, I ask you how can you think at all as to know what you are thinking about, unless with concepts which concepts come to you in words?


Suppose, Brian, let you and me exchange thoughts about circular thinking or reasoning or argument, is that all right with you? so that we can get started on with a logical launching pad?

[comet]

they might be half right. The universe may have very well been born. But your average adult child of abuse that is seeking revenge in religion will never give in to that possibility.

[chimp3]

Mariosep! You are understood! People are disagreeing with you! Do you comprehend?

[Arkilogue]

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.

[Arkilogue]

they might be half right.  The universe may have very well been born.  But your average adult child of abuse that is seeking revenge in religion will never give in to that possibility.

A "born" (procreated) universe is more fundamental than an "intelligently designed" universe. There is no arbitrary mental creation/decree in biological reproduction. The thing reproduces it's own nature and that's it.

[Cato]

The Cosmological Argument has been soundly refuted for centuries. Those finding the topic interesting should digest this:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmol...-argument/

It's a rationalization and is only convincing to those that already believe for other reasons. I've never understood why otherwise intelligent people find the argument convincing with the abrupt and arbitrary interruption of the causal chain to coincide with myths already accepted as true; special pleading.

[Minimalist]

Anyway, for colleagues here who do care to share their thoughts on how they get to their position that god at least the one they care to talk about, just pick one, any one at all - for we cannot be into no god in particular, that is not logically feasible but a waste of time and labor.

There is no evidence that your god, or any god, exists.  Having read your screed that streak continues intact.


(P.S. - your bible is not "evidence.")

[Mariosep]

Okay, thanks a lot for your participation, everyone here.


Are we now into causation, but I was thinking that we will talk about circular reasoning?


Anyway, so causation it is going to be.


You think that there is no causation at all, it is all what, correlation?

Causation is one kind of correlation, do you agree?

[comet]

they might be half right.  The universe may have very well been born.  But your average adult child of abuse that is seeking revenge in religion will never give in to that possibility.

A "born" (procreated) universe is more fundamental than an "intelligently designed" universe. There is no arbitrary mental creation/decree in biological reproduction.  The thing reproduces it's own nature and that's it.

I only do observations that support a belief, not what I want it to be belief. It may have been born.  If a person needs it to be dumb, or smart, they might want to ask why that is.  

We are smart, well sort of, and we have nothing the universe doesn't have more of.  That's is more rational than saying we have something more than the universe has.

[Mariosep]

It is all right to disagree, but it is more all right that with disagreement, parties to the disagreement agree to expound on their reasons why they disagree, respectively from each side.

So, let dear colleagues here, point out one thing you disagree with me here in this thread, that I am expounding on, namely, how to prove God exists, with first coming to the information of the concept of God, then going into objective reality to search for the evidence of an entity corresponding to the concept of God in our mind.

What do you find disagreeable to you and why?