"I have an argument for God but a lot of it is based on premises that are disputable"
MK, you didn't really need to go beyond that point really. These versions are less sound than the much maligned and disputed standard versions we are used to hearing.
Problems with your syllogisms include question begging as the second line seeks to assume something that you are trying to prove, bare assertion in that morality and 'ultimate greatness' are both real, non-sequitur in that the conclusions do not follow from the premises nor do they conclude the there is a god (ie the last line should read, therefore god exists), but to be fair I do not see how you can get to a god from these arguments anyway?
MK, you didn't really need to go beyond that point really. These versions are less sound than the much maligned and disputed standard versions we are used to hearing.
Problems with your syllogisms include question begging as the second line seeks to assume something that you are trying to prove, bare assertion in that morality and 'ultimate greatness' are both real, non-sequitur in that the conclusions do not follow from the premises nor do they conclude the there is a god (ie the last line should read, therefore god exists), but to be fair I do not see how you can get to a god from these arguments anyway?
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
