Is it possible to talk with an atheist?

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This works for me:
"it is the point in time and/or in distance at which point a thing starts to exist, prior to which it was not existing."

So, can you now prove that God is the creator of everything with a beginning?
(Again, not that God exists assuming that God is the creator of everything with a beginning)

@Sanmario , I think that @leibode84 has done what you've asked.

However, begging forgiveness of leibode84, I think a better question for you to answer right now might be this:

Now that you know what "beginning" is, and can infer what "not beginning" is from that definition, how is it you can assert that there are "things with a beginning" without also inferring that must likewise be "things without a beginning?"

And how would you differentiate between them? How would you recognize which was which?

 

[Sanmario]

I am not talking with anyone except leibowde84.


leibowde84:
show me your proof that the universe had a point in time at which it started to existed and before which it was not existing - i.e. prove that the universe had a beginning.

Sanmario:
Suppose we both work as to determine whether the universe has a beginning or not.

 

[columbus]

We have the concept of God as the creator of everything with a beginning, and all my examples are of things with a beginning, so God is their creator.

Come on @Sanmario . These atheists who keep talking to you keep giving you space.
Suppose that there are things with beginning. Why would that mean God began them?
Tom

 

[columbus]

I am not talking with anyone except leibowde84.

Sorry dude. This is an internet forum. You don't get to make such rules.
Tom

 

[leibowde84]

show me your proof that the universe had a point in time at which it started to existed and before which it was not existing - i.e. prove that the universe had a beginning.

That wasn't me.

My reply was the following:
You have to first prove that God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

You can't honestly expect us to just assume that God is the creator of everything with a beginning without you proving it first, can you?

 

[Sanmario]

God in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning, it is a concept meaning a speculative thought in my mind, and I invite you to come with me to an expedition in the world to look for things with a beginning, is that all right with you?

In regard to universe without beginning or with beginning, we will also go to the world, the universe if you will, and look for things without a beginning and things with a beginning.

I am not talking with anyone except leibowde84.


leibowde84:
show me your proof that the universe had a point in time at which it started to existed and before which it was not existing - i.e. prove that the universe had a beginning.

Sanmario:
Suppose we both work as to determine whether the universe has a beginning or not.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Sorry dude. This is an internet forum. You don't get to make such rules.
Tom

I have strong(ly negative) suspicions about @Sanmario and both his agenda, and his ability to reason. I have seen this many, many times with those wedded to religion -- everything that points away from what they want to hear is not actually, never considered, and never becomes part of the dialogue. It is studiously ignored in the hope that it will go away and those who continue to make those points get tired and give up.

And then, you get to claim a win.

Nothing more futile in the world. Those who were not reasoned into faith cannot be expected to be reasoned out of it. Reason is not a part of what they are doing, nor is it something that they seek. They seek the comfort of being "right" without ever having to acknowledge that pretty much all of the available evidence says otherwise.

Bizarre, but that's religion.

 

[icehorse]

Those who were not reasoned into faith cannot be expected to be reasoned out of it.

Put another way:

What logic can you use when debating a person who doesn't value logic?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

This is what I've been trying to do for days now. I'm asking that you provide your evidence supporting your claim that God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

Dude! Your chess opponent is a pigeon. Just walk away dude.

I have strong(ly negative) suspicions about @Sanmario and both his agenda, and his ability to reason. I have seen this many, many times with those wedded to religion -- everything that points away from what they want to hear is not actually, never considered, and never becomes part of the dialogue. It is studiously ignored in the hope that it will go away and those who continue to make those points get tired and give up.

And then, you get to claim a win.

Nothing more futile in the world. Those who were not reasoned into faith cannot be expected to be reasoned out of it. Reason is not a part of what they are doing, nor is it something that they seek. They seek the comfort of being "right" without ever having to acknowledge that pretty much all of the available evidence says otherwise.

Bizarre, but that's religion.

Actually, I'm sort of waiting for @Sanmario to post "Suprise!". and reveal that he is actually an atheist, and this entire thread was a proof that it is indeed NOT possible to talk with a theist.
Maybe just 2 or 3 more pages of this cyclical nonsense.....then....

 

[columbus]

Blah, blah, blah, blah...

Well, at least I return to the thread to snicker at you and your reasoning. You don't need to keep tagging me. I am amused.
Tom

 

[columbus]

Blah, blah, blah, blah...
________________________


Sanmario said: ↑
I am not talking with anyone except leibowde84.

I am sure he is suitably impressed.
Tom

 

[Sanmario]

Dear readers, I guess leibowde84 will not be coming soon, so I will proceed to explain to you how the procedure of having a speculative concept of God in our mind, and then going forth into the universe to look for instances of things with a beginning, how this procedure makes up the proof from evidence of God existing.


1. We have a speculated concept in our mind of an entity we call God, and in this speculated concept He is the creator of everything in the universe having a beginning.

2. So with this speculated concept in our mind we go forth into the universe to locate things which have a beginning.

3. And all the things we see and experience in the universe have a beginning.

4. So all these things with a beginning make up evidence pointing to the existence of an entity that brings them to the beginning of their existence.

5. And this entity whose existence is pointed to by our evidence corresponds to the speculated concept of the entity we call in our mind God, Whom we describe as the creator of everything in the universe with a beginning.

6. Therefore God exists corresponding to the speculated concept of God in our mind, namely, the creator of everything with a beginning.


By way of illustration, let us imagine that we come upon a strange city, and we speculate on the concept of an entity in the city good in all kinds of wood work, whether a simple table or all the way to a wood mansion.

So we go forth outside everywhere to search for evidence of such a wood craftman/builder, and we see pieces of wood work: like doors, chairs, cabinets, and also whole houses made of wood.

These pieces of wood work are the evidence of the existence of one or several wood craftmen/builders.


