-
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
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: \ˈfāth\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths \ˈfāths, sometimes ˈfāthz\
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Anglo-French feid, fei, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust more at bide
Date: 13th century
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>
synonyms see belief
on faith : without question <took everything he said on faith>
Source: faith - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Nice pick and choose job you did there......Pronunciation: \ˈfāth\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths \ˈfāths, sometimes ˈfāthz\
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Anglo-French feid, fei, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust more at bide
Date: 13th century
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>
synonyms see belief
on faith : without question <took everything he said on faith>
Source: faith - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Now you are just flat out wrong.
Only if you throw out all the definitions of the word you do not like.
Now you just flat out lieing, because that is EXACTLY what you are doing.
Don't believe me?
Please see the Websters dictionary definition I provided at the beginning of my reply to your blatant bull ****.
Yes he can.
In fact, the atheist can even take the same dishonest route you have taken and deny you the "ability" to use faith to say that god does exist.
again you are just plain flat out wrong.
Or you are just plain flat out lieing.
So, which is it?
rageoftyrael
Veritas
What'd i tell you? if he tried to answer, in any way, he'd be wrong. i just love being right, lol.
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
Not only are you wrong (as Mestemia notes) about the definition of faith, you haven't even addressed any of the arguments I've put forth against you. How can you expect anyone to take your belief seriously?
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
You can say it, but until you can actually demonstrate that to be true, God isn't.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
You guys are just trying to be stubborn.
Of course it is allowed to use the application of the word 'faith' to the context of the discussion (not required to use every application...all at once.)
It remains as is.....
Faith is a belief in a higher Being.
I need not demonstrate proof to do so.
It is well and good that someone took hold of a common reference and presented it.
It demonstrates a willingness to try.
But is it not obvious?...I think one of you guys did make note of it already...
For every objection, science experiment, theory,.....etc.etc.etc.
Faith is offered, in saying "God did it",.... and it repeats.
Of course, such recurrence is frustrating to non-believers.
I'm getting old and gray. I've been around this sort of thing a long time.
I take the time to find cause to say "nay".
Haven't found it yet.
If I find a science, philosophy, or some intellectual argument.....that actually takes away "faith"....I will write down....get a copyright...
and die rich and happy for the money the book will bring.
And the world will end without God.
If you find such an item, you should do the same.
In the meantime, my faith remains intact.
Cause and effect....from singularity to the stars above....God did it.
Of course it is allowed to use the application of the word 'faith' to the context of the discussion (not required to use every application...all at once.)
It remains as is.....
Faith is a belief in a higher Being.
I need not demonstrate proof to do so.
It is well and good that someone took hold of a common reference and presented it.
It demonstrates a willingness to try.
But is it not obvious?...I think one of you guys did make note of it already...
For every objection, science experiment, theory,.....etc.etc.etc.
Faith is offered, in saying "God did it",.... and it repeats.
Of course, such recurrence is frustrating to non-believers.
I'm getting old and gray. I've been around this sort of thing a long time.
I take the time to find cause to say "nay".
Haven't found it yet.
If I find a science, philosophy, or some intellectual argument.....that actually takes away "faith"....I will write down....get a copyright...
and die rich and happy for the money the book will bring.
And the world will end without God.
If you find such an item, you should do the same.
In the meantime, my faith remains intact.
Cause and effect....from singularity to the stars above....God did it.
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
McBell
Admiral Obvious
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
You are absolutely correct, you do not need to demonstrate proof of your faith.
Unless you are trying to debate your faith.
In a debate forum.
Where people argue and present evidence for their beliefs.
In a debate forum.
Where you are now.
In a debate forum.
Debate.
Which means you present proof of your argument.
In a debate forum.
Which is what you are in now.
A debate form.
Where you debate things.
Does this clear things up a little more.
In a debate forum.
That's where you are.
A debate forum.
So debate.
Provide evidence.
In this debate forum.
Debate.
Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
With all due respect, I don't think you were explicit enough that this is indeed a debate forum where people debate their ideas.
Venatoris
Active Member
That's because there isn't any evidence that can prove or disprove god. As such, I can logically deduce that neither the theist view or the atheist view is more valid than the other. That's all you can get from logic on the subject.
Beaudreaux
Well-Known Member
You are misinformed. Faith, like many words, has several usages. From Merriam-Webster.com, your source. (faith - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)
Your definition is the second of three. Also note that it does NOT "continue to say....proving is not required." It says "belief is something for which there is no proof".
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Thank you Beaudreaux
The distinction you note has already been made.
The subtleties don't really influence my perspective.
God is still God. Do you really think I'm going to prove it?
At least one other has commented that proving God is unlikely.
Shall I perform what is unlikely?
What do you think?
Could the singularity be a creation?
Or perhaps the premise is easier for you.
How about an undeniable line of logic, showing there can be no God?
The distinction you note has already been made.
The subtleties don't really influence my perspective.
God is still God. Do you really think I'm going to prove it?
At least one other has commented that proving God is unlikely.
Shall I perform what is unlikely?
What do you think?
Could the singularity be a creation?
Or perhaps the premise is easier for you.
How about an undeniable line of logic, showing there can be no God?
Venatoris
Active Member
If by singularity you mean the single event(god or otherwise) that birthed the universe, then yes it is a creation. However, creation of the universe itself does not prove the existence of a conscious omnipotent god. In my view it is equally likely that the universe was created by the combination of unknown cosmic forces(similar to gravity) that exist but have yet to be proven.
rageoftyrael
Veritas
I'm sorry, but i gotta call you out on that one venatoris. to say that believing in a god for which there is no evidence is not less valid than not believing in a god for which there is no evidence is just.... not thinking. you must feel this way to an extent, being agnostic. cause after all, being agnostic is just one short step from being athiest. oh snap, i said it!