RE: I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?
November 11, 2016 at 3:34 pm
You have not once addressed what I have written on this thread.... but it's ok... it's ok... some of it will stay in your subconscious...
It's your thread, I respond to you.... I'll respond to him when I want and I don't want to, right now.
No, you are not good at observing causation. You are incredibly inept at it.
Mamas and papas bring pre-existing materials together to form babies.
Biology describes how that happens.... Chemistry can go further and describe many many other events where things that come together form something else... and a few events involved in biology, too.
If we proceed to things smaller than molecules... say atoms... and physics is the discipline used to describe the events that bring things together and form some other things...
Keep going into smaller things and you get into QCD and the like... still technically physics...
So, down deep, everything you perceive as being caused is described by physics. And everything is a case of taking some material, combining it with some other material, and resulting in some yet another material. Sometimes, mass gets converted into energy and vice-versa, but we know that those can be interchangeable (mass equals energy, with a proportionality constant, E = mc^2).
So.... kindly tell the rest of the class how your god's causality fits in this picture.
So, now your god god is everything.... such a wonderful all-encompassing and utterly useless concept...
(November 11, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Now, please just interact with Simon Moon and give him your thoughts on how to show me that I am wrong with my proof for God existing.Why?
It's your thread, I respond to you.... I'll respond to him when I want and I don't want to, right now.
(November 11, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Because I am only one person and not a battalion, and you are many, so it is most convenient in regard to time-saving and labor cost-cutting for me to just interact with Simon Moon, besides he is good at fallacies, and I am good at observing causation in the objective reality of existence where babies are caused by their papas and mamas.
No, you are not good at observing causation. You are incredibly inept at it.
Mamas and papas bring pre-existing materials together to form babies.
Biology describes how that happens.... Chemistry can go further and describe many many other events where things that come together form something else... and a few events involved in biology, too.
If we proceed to things smaller than molecules... say atoms... and physics is the discipline used to describe the events that bring things together and form some other things...
Keep going into smaller things and you get into QCD and the like... still technically physics...
So, down deep, everything you perceive as being caused is described by physics. And everything is a case of taking some material, combining it with some other material, and resulting in some yet another material. Sometimes, mass gets converted into energy and vice-versa, but we know that those can be interchangeable (mass equals energy, with a proportionality constant, E = mc^2).
So.... kindly tell the rest of the class how your god's causality fits in this picture.
(November 11, 2016 at 2:37 pm)Mariosep Wrote: Dear readers here, please think about this thought from yours truly:
“The default status of things in the totality of reality is existence.”
You see, when you think on that thought from yours truly, you will come to the knowledge that existence is composed of things existing from other things, and things existing from, by, through, in, of themselves or itself; and that thing that exists from, by, through, in, of itself, that is the entity that corresponds to my concept of God, namely, God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
So, now your god god is everything.... such a wonderful all-encompassing and utterly useless concept...