There, as leibowde84 does not seem to be coming over any time soon, I welcome anyone here to make comments on the proof from evidence of God existing, owing to the existence of things with a beginning in the universe.

 

[siti]

show me your proof that the universe had a point in time at which it started to existed and before which it was not existing - i.e. prove that the universe had a beginning.

Actually that was my post - so since you are responding to my post - and despite your reluctance to speak to anyone else, I am responding...

In regard to universe without beginning or with beginning, we will also go to the world, the universe if you will, and look for things without a beginning and things with a beginning.

OK - the universe itself, as far as we can possibly tell, is without beginning.

 

[dgirl1986]

Why do I keep getting tagged? Only tag me if you respond to my posts

 

[leibowde84]

God in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning, it is a concept meaning a speculative thought in my mind, and I invite you to come with me to an expedition in the world to look for things with a beginning, is that all right with you?

Then you aren't arguing for God's existence. You are arguing for God's existence assuming that your claim that God is the creator of everything with a beginning is true. And, really, you don't have to argue anything after that point.

If I accept that God is the creator of everything with a beginning, no argument is necessary for me to accept that God exists. That is why it is circular reasoning. The statement "God is the creator of everything with a beginning" assumes that God exists. Your premise assumes your conclusion.

 

[leibowde84]

leibowde84:
show me your proof that the universe had a point in time at which it started to existed and before which it was not existing - i.e. prove that the universe had a beginning.

This was not me. I did not say this. It was another member. But, you have not even made any headway in proving this. You have merely pointed to parts of the universe that, in your opinion, have a beginning. But, according to your definition of "beginning", they do not. They develop based on DNA passed down from generation to generation. There is no point at which they suddenly come into existence.

You would have to show evidence that the universe itself had a beginning, as everything in existence comes from elements that come from other elements and can be traced back almost infinitely.

God in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning, it is a concept meaning a speculative thought in my mind, and I invite you to come with me to an expedition in the world to look for things with a beginning, is that all right with you?

If we are going to have a worthwhile discussion, you have to prove that your definition of God is true. You cannot ask us to merely assume it is true.

 

[leibowde84]

Dear readers, I guess leibowde84 will not be coming soon, so I will proceed to explain to you how the procedure of having a speculative concept of God in our mind, and then going forth into the universe to look for instances of things with a beginning, how this procedure makes up the proof from evidence of God existing.


1. We have a speculated concept in our mind of an entity we call God, and in this speculated concept He is the creator of everything in the universe having a beginning.

2. So with this speculated concept in our mind we go forth into the universe to locate things which have a beginning.

3. And all the things we see and experience in the universe have a beginning.

4. So all these things with a beginning make up evidence pointing to the existence of an entity that brings them to the beginning of their existence.

5. And this entity whose existence is pointed to by our evidence corresponds to the speculated concept of the entity we call in our mind God, Whom we describe as the creator of everything in the universe with a beginning.

6. Therefore God exists corresponding to the speculated concept of God in our mind, namely, the creator of everything with a beginning.


By way of illustration, let us imagine that we come upon a strange city, and we speculate on the concept of an entity in the city good in all kinds of wood work, whether a simple table or all the way to a wood mansion.

So we go forth outside everywhere to search for evidence of such a wood craftman/builder, and we see pieces of wood work: like doors, chairs, cabinets, and also whole houses made of wood.

These pieces of wood work are the evidence of the existence of one or several wood craftmen/builders.


There, as leibowde84 does not seem to be coming over any time soon, I welcome anyone here to make comments on the proof from evidence of God existing, owing to the existence of things with a beginning in the universe.

This "argument" is circular. In your premise, that God is the creator of everything with a beginning, you are assuming your conclusion, that God exists.

Yet, we know that God IS NOT the creator of everything with a beginning. Songs, poems, stories, etc. have beginnings, but they are man-made. Trips have beginnings and ends, but they are not God made.

So, it seems that your concept of God is incorrect.

 

[columbus]

Yet, we know that God IS NOT the creator of everything with a beginning. Songs, poems, stories, etc. have beginnings, but they are man-made. Trips have beginnings and ends, but they are not God made.

The difference between trips, poems, eras, tasks, etc., and noses, roses, planetary bodies, etc. is simple actually. The first group is abstract things, they don't have objective existence. The second group does have objective existence, but not beginning.
So @Sanmario is arguing for the lack of Gods objective existence, as He is the Creator of things with beginning and not with objective existence.
Tom

 

[icehorse]

If we are going to have a worthwhile discussion, you have to prove that your definition of God is true. You cannot ask us to merely assume it is true.

You know I'm with you on this one 84...

That said, a fella CAN start a debate by saying:

If you'll grant me X, Y and Z, then I'd like to debate this other claim.

It seems however that @Sanmario is changing the goalposts in mid-debate?

 

[icehorse]

1. We have a speculated concept in our mind of an entity we call God, and in this speculated concept He is the creator of everything in the universe having a beginning.

2. So with this speculated concept in our mind we go forth into the universe to locate things which have a beginning.

3. And all the things we see and experience in the universe have a beginning.

1 - in your OP, you did not define god in this way.

2 - we cannot do that.

3 - you cannot prove that.

Let me give you an example: A person is made up of atoms. Every few weeks most of the atoms in a person change. Atoms that were in use are returned to the planet, and atoms that were outside of the body are now in the body. So it's hard ot even say that a body has a beginning and end.

Next, let's look at the mitochondria in all of our cells. Some of these mitochondria are several billion years old. So when exactly did your body "begin"? Are you sure?

Next, let's look at the atoms themselves. Cosmologists would tell us that most of them are at least 13 billion years old. But we don't know what happened before the big bang. We don't even know if "before" is a sensible term in this context.