Originally posted by timebombtedIt's the virulence of some atheists speech that rankles me. Why do you find it necessary to use that type of language to make your point?
Why is it the only proof "god believers" can ever provide is complete circular crap or a quote from a book written by man. It's amazing so many fall for this fallacy...... some would say its a miracle..... Ooo! further proof for you.
Are we children calling each other names?
And if there is a God, and he created everything, then the existence of everything would be proof enough. There's nothing circular about it.
Originally posted by scottishinnzIs it? If God created everything, then everything would prove that he is the creator. Ergo, God exists.
Yes, I know that's what you said. However, the fact that you said it doesn't prevent it from being a logical non sequiter.
If a DNA test was done to prove I am my sons father, then his existence proves I exist.
Originally posted by josephwIf a DNA test was done to prove I am my sons father, then his existence proves I exist.
Is it? If God created everything, then everything would prove that he is the creator. Ergo, God exists.
If a DNA test was done to prove I am my sons father, then his existence proves I exist.
Yes, but we have existential proof of both of you. What if only your son took the test? Would that prove you are his father, if your DNA was unknown? By your logic, yes.
"Is it? If God created everything, then everything would prove that he is the creator. Ergo, God exists."
I highlighted the important word. You started with the desired conclusion as an axiom and could help but to find the result you'd already made.
Originally posted by scottishinnzOk! I hate trying to prove God exists, and that isn't even why I got into this thread anyway.
[b]If a DNA test was done to prove I am my sons father, then his existence proves I exist.
Yes, but we have existential proof of both of you. What if only your son took the test? Would that prove you are his father, if your DNA was unknown? By your logic, yes.
"Is it? If God created everything, then everything would prove ...[text shortened]... the desired conclusion as an axiom and could help but to find the result you'd already made.[/b]
You know what proof you need. You go find it for yourself. 🙂
Originally posted by josephwIf I eloquently state my argument with logical reason and evidence, it will receive the type of response that lacks logical meaning and reason only produced to distract from the real issue. I suppose it comes down to whether the poster was worthy of my effort.
It's the virulence of some atheists speech that rankles me. Why do you find it necessary to use that type of language to make your point?
Are we children calling each other names?
And if there is a God, and he created everything, then the existence of everything would be proof enough. There's nothing circular about it.
Originally posted by shavixmirSuch a rant might only cause god to put you on his ignore list. Try asking nicely.
Hey! You! Schmuck!
Come on then! You omnipotent waste of ink. Show yourself!
We’ve got churches, synagogues and mosques full of people willing to kill and die on your behalf; millions of them; billions of them… all praying to you, worshipping you, living their pathetic little lives for you…. SHOW YOURSELF!!!
Come on down from your holy little perch a ...[text shortened]... distorted anus of the truth!
GET DOWN HERE! RIGHT NOW!
It’s time to have your arse whipped!
Originally posted by josephwJust got back from a run, who knows why this appeared twice........ God did it?
It's the virulence of some atheists speech that rankles me. Why do you find it necessary to use that type of language to make your point?
Are we children calling each other names?
And if there is a God, and he created everything, then the existence of everything would be proof enough. There's nothing circular about it.
Originally posted by josephwIf God created everything - this assumes there is a God in the first place. You're concluding that your assumption is correct based on that same assumption. It's a circular argument and therefore worthless.
Is it? If God created everything, then everything would prove that he is the creator. Ergo, God exists.
If a DNA test was done to prove I am my sons father, then his existence proves I exist.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIt seems to me that there are two explanations for the material universe. The first, of coarse, is that God created it. The second is that it always was. However, that is not what science tells us is it? In fact, science can look as far back as the Big Bang and NO further. So you tell me, what evidence is there that there was NO begining? It seems those who do not believe in a creator are being the irrational ones.
If God created everything - this assumes there is a God in the first place. You're concluding that your assumption is correct based on that same assumption. It's a circular argument and therefore worthless.
Edit: Please don't tell me it all magically appeared out of thin air.