Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 6:35 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 6:36 pm by Simon Moon.)
(November 7, 2016 at 3:46 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Thanks everyone for your presence and contribution.
Now, finally, Simon, you have shown up.
excerpt Simon #597 Wrote:Thanks, but no thanks.
You have already demonstrated that you are unable to be intellectually honest, so unless you can come up with actual evidence for your god, I may be done with this thread.
Okay, what about your being born from your parents, that is causation by your parents of your existence and life, is that not evidence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning?
Thanks dear Simon for showing up, please stay with me.
Just when I thought I was out, you sucked me back in...
No, it is existence of biological reproduction. Nothing more. If you want to prove it is evidence of a god, you have to support that claim with...wait for it...EVIDENCE.
Let me ask you something. Right now, there are some unfortunate people in Africa with an Onchocerca volvulus worm living out it's life cycle, and reproducing, in their eyes, leading to blindness.
Is the reproduction of Onchocerca volvulus also evidence for your god?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 6:37 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 6:41 pm by Crossless2.0.)
(November 7, 2016 at 5:40 pm)Mariosep Wrote:
Well, I guess it's going to be a long wait for Simon to reply to my post addressed explicitly to him; he is a good poster but subservient to his bad habit of hunting fallacies, instead of doing serious genuine productive thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.
That is what I find all the time with atheists, they don't think at all, they just voice out categorical statements laced with insults and cuss words, then they already feel so smug for having produced categorical declamatory utterances, and ending up with fu**’s and sh**’s.
Here, dear atheist colleagues, enter with google these two words, existence science, and you will see God’s existence come up page after page of hits by google.
Do that and think why, instead of issuing ipse dixit utterances and spicing them with cuss language, and then feeling so smug with having said something, no matter it is so empty and all pure arbitrary declamatory utterances.
Please, at least from intellectual curiosity, enter the words existence science with google into the realm of internet, and see what google will turn up.
And then think why.
ANNEX
Quote:Google: existence science
About 263,000,000 results (0.41 seconds)
Search Results
Does God Exist - Six Reasons to Believe that God is Really There - Is ... http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
2 Before you look at the facts surrounding God's existence, ask yourself, If God does exist ... Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous ...
Existence of God - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God
The existence of God is a subject of debate in the philosophy of religion, popular culture, and .... In Karl Popper's philosophy of science, belief in a supernatural God is outside the natural domain of scientific investigation because all scientific ...
10 Scientists Who Claim to Have Proof about the Existence of God ... http://www.oddee.com/item_98822.aspx
Jan 7, 2014 - Check out this list about theories and tests conducted by scientists from different fields that are intended to demonstrate the existence of God, ...
Believe in God in 5 Minutes (Scientific Proof) - YouTube
▶ 5:28 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQVm8RokoBA
Aug 2, 2014 - Uploaded by Sinai Speak
His Doctorate is in two fields: Earth sciences and physics. Donate to Sinai ... Scientist found definitive proof that ...
Can science prove the existence of God? – Starts With A Bang! - Medium https://medium.com/.../can-science-prove...d-b6fefdc5...
Dec 30, 2014 - This past weekend, Eric Metaxas lit up the world with his bold article in the Wall Street Journal, Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God.
World Renowned Scientist Michio Kaku Proves Existence Of God ... http://www.scienceworldreport.com/.../wo...ichio-kaku-...
Jun 13, 2016 - Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku, one of the most respected scientists today claimed that he found definitive proof of the existence of God.
What Science Says About the Existence of God - The New American http://www.thenewamerican.com/.../22901-...the-existe...
Apr 8, 2016 - What Science Says About the Existence of God. The second chapter of Carlos Calle's book The Universe: Order Without Design makes clear ...
Do Recent Discoveries in Science Offer Evidence for the Existence of ... https://www.gci.org/science/debate1a
Science writer Fred Heeren is in a position to know the arguments for his position from his seven-year search for evidence both for and against God's existence, ...
