Valid Arguments for God (soundness disputed)

[Jesster]

Just state the argument and show where there is a disconnect from the premises and conclusion.

No

I don't think anyone else wants to waste their time.

[Mystic]

Did doing that the last time stop you from making another one of these threads?

Khemikal, I really don't think people would be heavily focusing on a key premise if the argument was invalid. The fact, everyone (I don't recall people who didn't) focused on one premise or another, shows the argument was most probably valid. No one disputed that the premises don't lead to the conclusion, what people disputed was whether all the premises leading to the conclusion were true.

[Jesster]

The premise was the first place you're usually wrong. Why bother with the rest if we can stop there?

[Mystic]

I am getting these arguments checked by a professor that is an expert in logic and philosophy. So far all the arguments I've shown her, she said seem to be valid, what she advised I do is clarify what is meant by every premise (more elaboration) so to make the soundness more clear if it is sound.

[Jesster]

Cool story

[The Grand Nudger]

An appeal to a hidden authority...gee, sounds familiar, lol.  

I'll be honest with you Mystic....I don't believe you, but if that's true...you aren't getting your tuition money's worth.  Not that it would matter either way...because regardless of what you tell us your professor told you, people have repeatedly criticized your inferences.  I've done it, I've watched others do it...and I've watched you attempt to defend your inferences.  To be blunt, it seems to me that -you- should know this better than any of the rest of us. It doesn;t really matter whether or not you agree with any of our criticisms..which seems to be the angle you're fishing for.

I, persopnally, hardly care what your premises are. You've repeatedly demonstrated to me that you can't...physically can't form even the embryo of a coherent argument...and it doesn't surprise me that your premises are thirty flavors of insane.....but it's not as if it would matter anyway. So...I guess, if you really need an example of someone shitting on your ability to form a rational inference...look no further than this post - and hopefully you'll never have to make that request again.

Maybe this time you'll remember?

[downbeatplumb]

I am getting these arguments checked by a professor that is an expert in logic and philosophy. So far all the arguments I've shown her, she said seem to be valid, what she advised I do is clarify what is meant by every premise (more elaboration) so to make the soundness more clear if it is sound.

Is their surname Hovind?
Is this in some sort of Madrassa?
Are they high?
Are they just agreeing to get rid of you?

All of these things could be true because what you post recently is drivel.

You used to have good points, you used to make sense, what happened Mystic?

[brewer]

There is a difference between a valid argument and sound argument.

What I have seen is people dispute the soundness of these arguments (ie. whether the premises leading to the conclusion are all true) . The validity if I recall correctly, no one disputed.

Did you google the definition of valid?

Here is the first that comes up: 

val·id
ˈvaləd/
adjective

1. (of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.
   "a valid criticism"
   synonyms:
   well founded, sound, reasonable, rational, logical, justifiable, defensible, viable, bona fide;More
   

---

I am getting these arguments checked by a professor that is an expert in logic and philosophy. So far all the arguments I've shown her, she said seem to be valid, what she advised I do is clarify what is meant by every premise (more elaboration) so to make the soundness more clear if it is sound.

Have her join AF please.