RE: A possibly new perspective on this thing that we know as God.
March 10, 2020 at 9:30 pm
(This post was last modified: March 10, 2020 at 9:31 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(March 10, 2020 at 9:26 pm)unityconversation Wrote:(March 10, 2020 at 9:05 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Wow! Thank you, actually, for being the very first theist I’ve ever engaged with in 6ish years that actually looked up a fallacy I’ve called them on. I give you sincere credit for that. As far as your question: when you put together some kind of argument, either formal or informal, you need to have some evidence that your premise/premises are true, or likely to be true. That is simply an immutable fact of logic. But, even if you can demonstrate your premise to be true (that only humans possess this list X of attributes) which I don’t think you have or can, the structure of your argument still has to be valid. Yours isn’t. You’re essentially saying these attributes are divine because only humans have them, and your evidence that they’re divine is that only humans have them. In other words, you’re asserting the same thing twice without any evidence. What would count as evidence? Some demonstration of a god, and a demonstration that these human attributes are related, or caused by, or imbued with the nature of this god.
See the thing is, you were just denying the concepts, proofs and evidence that I was giving you.
Give me the post number that provides this proof and evidence.
Quote:All the stuff you just said I already touched on, so I'm not going to do it again, it's becoming repetitive.
Yes, it is getting repetitive; continually asking you for justification for your belief and getting nothing, lol.
Quote:Ok so I guess this topic has ran it's course.
It's been interesting talking to you all.
Have a good one.
Take your ball and go home then.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
