The Stage is Yours.

[fr0d0]

The Christian God neccessarily exists as the only reasonable conclusion (world view). All other conclusions fail.

Out of interest, since I don't want to have to trawl through the entire thread, has fr0d0 offered up any further justification for his first post in this thread? Obviously the above 'answer' simply raises more questions, but rather than just elaborate on the statement at the time, dear fr0des needs to have his hand held. He knows the next question is obviously 'Why is it the only reasonable conclusion?' but he likes to be deliberately evasive, you see.

So fr0d0, be a dear and either point me in the right direction, or elaborate, sil vous plait.

Here are the answers that I've given so far to my opening statement in this thread, as Raphael has thoroughly, scanned, and read carefully yet not seen, and Eldinero accuses me of never answering the question based on Raphaels say so:

ergo God because of the positive reason. The disproof proves nothing besides that which is disproven

I didn't provide details, no. It is my assertion that all conclusions lead back to god. They don't lead back to no god. I'm not condemning any other world view there, just laying down the criteria. If you believe that your own view works out, and I hope you do, I haven't found that.

Well I believe I made one in my 1st post in this thread. Meaning and purpose are all bound up in metaphysical thinking and it is what informs our world view. For materialists this is a complete non starter and a huge unresolved conflict they somehow live with.

"All conclusions lead back to god." <- Well, that seems like a very vague critera unless you specify what are some of those conclusions and demonstrate how they "necessarily" imply that only the Chrisitian God is real.

It's not vague. It's just not dealing with the minutae. The detail is just that, very detailed. For anything to make sense metaphysically, it is my contention that the christian god is the only satisfactory answer. I work that out continually. Why should I act positively? Because it makes sense in the wider scheme of things that positivity is life. Any question you pick makes sense including God. Minus God it fails to make sense.

I logically deduce my own position and find it to be the only one that satisfies my enquiries; and those enquiries are constnatly ongoing.

1. How does meaning and purpose all lead back to Christianity, though?

It leads back to the Christian description of God. It's how and why Christianity came about - to describe meaning and purpose, as it is the reason for most religious endeavour. I believe that the Christian model answers that perfectly, where other endeavours do not. Straight away (I think) you and I would dismiss those endeavours that have god as a destructive force. So it goes on and we find what makes sense for us. I don't know what you've concluded on that, or if you've ever considered it. It doesn't predicate belief so there's no reason why you should IMO.

It (But that) doesn't logically imply that only the Christian God nor Allah are necessarily true. Afterall, there are many other religions that encourage you to act positively.

Quite so. I'm not claiming exclusivity on that.

So, you should have more than just "meaning and purpose" as an argument for Christianity because the same argument can be made for any other religion.

Meaning and purpose as the raison detre of all religious endeavour I said. Nothing about justification for only christianity.

And you should also be able to explain to me why you think that the Christian model of God is only model that answers everything perfectly which you still haven't done yet.

See my answer above. Also, this is way to big a question, and one I'm not qualified to answer. I could try and put it all together for you, but it would fail scrutiny because I am no expert. See any studies on the summa theologica by Thomas of Aquinas. I'm sure someone like Ryft could be far more exacting for you if you require sources.