Has a Prominent Physicist Proved the Existence of God? - Breaking ... http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/.../pr...xistence-g...
Jun 23, 2016 - Some lauded his declaration of faith as a sign that science finally ... in the existence of one God as creator of the universe, intervening in it and ...
People also ask
Do gods exist?
Why there is not a God?
Is science is a religion?
Why Science Does Not Disprove God | TIME
time.com/77676/why-science-does-not-disprove-god/
Apr 27, 2014 - A number of recent books and articles would have you believe that—somehow—science has now disproved the existence of God. We know so ...
"According to legend, in 1989 a team of Russian scientists who were operating under the direction of Dr. Azzacove drilled a hole that was nine miles deep in an unnamed place in Siberia before breaking through into a cavity. Intrigued by this unexpected discovery, they lowered an extremely heat tolerant microphone, along with other sensory equipment, into the well. They listened and recorded (purportedly) the tormented screams of desperate people. The second surprise was the high temperature that they discovered at the earth's center, which was over 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The conclusion was that they had opened a hole into Hell.
The story was first published in 1990 by the Finnish newspaper Ammennusatia, a journal published by a group of Christians from Leväsjoki, a town in Western Finland.
United States tabloids soon ran the story, and sound files—recordings of those alleged supplications from the damned—began appearing on various sites across the Internet. Immediately, the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TNB) discussed the sound clip on its evangelical channels, proclaiming that the clip was the ultimate proof of the existence of Hell.
Age Rendalen, a Norwegian teacher, heard the story on TBN while visiting the United States. Disgusted with what he perceived to be mass gullibility, Rendalen decided to augment the tale at TBN's expense. Rendalen wrote to the network, originally claiming that he disbelieved the tale but, upon his return to Norway, supposedly read a "factual account" of the story. According to Rendalen, the "story" claimed not only that the cursed well was real, but that a bat-like apparition (a common pictorial representation of demons, such as in Michelangelo's The Torment of Saint Anthony) had risen out of it before blazing a trail across the Russian sky. To perpetuate his hoax, Rendalen deliberately mistranslated a trivial Norwegian article about a local building inspector and submitted both the original Norwegian article and the English "translation" to TBN. Rendalen also included his real name, phone number, and address, as well as those of a pastor friend who knew about the hoax and had agreed to expose it to anyone who called seeking verification.
Unfortunately, the Trinity Broadcasting Network ran the story without contacting Renalden or the Californian pastor, and the false story of "Well to Hell hoax" appeared on television, radio, and in a large number of publications.
The real story is that the Soviet Union had, in fact, drilled a hole nearly eight miles deep, the Kola Superdeep Borehole, located not in Siberia but on the Kola Peninsula, which shares borders with Norway and Finland. Upon completing the borehole in 1989, some interesting geological anomalies were found, although they reported no supernatural encounters. Temperatures reached 180 °C (360 °F), making deeper drilling prohibitively expensive. The recording, however, was later revealed to have been a cleverly remixed portion of the soundtrack of the 1972 movie Baron Blood, with various effects added."
If you want to accuse me of intellectual dishonesty or lack of proper curiosity for not going further with your "sources", so be it. But I have a life and my time is too valuable to spend reading such nonsense. If this is what you have in mind when you write of "serious genuine productive thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas" then I really don't know what to say, other than you haven't the slightest idea what those words actually mean. And Simon pointing out specifically how your reasoning fails is your problem, not his. Simon actually does "serious productive thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas" so I can understand why his posts confuse and infuriate you so.
Tell me you're trolling. I could sort of respect that. But in case you're serious, all I can do is laugh and walk away. Have fun with your poor reasoning and crank ideas.
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 6:40 pm
Dear atheist Astreja, we were talking about what and how it is to prove something exist in objective reality outside our mind.
I mentioned the nose in our face, that is very easy and quick to prove, by merely in a group, each one touching his nose and the nose of everyone's else.
What about proving that there is an entity that corresponds to the concept in our mind of that entity?
