-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Disproving god with the laws of logic
- Thread starter freethinker44
- Start date
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
Well then I have faith that I own your life. Now since having faith in this means no one can offer any opposition, then looks like you are now my slave.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
You are absolutely correct.
I applied your logic and it turns out it doesn't work.
Who would have guessed.
I applied your logic and it turns out it doesn't work.
Who would have guessed.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
If you aren't going to try to prove me wrong then why even come on here?
rageoftyrael
Veritas
yeah, it's pretty sad when your only argument is that you believe. and then you proceed to admit that you can't do any better. i think you are out of your league here thief. if intelligent thought isn't what you are using in this debate, you aren't going to win.
GiantHouseKey
Well-Known Member
If after all of these posts you still don't understand how basic logical arguements are constructed, I find it of no surprise that you still believe you have the upper hand.
You DO have to prove it, because without proof, you are simply wrong, based on logic. Regardless of whether God 'is' or 'is not'. She may exist, she may not exist, but if you cannot prove it, by the laws of logic, you are wrong. That's just the way it is.
Circular reasoning leads only to deluding yourself.
GhK.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
You only take this stance because you CAN'T prove.
Any would being who lived as the one you describe would cancel out its own existence. The god you describe can only exist if it is created and kept within the minds of men.
Nope! What this means that you cannot know God and spiritual things without His help, and His help comes by a gift that those in whom He has mercy and compassion have received, faith is in the mind of the believer and that is this something that you havent got yet and perhaps never will. Dont ask other people for a gift that they cannot give you, ask God.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
post #779 is nothing but unsubstantiated opinion.
rageoftyrael
Veritas
so, let me get this straight, emiliano, to have faith, you must have faith? you don't see the circular logic here?
GiantHouseKey
Well-Known Member
The Neo Nerd
Well-Known Member
Don't bother you won't get an intelligent answer from him. I've tried.
-Q
-Q
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Hey mesty.....
Post #779 is filled with substance.
An entire universe (one word) of substance.
But maybe you prefer not to say more about cause and effect.
The universe is rotating.
God did it.
Without His influence, the big bang would be no more than an ever increasing hollow explosion...no rotation.
Post #779 is filled with substance.
An entire universe (one word) of substance.
But maybe you prefer not to say more about cause and effect.
The universe is rotating.
God did it.
Without His influence, the big bang would be no more than an ever increasing hollow explosion...no rotation.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Post 779, like the OP, is pure speculation.
"Everything that can be invented has been invented." --Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
While this quote cannot be attributed to Mr Duell empirically, it does illustrate the flawed thinking of "that which has not been discovered does not exist."
Lack of evidence does not "prove" there is no deity, it just shows that a deity has not been proven. It may never be proven, or it may be. Or evidence will come to light that shows conclusively that there is no deity.
But to attempt to assert as factual that "there is no god" , or that "there is a god" is a logical fallacy in that it has not been proven nor dis-proven.
We can prove that certain reveled revelations are historically and scientifically false, or that certain claims of "proof of god" are in fact pseudoscience at the very best. We can even logically assume that there is or is not god.
But as to empirical evidence that there is, or is not, a god or deity of some sort?
It has been yet to be presented.
(Re-posted from thread Science vs. God)
"Everything that can be invented has been invented." --Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.
While this quote cannot be attributed to Mr Duell empirically, it does illustrate the flawed thinking of "that which has not been discovered does not exist."
Lack of evidence does not "prove" there is no deity, it just shows that a deity has not been proven. It may never be proven, or it may be. Or evidence will come to light that shows conclusively that there is no deity.
But to attempt to assert as factual that "there is no god" , or that "there is a god" is a logical fallacy in that it has not been proven nor dis-proven.
We can prove that certain reveled revelations are historically and scientifically false, or that certain claims of "proof of god" are in fact pseudoscience at the very best. We can even logically assume that there is or is not god.
But as to empirical evidence that there is, or is not, a god or deity of some sort?
It has been yet to be presented.
(Re-posted from thread Science vs. God)
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Okay Tumbleweed....
Speculation is what to you? Eye witness account I suppose.
We all look up at one time or another.
We know the entire universe is moving.....and not in straight lines.
Science would have you believe, that reversing all of the movement results in a singularity.
At the moment of expansion....
The singularity is rotating...or it isn't.
If not...the result would be an ever increasing hollow explosion.
No rotation.
If rotation is present...the result would be what you see over head.
At the point of singularity...."what" induced the rotation?
For a singularity to be truly singular...secondary points are not allowed.
Geometry, as we know it cannot exist.
But "something" initiated the movement....the big bang.
If not..... the singularity would remain at rest.
( a law of motion)
"Something" got it started.....with rotation.
I call Him the Almighty.
Speculation is what to you? Eye witness account I suppose.
We all look up at one time or another.
We know the entire universe is moving.....and not in straight lines.
Science would have you believe, that reversing all of the movement results in a singularity.
At the moment of expansion....
The singularity is rotating...or it isn't.
If not...the result would be an ever increasing hollow explosion.
No rotation.
If rotation is present...the result would be what you see over head.
At the point of singularity...."what" induced the rotation?
For a singularity to be truly singular...secondary points are not allowed.
Geometry, as we know it cannot exist.
But "something" initiated the movement....the big bang.
If not..... the singularity would remain at rest.
( a law of motion)
"Something" got it started.....with rotation.
I call Him the Almighty.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
You assume something got it started.
You speculate that it is "the Almighty"
There is nothing wrong with you having faith.
But it is wrong to present it as an empirical fact.
GiantHouseKey
Well-Known Member
And then, for some reason, you decide to turn the currently reasonable idea of deism into a fairytale?
GhK.