(April 16, 2014 at 5:19 am)Ben Davis Wrote:(April 15, 2014 at 11:23 pm)Heywood Wrote: Ben's claim was that I was "begging the question". Showing his claim was false is not being a "weasel". If anything I did him a favor by teaching him what "begging the question" really means.Actually, all you showed is that you either don't realise when you're begging the question or that you'll deliberately lie in order to defend your faith.
The 'only' was crucial because it negates the 'if': there is no alternative to the 'condition' therefore it's not a condition, it's an assumption. The construction of an IF statement is IF, THEN, ELSE. If there's no ELSE, the IF is irrelevant.
Quote:I'm afraid you will just have to learn to live with the idea that certain aspects of physical reality support the notion of God.Quite the contrary. I wonder if you'll ever learn to live with that?
Don't be silly. The "only" doesn't negate the "if". It negates the possibility of an explanation other than God.
The argument is valid. There is no begging the question.
For the record, the point of the argument was not to summarize my position. The point of the argument was to show you there is no begging the question. You can take the "only" out if you like.