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

[Mariosep]

Well, as I thought so, no atheists take up the seek the fallacy of Simon, and no atheists take up the challenge to give a decent explanation of why they are carrying on the identity of atheists.

ETA: Thanks to the founders and owners and operators of this forum, I am still here; but it does give me a chill, owing to so much hostility against my person from atheists here.

I always try my very best to know the rules and observe them completely and all the time, but I have not completed any Ph.D. research on the rules here and the jurisprudence thereof.
----------------------

Now, to my idea for this morning:

Preface (today’s stats: posts = 1009 | viewers = 20987)

Dear everyone here, thanks a lot for reading my thread here; in particular I like to address atheists here:

Please read my still increasing posts when you want to declare that I have not proven God exists, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning, click on this link  – start with the OP though the No. 1 post of this thread.

And please oh please, no raving mad foul language and no unseemly cusses against me and against God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Now, as I have said earlier that I would take some time to research on atheists’ psychology dictating atheists’ epistemology, here is a study I came unto from a thoughtful journalist (whom I could call an international multi-discipline writer) on atheists might not exist, scientists say, see ANNEX below.

Happy reading, and please, do not go into raving mad foul language and unseemly cusses on me and also on God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

I will now take on the concern to inquire on the explanations if any from thinking atheists, emphasis on thinking, for the default status of things in the totality of reality which is existence – this is the sub-topic next: "Atheists explain existence."


ANNEX

*See bemused countenance of author below, Nury Vittachi.

Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke
By Nury Vittachi | July 6th 2014 08:03 PM | 863 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments

Metaphysical thought processes are more deeply wired than hitherto suspected

WHILE MILITANT ATHEISTS like Richard Dawkins may be convinced God doesn’t exist, God, if he is around, may be amused to find that atheists might not exist.

   Cognitive scientists are becoming increasingly aware that a metaphysical outlook may be so deeply ingrained in human thought processes that it cannot be expunged.

   While this idea may seem outlandish—after all, it seems easy to decide not to believe in God—evidence from several disciplines indicates that what you actually believe is not a decision you make for yourself. Your fundamental beliefs are decided by much deeper levels of consciousness, and some may well be more or less set in stone.

---

Read more, http://www.science20.com/writer_on_the_e...oke-139982

[End words of the author]
POPULATION IMPLICATIONS
When looking at trends, there’s also population growth to consider. Western countries are moving away from the standard family model, and tend to obsess over topics such as same-sex marriage and abortion on demand. Whatever the rights and wrongs of these issues, in practice they are associated with shrinking populations.  Europeans (and the Japanese) are not having enough children to replace the adult generation, and are seeing their communities shrink on a daily basis.

   Africans and South Asians, on the other hand, are generally religious and retain the traditional model of multi-child families—which may be old-fashioned from a Western point of view, but it’s a model powerfully sanctioned by the evolutionary urge to extend the gene pool.

   “It’s clearly the case that the future will involve an increase in religious populations and a decrease in scepticism,” says Steve Jones, a professor in genetics at University College London, speaking at the Hay Festival in the UK recently.

   This may appear as bad news for pro-atheism campaigners. But for the evolutionary life-force which may actually make the decisions, this may augur well for the continued existence of humanity. (An image of Richard Dawkins and his selfish gene having a testy argument over dinner springs to mind.)

---

      In the meantime, it might be wise for religious folks to refrain from teasing atheist friends who accidentally say something about their souls. And it might be equally smart for the more militant of today’s atheists to stop teasing religious people at all.

        We might all be a little more spiritual than we think.

I tried to upload the image but it turned out that a lot of blank space got included, sorry; so I decided to put it at the bottom of this post.

*

[Jackalope]

[Angrboda]

[Cyberman]

Trust me, Mario, I am giving this thread all the consideration it deserves.

[LadyForCamus]

[Whateverist]

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

What proof? I have seen no proof. Not even any evidence or half-way decent rationalization of your beliefs.

[Mariosep]

Okay, dear atheist colleagues here, let us go together into my proof for God existing, so that you will already stop with complaining that I have not proven God exists.

But you see, the trouble in talking with atheists is that you atheists don't care to first work with me together on the meanings of words used, like for example, what is evidence.

Anyway, here goes.

My proof is essentially founded on the evidence in the default status of things in the totality of reality which is existence.


1. In the totality of reality which is existence we you and I know about babies, and the nose in our face.

2. Babies and nose in our face do not create themselves.

3. So they need a creator to bring them to the default status of things in the totality of reality which is existence.

4. As they babies and nose do exist in the totality of reality which is existence, it follows that a creator first and ultimately created them.

5. There, babies and nose are two instances of evidence for the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

6. That is the proof from evidence for God existing, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.


So, you do comprehend with the above steps Nos. 1 to 6, that I have proven the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

---

.-.

So, let us all dear readers here sit back and await with bated breath for the comments of atheists on my proof for God existing.

And please, dear atheists, no more complaining that I have not proven God exists, first and foremost in concept as the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

[Tonus]

4. As they babies and nose do exist in the totality of reality which is existence, it follows that a creator first and ultimately created them.

Ergo, men and women created the universe.

[Pat Mustard]

I've just come to a startling realisation, mariosep is V'Ger!

[pocaracas]

I've just come to a startling realisation, mariosep is V'Ger!

Oh.... he only understands Morse, then.