How do we you and I prove the existence of such an entity?
Please do not insist that we have finished that exchange because as I recall we never did.
If you insist that it was already finished, then I request that we go there again because I like to refresh my memory, to see where I went wrong or where I was right.
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 7:05 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 7:06 pm by AceBoogie.)
This is hilarious to me because your argument, Mario, is almost as old as religion itself (well maybe not QUITE that old, but pretty fucking old). People have been arguing this first cause idea for centuries.
Mario, what you're doing is creating your own little bubble where you create the facts, concepts and ideas. Now this is fine if you're trying to, in your own mind, make sense of the idea of god and how that idea could, in some way, correlate with reality. But if you're going to propose an argument to other people you actually have to operate within the confines of REALITY.
The problem with you trying to get us to agree with your definition of god, IN CONCEPT OF COURSE, is that you can do that with anything, really. A concept merely existing means nothing.
We COULD say:
1. Unicorns, in concept, are the first and foremost creators of the universe, man and everything with a beginning.
2. Look for instances of causation in reality, outside of concepts in our mind.
3. We find many instances of causation in reality.
4. We must then infer to the first and ultimate cause.
5. We realize that the first and ultimate cause is in correlation with our concept of Unicorns (HOW CONVENIENT!)
6. Unicorns are the first and ultimate cause of all that exists.
So yea, in this little world of mine I've created, unicorns are the creators of the universe. The problem is, NO ONE ELSE thinks this about unicorns, because unicorns don't fucking exist. I'm not sure if you realize how stupid you sound or if you're now just trying to hang on to the last, dangling thread in order to save face because everyone has exposed your stupidity.
“Love is the only bow on Life’s dark cloud. It is the morning and the evening star. It shines upon the babe, and sheds its radiance on the quiet tomb. It is the mother of art, inspirer of poet, patriot and philosopher.
It is the air and light of every heart – builder of every home, kindler of every fire on every hearth. It was the first to dream of immortality. It fills the world with melody – for music is the voice of love.
Love is the magician, the enchanter, that changes worthless things to Joy, and makes royal kings and queens of common clay. It is the perfume of that wondrous flower, the heart, and without that sacred passion, that divine swoon, we are less than beasts; but with it, earth is heaven, and we are gods.” - Robert. G. Ingersoll
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 7:26 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 8:32 pm by Simon Moon.)
(November 7, 2016 at 5:40 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Well, I guess it's going to be a long wait for Simon to reply to my post addressed explicitly to him; he is a good poster but subservient to his bad habit of hunting fallacies, instead of doing serious genuine productive thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.
I was out or town for the weekend.
Sorry to inform you, but finding fallacies in arguments is the most reliable method of testing whether an argument meant to support a claim, is indeed a rational reason to believe the claim. You can't have "doing serious genuine productive thinking on truths, facts, logic" without being able to tell if an argument is valid or fallacious.
Quote:That is what I find all the time with atheists, they don't think at all, they just voice out categorical statements laced with insults and cuss words, then they already feel so smug for having produced categorical declamatory utterances, and ending up with fu**’s and sh**’s.
Here's the thing.
We have been provided with every argument for the existence of gods there are. Your inferior version of the cosmological argument is nothing new. We are not "just voicing" out categorical statements, we are demonstrating, using valid logic, why your argument is flawed.
Quote:Here, dear atheist colleagues, enter with google these two words, existence science, and you will see God’s existence come up page after page of hits by google.
Do that and think why, instead of issuing ipse dixit utterances and spicing them with cuss language, and then feeling so smug with having said something, no matter it is so empty and all pure arbitrary declamatory utterances.
There is no such thing as 'existence science'. None of those sites (yes, I checked them all) employ the scientific method.
Quote:Please, at least from intellectual curiosity, enter the words existence science with google into the realm of internet, and see what google will turn up.
And then think why.
Why?
Because believers are desperately trying to come up with reasons for their belief that have the veneer of rationality. But in truth, they are all as fallacious as yours.
