Is it possible to talk with an atheist?

[Sanmario]

@Jayhawker Soule



Dear readers and posters here, this is the way to discern the worth of a proof, like my proof from evidence of God existing in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning.

Try to throw serious objections against each step of its proof, here I will reproduce again my proof, and you dear readers and posters here, see if you can throw serious objections against each step by step exposition of my proof.

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
​

I am going to bed now, it is now at my place 11:10 p.m. of Saturday, April 8, 2017.


See you guys again tomorrow morning.

@Jayhawker Soule


I see, dear Jayhawker, you are after the brand and forgetting that something in substance is better but for your bad habit of being brand servile, slavish, and thus empty-headed - I see you to be basically a stink bomb thrower, nothing more of any cognitive depth and creativity.

Okay, I will repeat my proof for God existing, and you produce your brand Kalam argument, and let readers see which one is better and clearer.


This is my again concise, precise, and in clear simple language for the proof from evidence that God exists, in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning.

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.​

Now, Jayhawker, produce your brand Kalam argument.

And don't neglect to present your if any at all concept of god or God.

 

[icehorse]

Dear @Sanmario

I anxiously await your response to my question. to recap:

you said: God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

I asked: Define "beginning" ?

This.is.a.valid.question.

Scientists.admit.that.no.one.understands.the.nature.of.time

(argh.my.computer's.spacebar.just.broke.)

 

[columbus]

you said: God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

I asked: Define "beginning" ?

This sort of thing has been done. Sanmario consistently ignores responses that point out the flaws in his premise, then gets annoyed by the lack of interest people show in his repetitious posts.
Tom

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

@Jayhawker Soule


I see, dear Jayhawker, you are after the brand and forgetting that something in substance is better but for your bad habit of being brand servile, slavish, and thus empty-headed - I see you to be basically a stink bomb thrower, nothing more of any cognitive depth and creativity.

<yawn>

petty ad hominem​

</yawn>

 

[Sanmario]

@icehorse
@leibowde82
@columbus


Dear icehorse, here is my definition of beginning, in re God exists or not, 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.

Dear leibowde84, you have not presented your account of the Kalam argument.

Dear columbus, point out one flaw in my proof for God existing, as below:

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.


Now, please everyone, produce your serious objections to my proof above for the existence of God, in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning.

Dear readers and posters here, this is the way to discern the worth of a proof, like my proof from evidence of God existing in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning.

Try to throw serious objections against each step of its proof, here I will reproduce again my proof, and you dear readers and posters here, see if you can throw serious objections against each step by step exposition of my proof.

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.

I am going to bed now, it is now at my place 11:10 p.m. of Saturday, April 8, 2017.


See you guys again tomorrow morning.

Sanmario said: ↑

@Jayhawker Soule


I see, dear Jayhawker, you are after the brand and forgetting that something in substance is better but for your bad habit of being brand servile, slavish, and thus empty-headed - I see you to be basically a stink bomb thrower, nothing more of any cognitive depth and creativity.

Okay, I will repeat my proof for God existing, and you produce your brand Kalam argument, and let readers see which one is better and clearer.


This is my again concise, precise, and in clear simple language for the proof from evidence that God exists, in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning.

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.

Now, Jayhawker, produce your brand Kalam argument.

And don't neglect to present your if any at all concept of god or God.

Post #203 Sanmario, Yesterday at 11:13 PM

 

[icehorse]

Dear icehorse, here is my definition of beginning, in re God exists or not, 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.

While your definition seems reasonable, the best scientists aren't even sure that anything ever "starts to exist" - time might not work that way.

 

[Sanmario]

@Readers all
@Posters all


Dear readers and posters, please see if you can produce serious objections to my proof from evidence of God existing, in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.

To leibowde84, please produce your brand Kalam argument.

Thanks, everyone for your presence and contribution, I must apologize for not attending to everyone, you see I am only one person, not a battalion, and besides there are times when it is best to delay or skip answering a poster, because I am not ready yet to answer him.

Now, this thread is about Is it possible to talk with an atheist?

Of course I address myself to also everyone else aside from atheists, my expectation is that we only all work as to concur on contentious questions, that is the way to arrive at better knowledge of reality, like as in the debate on God exists or not.

And the first order of the day is to work we all as to concur on the concept of God.

Here is again, forgive the repetition, my concept of God, namely: in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.

Please, everyone, produce your concept of God; if you have already presented your concept of God, please just do it again now in reply to this post; there is no harm in repeating your concept of god or God, that repeating it again and again, it is good to save time of everyone to have to look it up.

 

[Sanmario]

Dear icehorse, where did you ever get the thought that the best scientists are not even sure there is ever a beginning to anything at all?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now, Jayhawker, produce your brand Kalam argument.

