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

[I_am_not_mafia]

Dear atheist colleagues, please: I am asking you to prove the existence of atoms, in order that you will experience what and how it is to prove something to exist in objective reality outside of concepts in your mind.

Already answered

How it happened in practice:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/2015112...e-of-atoms

God's existence is still going to be proven with us going out to the objective reality of existence outside our mind, to look for evidence for the existence of God, evidence such as all instances of causation whereby one thing brings about the existence of another thing, for example, think or observe that we all are caused i.e. brought into existence by our parents.

And from that evidence like human procreation of fellow humans, babies, we infer to the existence of the first and ultimate cause of causes

Your inference is wrong. What causes a snowflake?

without a mind and the concepts we have in our mind, we are not humans but at most robots created by computer engineers,

What is a mind and how is it different from a brain? Can you have a mind without a brain?

You see, dear atheist colleagues, you woefully or miserably conflate the enunciation of a concept for the affirmation of existence of the object corresponding to the concept in our mind - of the object.

This sentence doesn't mean anything because you were trying to be clever with long words and were using them incorrectly:

Conflate: combine (two or more sets of information, texts, ideas, etc.) into one.
Enunciate: express (a proposition, theory, etc.) in clear or definite terms.

So what you could have said instead, far more succinctly which would allow people to actually understand what you are saying and respond without having to parse your tortured text was:

'We see theories and the objects they apply to as being one and the same thing.'

Please give evidence where this has ever occurred in this thread.



You see dear theist colleague, my esteemed Mariosep, whilst you pontificate verbosely and needlessly interject unnecessary asides into your sentences, much like I am doing in this very sentence which could easily have been edited out thereby avoiding distracting the reader and confusing her as to what I am talking about, your disinterested reader has glossed over because they are not sufficiently invested in what you feel compelled to express because you refuse to engage with them or respond to their counter arguments.