Quote:Does God Exist - Six Reasons to Believe that God is Really There - Is ... http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
2 Before you look at the facts surrounding God's existence, ask yourself, If God does exist ... Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous ...
I checked out all 6 reasons. Again, nothing we have not heard before. Mostly they are argument for ignorance.
"I can't figure out how consciousness arose, therefor god". "The universe sure looks designed, therefor god".
Quote:10 Scientists Who Claim to Have Proof about the Existence of God ... http://www.oddee.com/item_98822.aspx
Jan 7, 2014 - Check out this list about theories and tests conducted by scientists from different fields that are intended to demonstrate the existence of God, ...
Serbians digging into Hell.
A neuroscientist claims he visited heaven while in a coma. Couldn't have possibly been hallucination caused by a his coma? Naw, must be heaven.
Even Pascal's wager. The worst justification to believe in a god ever.
Seriously?!
Quote:Believe in God in 5 Minutes (Scientific Proof) - YouTube
▶ 5:28 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQVm8RokoBA
Aug 2, 2014 - Uploaded by Sinai Speak
His Doctorate is in two fields: Earth sciences and physics. Donate to Sinai ... Scientist found definitive proof that ...
Couldn't watch it at work, but I am willing to bet a week's salary that it does not contain any valid reasons. I will watch it late.
As for the rest, several wouldn't get to a site.
As far as Michio Kaku goes here is an article by a physicist who is also a Christian, who says that Kaku discovered no such thing.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 8:25 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 8:32 pm by Mariosep.)
Dear everyone who wants to interact with me on the issue God exists or not, that includes Astreja, Simon, etc.
I want us to work as to concur on what it is to prove the existence of an entity in objective reality from the concept in our mind of that entity, for example, like Bigfoot.
No need to interact with you over your various points in your messages.
When we work as to concur on the concept, that does not mean at all: that you and I are affirming already the existence of the entity corresponding to the concept we have formulated in our mind.
Please try to understand that, namely, when and as we have formulated in our mind a concept, how do we prove that there exists or does not exist in objective reality the entity outside of the concept in our mind, but corresponding to the concept in our mind?
I said this already nth times, how can we at all communicate when we don't have the concurred on concept of the thing we are talking about, much less search for its existence as to correspond to the concept in our mind?
To formulate a concept in our mind does not mean that you will produce a ridiculous concept of that entity we will search for in objective reality, like that we have the concept of a flying spaghetti monster, or an orbiting teapot in space etc.
I will already be into endless repetition trying to make you atheist colleagues here to comprehend what I am trying to succeed in making you see my point, but if your mindset is definitely and persistently into taking to ridicules right away in the very first step of how to communicate as not to talk pass each other's head, then I will just make a commentary on the debate between Russell and Copleston, and you can join me in contributing to the commentary, then I just hope that in that environment you will not insist on dwelling on ridiculous analogies.
-.-
Here, please atheist colleagues, read the texts in bold below, and see whether you understand what Russell is agreeing to: it is definitely not into affirmirng the existence of God.
Quote:A Debate on the Existence of God
Bertrand Russell [hereafter R:] and F.C. Copleston [hereafter C:]
C: As we are going to discuss the existence of God, it might perhaps be as well to come to some provisional agreement as to what we understand by the term "God." I presume that we mean a supreme personal Being -- distinct from the world and Creator of the world. Would you agree -- provisionally at least -- to accept this statement as the meaning of the term "God"?
R: Yes, I accept this definition.
C: Well, my position is the affirmative position that such a Being actually exists, and that His existence can be proved philosophically. Perhaps you would tell me if your position is that of agnosticism or of atheism. I mean, would you say that the non-existence of God can be proved?
R: No, I should not say that: my position is agnostic.
C: Would you agree with me that the problem of God is a problem of great importance? For example, would you agree that if God does not exist, human beings and human history can have no other purpose than the purpose they choose to give themselves, which -- in practice -- is likely to mean the purpose which those impose who have the power to impose it?