<yawn>

ignore-list​

<yawn>

 

[columbus]

Dear columbus, point out one flaw in my proof for God existing, as below:

I have. In other posts that you have ignored.
I don't really have enough patience to keep responding when you ignore me and there are more interesting discussions to be had on RF
Tom

 

[Sanmario]

Tell me, icehorse, how might time work aside from our experience on how it works?

Do you or are you at all conscious of how you experience time?

While your definition seems reasonable, the best scientists aren't even sure that anything ever "starts to exist" - time might not work that way.

 

[Sanmario]

Please, everyone, if you have no patience in being here, please do not talk at all here.

 

[Sanmario]

Now, dear all readers and posters, are you aware that up to the present, leibowde84 has not produced his brand Kalam argument, instead of yawning all the time he writes here?

Perhaps some people can help him.

Now, please leibowde84, do not give a link instead of producing your brand Kalam argument from your stock knowledge, dear leibowde84, because you come forth as to appear that you are a master of the brand Kalam argument.

 

[Skwim]

<yawn>

ignore-list​

<yawn>

Ain't that the truth!

.

 

[Sanmario]

Sorry, I am getting mixed up with leibowde84 and Jayhawker Soule, they seem to be similar.

Anyway, everyone who is into the brand Kalam argument as to have a stock of it in your brain, do me the favor, produce it here in concise, precise, simple clear words.

 

[Sanmario]

Welcome, Skwim.

What do you know about the brand Kalam argument? From stock knowledge only, please.

When you realize, everyone here, that you have no stock of the brand Kalam argument as to be incapable of bringing it up here in concise, precise, simple clear language, please abstain from mentioning it, no need for dropping names of argument which you don't have stock of any information at all.

Read my concise, precise, simple clear exposition from evidence of God existing, in concept as the creator of everything with a beginning:

1. Enunciate the concept of God, namely, in concept God is the creator of everything with a beginning.
2. I go to the realm of existence to look for everything with a beginning.
3. I see everything with my eyes and I experience everything I meet as for example the babies at home and the roses in the garden, and everything else, you mention it, it has a beginning.
4. So, there are everything with a beginning that we are living with and in and within.
5. They are evidence of God existing in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.
6. Conclusion from evidence: God exists in concept as creator of everything with a beginning.


And please, everyone, do readers the great favor of presenting your serious objections against my proof from evidence for God existing, above repeated for your convenience.


Dear guys here, everyone, I have to leave now, will be back later in the late afternoon.

 

[columbus]

Ain't that the truth!

.

Welcome Skwim
Tom

 

[icehorse]

Tell me, icehorse, how might time work aside from our experience on how it works?

Do you or are you at all conscious of how you experience time?

Those questions are interesting but off the point. How we experience time may have little to do with its true nature. So - for example - it could be that time can work backwards. It could be that everything has already happened, that there is no "before and after" at all. Physicists and cosmologists are struggling with these questions.

The point is, your definition is fuzzy.

 

[Sanmario]

Dear readers and posters here, please abstain from talking on imaginary scenarios, if you have no experience at all of something and can never have that experience as to talk from experience, please just don't talk at all, i.e. over imaginary scenarios.

Like for example, some people love to say that things could be different, and therefore they feel so smug already that they have said something of any virtue to enhance our knowledge of reality, when in fact that is their silly self-smug trick to themselves by which they unwittingly feel so smug.

Now, everyone, take careful notice of people, always ask yourselves all the time: Is this guy bringing in imaginary scenario for no contribution to our enhancement of the knowledge of reality, but for only unwittingly feeling himself to be so smug.

I don't care to talk with such folks, whose only contribution to forums is to confuse the common folks' attention by bringing in imaginary scenarios which these talkers always go into, and stupidly without themselves knowing it about their kind of stupid imagination, feeling so absurdly self-smug.

You know, dear critical thinkers and readers here, examine the posters here, and see who are the ones always resorting to imaginary scenarios.

I tell you that is one ground by which I choose to not bother with such posters altogether, because I don't want to waste my time and trouble to indulge them in their stupid useless nonsense irrelevant imaginary scenarios.

Now, read my posts here and tell me if I talk on imaginary scenarios.

 

[Sanmario]

Next, dear readers and posters here, Watch out for posters here who talk and wax so eloquently over something like for example, the brand Kalam argument, and when they are challenged to produce from their stock information or mental database an account of what is that brand Kalam argument all about, they take to yawning and yawning and yawning endlesly as though they are into hibernation.

Have nothing to do with such posters who yawn and yawn and yawn and yawn endlessly, let them continue in their hibernation, wasting the bandwidth of the forum owners and operators here.

Don't invest your precious time and trouble with such hibernating posters.