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

[Mariosep]

Asmodee, you are keen to exchange thoughts with me grounding ourselves on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas?

That is my impression that atheists here do not care to exchange thoughts with me at all, they just want to say something from their own whatever motive, but exchange is to my observation, impossible; for they don't continue after their first or second reaction to my efforts to develop a link with them, as to continue until we get into a concurrence on whatever we are into, in our exchange.

Dear Asmodee, see if this is not also the case at present with my reaction to your post reproduced below.

I fear you will already at this point go away.

It seems to me, that atheists here really resist any serious attempts to get them to interact with me, and then they will accuse me of trying to proselytize them when I exert further to connect with them.

You see, dear atheist readers of this post, I am here just to enjoy my hobby of knowing what atheists are into and what I am into: from my part I am curious, what about you atheists here, are you also curious to know what I am here into?

Okay, you ask me, and I will tell you, namely, that I am curious to know what you are into here in this forum and in this thread started by me.

And yes, I know God exists, and I am very curious to know how atheists come to know or whatever it is with them about denying God existing.

At this point theists here will say that they don't understand my English.

So, there, I again fail from my own fault to get linked up with an atheist here, just to satisfy my curiosity: what is driving them to post messages but to not pursue an interaction as to come to concurrence on whatever the issue is, that is taken up with them.

Now, I also notice that they will try to drive me to get annoyed terribly, and then I wind up getting banned forever,  owing to being unkind with my language.

Anyway, I have not read all the new messages this morning, I just get started from the last new post here and move to my last post prior to the present session, so I will go now to see whether Jesster, the lady poster here, she with the adage, your friendly neighborhood heathen, whether she has taken up with my invitation for us to pursue whatever it is with her to take up with me, aside from saying that I am trying to digress from whatever it was I was digressing from.

Summing up: I will just most cordially invite any atheist here at all, to let us we two, for I cannot be answering every post that is addressed to me, I am only one person, not a battalion, but there are atheists here who many of them take to react to me and then disappear, forever(?).

Mariosep, I surmise that English is not your first language, and that is okay, but it would really help the conversation if you didn't try so hard to "sound smart", using big words and stringing different concepts together.  I'm sure you're very intelligent, but your posts are a little confusing because of your attempt to sound smart.

You seem to be asking us to disprove some god which you have defined in your head but you only define as "not the God of the Bible".  But "disprove this" is not how logic works.  You could, for instance, never give me absolute proof that fairies don't exist, or gnomes, or trolls.  You can't go out and gather evidence that something doesn't exist because something that doesn't exist is not there to leave behind evidence.  Instead you have to ask for evidence that something does exist.  You can't prove non-existence.  So there is no proof,  logical or otherwise, that there are no gods, which is exactly what one would expect whether any give god(s) existed or did not exist.


Your initial post asked for our opinion on your logical "proof" of some undefined god.  The only thing you have defined about that god is that it is not the God of the Bible, yet you are quick to point out that we are wrong in any definition we give for that god.  You seem to want an intelligent conversation, yet everything you say leads away from intelligent conversation, whether it be speaking beyond your language skills, telling us that we are arguing against the wrong god when you offer no definition of which god you're talking about or, strangely, proclaiming that circular logic is natural and acceptable, which it is very much not.  Circular logic is no logic at all.

Anyway, many of us have answered your original post and told you what we found wrong with your argument.  Whether you accept our critiques or not, we have answered you.  Strangely, though, you keep changing what the conversation is supposed to be about to the point where none of us really understand what it is you actually want any more.  If you could define both the deity in question and what you expect of us in clear language you do not attempt to dress up with too much pleasantry or sophistication perhaps we can give you an answer to whatever the question is you actually want an answer to.  At this point I don't think any of us really know what the question is.