I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?

[Faith No More]

Has it occurred to you that no one wants to take up your "challenge" because you just ignore people's rebuttals and continue to repeat your argument again as if no one said anything?

You're not debating. You're just mentally masturbating all over this thread.

[Cyberman]

It's like the nutter on the bus, isn't it? You make even the slightest eye contact and you're doomed.

Sorry to disappoint you, Mario, but it would never work. I have a feeling you're not into penis.

[Whateverist]

It's like the nutter on the bus, isn't it? You make even the slightest eye contact and you're doomed.

Sorry to disappoint you, Mario, but it would never work. I have a feeling you're not into penis.

Brilliant!  I'm ready to give you the lifetime witty prize right now.

[Asmodee]

And please no cussing...

We didn't go to your church to talk to you.  You came here to talk to us.  If you don't like the language we use perhaps you should consider shitting somewhere else.

[Asmodee]

Please atheists here, and no need to use the words magic, magical, in your messages against God existing, just as with your foul language, that is not going to save you from the fact that you are always running away from the issue itself, on God exists or not.

Now you are the one running away from the issue.  "Magic" is defined as "the power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces".  By its definition you ARE talking about magic.  I know, you prefer to use the word "miracle", but that's a mental trick on your part to set your deity apart from any other supernatural thing.  As I'm sure I've told you before, your God is not special to me.  I will not give it special treatment.  You see, your claims are as ludicrous to me as those of the Wiccan casting spells, which they are at least honest enough to actually call "magic".  Your God is not special.  He is deserving of no special consideration, no special words until you can PROVE he is.  And even if he were special, even if I believed he were real, the word "magic" would STILL properly describe his influence on the universe.  It's the right word, it's not just one you want to hear unless you can explain to me why it is not just special pleading on your part, insisting that I simply accept that YOUR deity is so super-special that while those OTHER guys do "magic", yours doesn't do "magic".  Miracles are really something ENTIRELY different than magic for some reason OTHER than that you want them to be.

The word "magic" is being properly used in reference to your deity until and unless you can show otherwise.  Hell, Moses even once cast the exact same spell as an Egyptian magician to turn a staff into a snake.  Even in the Bible the works of your deity are no different from any other magic, they're just more powerful than other magics.

IN FACT, there actually IS NO OTHER WORD which works in all instances.  A "miracle" is defined as "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency" or "a highly improbable or extraordinary event, development, or accomplishment that brings very welcome consequences".  In both cases those are "welcome" events.  The flooding of the planet, the destruction of two cities, the earth swallowing up thousands of Jews who worshiped the golden calf, the plagues of Egypt...NONE of those things matches the definition for "miracle", and neither does turning a staff into a snake.  None of those things are properly described as "miracles".  Magic is the ONLY word there is to label those events.

So I ask you, if magic isn't the right word to describe the flooding of the earth, what is the right word?  Of course I already know where your mind is going with this.  "God's judgement".  What about turning the staff into a snake?  And before you call that a "miracle" do remember that Pharaoh's magician did the EXACT SAME TRICK!  How is one magic and the other is not?  Special pleading.

[Asmodee]

Has it occurred to you that no one wants to take up your "challenge" because you just ignore people's rebuttals and continue to repeat your argument again as if no one said anything?

You're not debating.  You're just mentally masturbating all over this thread.

He actually tries to debate people here, but then it gets tough so he pretends not to have seen their responses and moves on to someone else.  Since so many of us respond it's easy for him to control the conversation by just picking the person he thinks has an argument he can tear apart.  In short, he's a dishonest slimeball not interested in anything remotely resembling "intellectual".  Actually, at this point I'm not sure if he's purposely a troll or he actually thinks he's people.  He has yet to actually refute a single refutation to his OP.  He just keeps moving on to new things and new people when he has lost so he doesn't have to accept that he's lost.

[Mariosep]

Well, thanks a lot dear readers for your presence in this thread from yours truly.


No, no clear acceptance of my challenge by Stimbo, for us two to exchange thoughts on God exists or not.

So, Stimbo is out for the present as I tell her she - forgive me, you are a he?

What about the image to my observation of a she in your identity inscription?

No matter… as I tell him he can always decide to accept my challenge.


In the meantime I will also dispense myself from further interaction with Simon, because I don't see how he could be of any profit to me because he is into textbooks all the time, nothing from his very own personal thinking at all.

And he has no experience himself whatsoever with fathering a baby.

So, why invest time and labor with him when there is no return of useful knowledge for the effort, useful knowledge arrived at by him, not from canned textbooks, and not from in-experience of life in all its vicissitudes, but from a lifetime self-application to thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas, AND grounded on his own experiences of life in all its vicissitudes?


Now, dear atheist posters here, when you have come to your senses, after having decided to abstain from raving mad foul language, personal attacks against your debate opponents, and also no more flippant but empty daring insults on God, like calling God bad names, for example 'bastard rat', let us do some genuine thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas, on what I again brought up just in my immediately preceding post, namely, my insight:

"The default status of things in the totality of reality is existence."

Do you anyone atheist here concur with me on that statement?

If not, what is your alternative?

And please, I will not take this standard answer from atheists, “We don’t know.”

Because the thing speaks for itself, namely, if you even with the default status of things in the totality of reality, you cannot finger out what it is for you; then you have no place in a forum whatsoever – unless of course you are here to only throw out raving mad foul language, hurling personal attacks on your debate opponents, and spewing out insults against God.

And ending up with slapping on each other's shoulder, reciprocal kudos.

[FatAndFaithless]

I don't know.

[Cyberman]

So, Stimbo is out for the present as I tell her she - forgive me, you are a he?

What about the image to my observation of a she in your identity inscription?

What about the image of an outline in yours? Is that you in real life?

[Simon Moon]

In the meantime I will also dispense myself from further interaction with Simon, because I don't see how he could be of any profit to me because he is into textbooks all the time, nothing from his very own personal thinking at all.

First of all, I am not into textbooks all the time. But I do understand their importance.

Everything I post to you is from my own personal thinking. Just because much of my thinking is informed by texts written by some of the best minds in history, does not mean it is a bad idea to incorporate it into my own thinking.

And he has no experience himself whatsoever with fathering a baby.

Doesn't matter. I have a very good understanding of the process, and have helped raise my girlfriend's children, more so than the biological.

And I also understand, much more than you do, why babies being conceived and born is in no way comparable to the existence of a universe creating god.

So, why invest time and labor with him when there is no return of useful knowledge for the effort, useful knowledge arrived at by him, not from canned textbooks, and not from in-experience of life in all its vicissitudes, but from a lifetime self-application to thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas, AND grounded on his own experiences of life in all its vicissitudes?

My responses to you have all been from my own thinking, from experience, and a lifetime of thinking about truths, facts, logic (which you have demonstrated you do not understand).

Every response has been based on my own life experiences. Some of my life experiences have been in the study of logic, philosophy and science.