I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[amw79]

Again, read through the read. What of, my arguments HAS been refuted? I have seen no refutation of A) the a posteriori argument from potentiality/contingency........

The Cosmological Argument. Correct? Or are you speaking of something else entirely?

Please reply without the word-salads. For example instead of something like "causes are ontically prior to their effects" Just say "causes bring about their effects". Really, no one is impressed with your impressive use of a thesaurus and a latin phrase book.

If I propound an argument a contrario a posteriori, please don't repudiate a priori.
It's ab absurdo from ab irato.


Well, ok, not as an impressive use as yours, but you get the picture. It doesn't help the communication of your thoughts. And I want to know your thoughts on this cosmological argument. Not the thoughts of some long dead catholic dudes. 'k?

This has been the whole problem with this thread really. Its quite instructive to note that most here could sum up some of the greatest ideas ever proposed - concepts of logic, freedom or democracy; theory of evolution by natural selection, theory of relativity and special relativity - in plain, succinct language, however JP has for 30 pages unsuccessfully attempted to explain his a posteriori argument, using language not used outside of advanced theology.

Any challenges have been met with "You don't understand" and links to catholic definitions of terms - one of which was about 3 pages of denifition for two words - actuality & potentiality.

Again, I say the argument is set up as untestable and unobservable, and as such deserves no further attention