RE: Challenge For Theists
February 10, 2015 at 9:27 am
(This post was last modified: February 10, 2015 at 9:27 am by Norman Humann.)
(February 10, 2015 at 9:02 am)Drich Wrote:I'm not? If I'm not mistaken, you said that God is the proof of his existence. So his inexistence is also the proof for itself.(February 9, 2015 at 11:44 pm)Norman Humann Wrote: Whoever said that they did? I just followed your logic.
Actually your not.
Your committing a formal fallacy:
Affirming the consequent – the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.[8]
Also, you're wrong and the proof is the fact that you're wrong. That's what your logic sounds like.