Proving God Existence

[The Grand Nudger]

I figured God was orderly.

First you "figured god" before you added an attribute. Not a problem in our discussion, but keep in mind that no matter how well designed an argument may be, if the premise is flawed then the conclusion will be worthless.

God is either orderly or he's not.

Well, could be a mix of the two, but hey, splitting hairs

If disorderly, everything created should be chaotic.

Doesn't follow.

If orderly, things should follow a set predictable formula.

Doesn't follow

I look around the world. I see predictable formula.

So do I, but who cares?

Even more so, if God weren't orderly, we couldn't use philosophy/logic, an ordered discipline, to reach knowledge of his existence.

Doesn't follow......for fucks sake....

[Cato]

@Ryan

I'll assume you're a troll. Carry on.

Tex?

Shit!. Someone call Laura.

George W. is using the internet unsupervised again.

[pocaracas]

[Tex]

I wasn't writing syllogisms, but I promise you they follow. The definition of God for this post is, "A being who is the cause/source of all things". Also, this post is not a proof of God. This is only to show that I made sense in my last post.

God is either orderly or he's not.

Well, could be a mix of the two, but hey, splitting hairs

If he was a mix, then the source of order would be elsewhere. God would have to be contingent upon some other thing, thus making God not God. God is either orderly or not.

God is the cause/source of all things.
One thing is order.
God is cause/source of order.

If disorderly, everything created should be chaotic.

Doesn't follow.

If God is not the source of order, something else is, and God is now not God. If there is no source for order including and apart from God, then nothing can be ordered.

God is the cause/source of all things.
No thing existent is order.
God is not the causer/source of order. (It doesn't exist)

If orderly, things should follow a set predictable formula.

Doesn't follow

God is the cause/source of all things.
A thing existent is order.
God is the cause/source of order.

I look around the world. I see predictable formula.

So do I, but who cares?

If I didn't, it would mean, assuming God's existence, he could never be proven.

Even more so, if God weren't orderly, we couldn't use philosophy/logic, an ordered discipline, to reach knowledge of his existence.

Doesn't follow......for fucks sake....

Like the rest of them, it does follow.

God is the cause/source of all things.
No thing existent is order.
God is not the causer/source of order.

God is not the causer/source of order.
Order includes philosophy/logic.
God is not the causer/source of philosophy/logic.

And since nothing else causes order, nothing else causes philosophy/logic. And since philosophy/logic now don't exist, we cannot use them to prove God.

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL promises, promises. No, none of that garbage follows, and none of your responses follow either, wtf?

If he was a mix, then the source of order would be elsewhere.

And? So what if it was/why couldn't it be? IOW, doesn't follow.

God would have to be contingent upon some other thing, thus making God not God.

So what if he were, plenty of gods proposed have been contigent upon other things. IOW, doesn't follow

God is either orderly or not.

Re-assert, affirmative.

If God is not the source of order, something else is, and God is now not God.

Doesn't follow. (ital)

If there is no source for order including and apart from God, then nothing can be ordered.

Check your own bit above, I bolded the best part.

God is the cause/source of all things.
No thing existent is order.
God is not the causer/source of order. (It doesn't exist)

Word salad.

[Tex]

I answered all your objections. Just because you don't like it or don't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't follow.

[Ryantology]

@Ryan

I'll assume you're a troll. Carry on.

I'll assume you're an idiot who believes one can call knowledge any conclusions which follow from entirely subjective experiences and unverifiable assumptions.

[Tex]

"I'll assume you're an idiot who believes one can call knowledge any conclusions which follow from entirely subjective experiences and unverifiable assumptions."

Have I claimed to have supernatural experiences? Even if I had, what would make you believe me? I'm arguing that Muslim Scholar is using Aristotle's proof wrong and made some other false claim. That's all. My goal is not to wow you all with some super-proof.

[Muslim Scholar]

I figured God was orderly. God is either orderly or he's not. If disorderly, everything created should be chaotic. If orderly, things should follow a set predictable formula. I look around the world. I see predictable formula.

Even more so, if God weren't orderly, we couldn't use philosophy/logic, an ordered discipline, to reach knowledge of his existence.

His Creation not himself
His creation is orderly so we can figure and think about it
but God himself is unique (Orderly or not is not valid), so you cannot understand how he do things.

---

By Logic we can prove that space-time is not infinite (Nothing can be infinite at all)

Except your god, right?

It doesn't apply for God
God created time itself (as proved), so you cannot apply something created after God to God before it was created.
God is eternal

[The Grand Nudger]

I answered all your objections. Just because you don't like it or don't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't follow.

Whether or not something follows has nothing to do with whether or not I like it. If I don't understand, you've failed to convey the message. Don't get pissy just because you've failed to properly establish or elaborate upon the shit you'd like to claim. Practiced in an echo chamber? This shit is entirely too easy to question - and you obviously don't have much experience driving past people who don't simply swallow the koolaid. Leave that shit at church. Here, you'll have to do work.