He would still have to show that cause could only be a God.
It's just a pointless debate. Anyone who has an interest in this area would conclude.... It is impossible to prove that God exists through facts and logic.He would still have to show that cause could only be a God.
You mean the existence/absence of a disclaimer at the front of the work that "all characters within this book are entirely fictional, and any resemblance to people living or dead is entirely coincidental"?
The example, though, is valid for purposes.
Clearly Pachomius disagrees, and thus it is not pointless if the outcome of this debate is that one side or other changes their view based on what is discussed here.davewhite04 said:It's just a pointless debate. Anyone who has an interest in this area would conclude.... It is impossible to prove that God exists through facts and logic.
Wow - so you refuse to discuss with davewhite04 on the basis of him requiring you to use quotes from the Bible to support your case, and here you are doing just that.Okay, here we go.
I had already the concept of God from my Christian faith -- though I have to tell you as I have already unless memory fails me told folks here that I am into what I call myself, a liberal Christian -- on this matter, more later.
From my Christian faith as I have already told Dave at least two times, it is the teaching of the Christian faith that God is first and foremost in relation to the universe and everything with a beginning:
Creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
This thought is founded on two very ancient texts of the Christian faith but I take them to be also founded on thinking on facts and logic, if we would prescind from revelation.
Here are the two most ancient texts:
1. In the beginning God made heaven and heart h. -- Gen. 1:1
2. I believe in God the Father almighty creator of heaven and hearth. -- Apostles' Creed verse 1
On the foundation of those two texts and also innumerable similar texts from the history of the Christian faith, I formulated my concise and precise and definite concept of God, namely:
That God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.
I.e. you are relying on the revelation of the Christian faith, with no actual grounding on facts and/or logic, and just an assumption / belief that what you rely on is "founded on thinking on facts and logic".So, that is how I have come to my own draft of the concept of God.
The concept you are using is one that spidergoat will not claim to be able to disprove.And that is the concept of God I will be proving that He exists in objective reality, and you to prove that He does not.
Indeed - and the belief that it must therefore have been "founded on thinking of facts and logic". It's laughable as much as it is pathetic.His "thinking on facts and logic" turns out to be..."I read it in the Bible"....
There has to be something wrong with him. Who has a single track mind to that extent? Repeating the same phrases (and entire conversations) over and over before they can make a new point is indicative of some kind of mental illness.Indeed - and the belief that it must therefore have been "founded on thinking of facts and logic". It's laughable as much as it is pathetic.
I've heard your argument, and I think it has several flaws. For instance, you argue this:And that is the concept of God I will be proving that He exists in objective reality, and you to prove that He does not.
if he showed a superiority complex could be mental illness but i don't think he has mental illness, though ocd might explain the perfect posts(to him).There has to be something wrong with him. Who has a single track mind to that extent? Repeating the same phrases (and entire conversations) over and over before they can make a new point is indicative of some kind of mental illness.
You might be right. OCD and English as his second language?if he showed a superiority complex could be mental illness but i don't think he has mental illness, though ocd might explain the perfect posts(to him).
I think the writing is down to a badly schooled Gentlemen - Sherlock HolmesYou might be right. OCD and English as his second language?
We have done. It is you who has not: you have referenced no facts relevant to the matter, and no logic as to how you reached your concept, nor how that concept leads to the conclusion that God certainly exists, other than as the concept.Addressing everyone here:
Okay, dear readers here, let us all sit back and observe whether atheists here will be positively contributing to my research work on how they think on facts and logic on the issue God exists or not.
Other than gross inaccuracy in your generalisation of what atheists think, this seems to be nothing but an argument from incredulity on your part. Oh, wait, is that too much "thinking on facts and logic" for you?But right from the start I have to share with you dear readers this misgiving, namely, that atheists as they already maintain that everything just comes forth from randomness or chaos, there is no order, no stability, even there is nothing at all but this nothingness gave forth by randomness and instability the whole universe and you and me and them.
Show that it is "incognitive", please.Why do they have this kind of a most deplorable cognitive or better incognitive attitude?
Utter drivel. It is precisely the "thinking on facts and logic" that you demand (and that you have so far failed to evidence that you are even capable of) that leads many atheists to their position regarding the notion of gods.Because owing to their original sin of the bias as described above, namely, everything came forth from randomness, chaos, nay, even nothingness, they never ever mastered the virtue of disciplined systematic thinking on facts and logic, to come to the knowledge of reality outside their random, chaotic, nothingness mind if we can call their brain a mind.
How many times do we need to tell you, Pachomius: we understand your concept. We have done since you first posted it. The issue is not with us understanding your concept but instead is with (a) how you fail to move on from that concept and put it to use to show, as you claim, that by "thinking on facts and logic" we can show this concept to certainly exist; (b) the weaknesses that exist with your perceived / anticipated line of argument.Now, atheists, let you and me work together for me to get you to understand this sentence from yours truly, namely:
In concept God is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.
What words don't you know of their meanings? Tell me and I will explain to you what they mean, the words you don't know the meanings of; but I tell you if you have reading comprehension in English, every word in that sentence should be clear to you as to its meaning.
Oh, the irony... it might even have been funny if it wasn't so miserably pathetic.Don't be wasting the time of readers.