RE: Proving God Existence
May 28, 2013 at 2:10 am
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2013 at 2:28 am by Muslim Scholar.)
(May 26, 2013 at 7:23 am)bennyboy Wrote: You seem to have a pretty special idea of what it means for something to exist. Normally, to exist is to be locatable in both time and place (for things), or to be experienced as a thought by an individual (this experience also being mediated by time, for without time, there can be no flow of thought). In either case, you have the framework which time provides, and which allows for things to happen-- like new stuff getting made.You should discuss the proof in its context only
I'm not using the common definition of "Time", I'm only using a sub of its definition which is Events and related events
So when I said, god is outside time, it means His (first action) was/cannot be related to any other event.
(May 26, 2013 at 2:54 pm)little_monkey Wrote:I didn't assume that, however if events are infinite S1 & S2 must exist(May 26, 2013 at 6:24 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: I didn't apply algebra at all, it is only logic!
Your logic is circular. You started with S1 is finite and S2 is infinite to conclude that S1 is indeed finite, therefore S2 can't be infinite.
Quote:I mean "disjoint" or "Logical Paradox"Quote: It is a paradox, i.e. impossible to exist in reality
Wrong definition: A paradox is an apparent contradiction.
Quote:Just apply the proof on anything assumed to be infiniteQuote:Infinity itself is a conceptual term and nothing can be of infinite time time in the future or history or have an infinite number of real elements.This is a blatant assertion with no evidence supporting it.
Or bring a real existence of an infinite members.
(May 26, 2013 at 8:25 pm)ideologue08 Wrote:Proofs are meant to prove the existence/validity of something.(May 26, 2013 at 8:20 pm)little_monkey Wrote: Get real. The burden of proof lies on the shoulder of the one who made the blatant assertion.So if I say "unicorns don't exist", the burden of proof would be on me to prove that they don't exist? You are really are an ignorant little fucker aren't you? Now are you going to show us an example of non-theoretical infinite or are you going to carry on acting like the ignorant schmuck you are?
Non-existent is impossible to be proved, except by perfect induction where "all" is a finite accessible to be searched
or by contradiction like I did.
For example prove the non-existence of a man in a house by search every room.
Can you prove that Fairy tails don't exist at all? Impossible
The burden of proof is on the party claiming the existence
Like me proving the existence of God
So, you are the one to prove the existence of a real infinite things!
However you don't need that as I already proved the impossibility of that, You either refute my proof or bring a proof of your own showing that it is possible.