R: Roughly speaking, yes, though I should have to place some limitation on your last clause.
C: Would you agree that if there is no God -- no absolute Being -- there can be no absolute values? I mean, would you agree that if there is no absolute good that the relativity of values results?
R: No, I think these questions are logically distinct. Take, for instance, G. E. Moore's Principia Ethica, where he maintains that there is a distinction of good and evil, that both of these are definite concepts. But he does not bring in the idea of God to support that contention.
C: Well, suppose we leave the question of good till later, till we come to the moral argument, and I give first a metaphysical argument. I'd like to put the main weight on the metaphysical argument based on Leibniz's argument from "Contingency" and then later we might discuss the moral argument. Suppose I give a brief statement on the metaphysical argument and that then we go on to discuss it?
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 10:04 pm (This post was last modified: November 7, 2016 at 10:06 pm by Astreja.)
(November 7, 2016 at 6:40 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Dear atheist Astreja, we were talking about what and how it is to prove something exist in objective reality outside our mind.
First of all...
(Springy G reaches for Her Clue-By-Four™)
*BOP*
That's for continuing to use "dear" after being told that it was disrespectful.
Secondly, I am a strong agnostic. I believe that it is impossible to definitively prove the existence of anything. As such, I do not concern Myself with that kind of philosophical masturbatory silliness and favour pragmatism instead. If I think something is real and can interact with it, that's sufficient evidence for My purposes.
Quote:I mentioned the nose in our face, that is very easy and quick to prove, by merely in a group, each one touching his nose and the nose of everyone's else.
What about proving that there is an entity that corresponds to the concept in our mind of that entity?
How do we you and I prove the existence of such an entity?
Exactly the same way we demonstrate the existence of noses -- By encountering it in the real world and interacting with it.
We do not generally waste time constructing philosophical arguments regarding the existence of noses, although you appear to be obtuse enough to attempt it. As you said, we look in the mirror or touch the nose, or reach for a bottle of decongestant spray when it clogs up.
As such, there is no need to construct a philosophical argument regarding the existence of a hypothetical god. It's either there or it isn't. Until you can come up with physical evidence that is as compelling as the evidence for noses, you have no basis for your argument and we have nothing further to discuss.
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 10:17 pm
LOL
Every time someone tears apart his argument he just dances around it all and changes the subject.
This thread is going nowhere and I'm checking out.
“Love is the only bow on Life’s dark cloud. It is the morning and the evening star. It shines upon the babe, and sheds its radiance on the quiet tomb. It is the mother of art, inspirer of poet, patriot and philosopher.
It is the air and light of every heart – builder of every home, kindler of every fire on every hearth. It was the first to dream of immortality. It fills the world with melody – for music is the voice of love.
Love is the magician, the enchanter, that changes worthless things to Joy, and makes royal kings and queens of common clay. It is the perfume of that wondrous flower, the heart, and without that sacred passion, that divine swoon, we are less than beasts; but with it, earth is heaven, and we are gods.” - Robert. G. Ingersoll
RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 7, 2016 at 10:38 pm
(November 7, 2016 at 6:40 pm)Mariosep Wrote: I mentioned the nose in our face, that is very easy and quick to prove, by merely in a group, each one touching his nose and the nose of everyone's else.
What about proving that there is an entity that corresponds to the concept in our mind of that entity?
How do we you and I prove the existence of such an entity?
Why is a group of people required, when you can just touch your nose? Why on Earth would you need to make a logical proof that your nose exists, according to the "concept in your mind"? Are you so completely steeped in solipsism to the point where a return to reality is that difficult? Something tells me the answer is: yes, you are.
Objective reality, my friend. You should try it out. You may not like it at first due to the whole there is no real god thing; but hey, you'll get used to it.
“Life is like a grapefruit. Well, it's sort of orangey-yellow and dimpled on the outside, wet and squidgy in the middle. It's got pips inside, too. Oh, and some people have half a one for breakfast.” - Ford Prefect
