Top Seven Reasons God Exist.

[Unveiled Artist]

It is circular reasoning because you are assuming that these things we know exist are part of God and, thus, God exists. I could say God is life. Life exists so God must exist. This doesnt actually prove anything. Aquinas proof for God employs the same logical fallacy.

Its God exists because God is life.

Not.

God exist because life exists.

The former is saying God is what all life is. So you can take out the "word" God and life would still be there; hence exist.

The latter is a circular argument which makes no sense if God was not life.

Im using the former. Thats why I dont understand why God is making it a barriar to see my point, God has nonevidence. It is itself evidence. Its a collection word for the evidemfe that makes if up.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What you are missing is your supporting evidence for why God is those things. You haven't supported this at all.

How so you give supportive evidence for what exists?

The moon is at its wanning phase on the western world. The sun is still at morning on our east side. We just had a heavy shower you can plug in on the internet with my zip code.

Im talking to you so I do have some brain sense left and a mind. I know energy exist because I get a lot of it after my morning excercise.

What type of support are you asking for?

 

[leibowde84]

How so you give supportive evidence for what exists?

The moon is at its wanning phase on the western world. The sun is still at morning on our east side. We just had a heavy shower you can plug in on the internet with my zip code.

Im talking to you so I do have some brain sense left and a mind. I know energy exist because I get a lot of it after my morning excercise.

What type of support are you asking for?

Supporting evidence for your assumption that God is the things that you claim God is. That's all. You haven't shown why your definition of God is accurate.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We complain, or debate, about the definition of God all the time. RF does it hourly. They arent debating the word itseld but the meaning people apply to it.

And I find it equally silly when they do it too.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Is that the same as me asking you why do you think a computer is a computer because you called one?

Supporting evidence for your assumption that God is the things that you claim God is. That's all. You haven't shown why your definition of God is accurate.

Why do I think the moon is the moon?

Are you asking why or how do I know things are what labels we used for them? Like give evidence for why a tree is named a tree. (Without comparison to none trees)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

And I find it equally silly when they do it too.

Lol. I mentioned this in an oldish thread. "Why debate about nothing?"

The floor went up in flames.

 

[leibowde84]

Is that the same as me asking you why do you think a computer is a computer because you called one?



Why do I think the moon is the moon?

Are you asking why or how do I know things are what labels we used for them? Like give evidence for why a tree is named a tree. (Without comparison to none trees)

Those are linguistic terms that describe actual physical entities. A "tree" is a "tree" because we have assigned the term to things that display the qualities of a tree. It is pattern recognition. "God", on the other hand, is not a physical entity that can be seen. You have arbitrarily assigned things to God that do exist without supporting those assignments with evidence or a reasoned argument. A "tree" is a material object. The "moon" is a material object. "God" is not a material object, and, as you said, people have various definitions for God. "trees" and the "moon" don't have this issue, as we can use pattern recognition to identify them. So, first, you must show that your assignment of these things to God, which make up your entire argument as if these things exist (which they do) and they are God (which you have not supported yet), then God must exist. You skipped the hard part, explaining why your definition of God is supported with reason and evidence. Otherwise, you aren't proving anything about God, but merely your own subjective concept of what God is based on the assumptions that God is made up of what you claim.

 

[Koldo]

In other words, God exists because you define the term as whatever you want.

 

[leibowde84]

In other words, God exists because you define the term as whatever you want.

Exactly.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Um. You completely missed my "definition" not attribution of the word God.

God is not an entity nor is "he" anything to where it would make logical sense to attribute anything to. Thats like atrributing love to air beyond symbolism.

There is no entity in this thread. Unless that is how you define God?

If it is, I am an atheist I cant provide evidence for a claim of my attributing life to a word that, of itself, is just a word with multiple meanings.

What type of God am I attributing life to? Whose God?

Those are linguistic terms that describe actual physical entities. A "tree" is a "tree" because we have assigned the term to things that display the qualities of a tree. It is pattern recognition. "God", on the other hand, is not a physical entity that can be seen. You have arbitrarily assigned things to God that do exist without supporting those assignments with evidence or a reasoned argument. A "tree" is a material object. The "moon" is a material object. "God" is not a material object, and, as you said, people have various definitions for God. "trees" and the "moon" don't have this issue, as we can use pattern recognition to identify them. So, first, you must show that your assignment of these things to God, which make up your entire argument as if these things exist (which they do) and they are God (which you have not supported yet), then God must exist. You skipped the hard part, explaining why your definition of God is supported with reason and evidence. Otherwise, you aren't proving anything about God, but merely your own subjective concept of what God is based on the assumptions that God is made up of what you claim.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In other words, God exists because you define the term as whatever you want.

Basicaly. Just I see some common threads: mind, purpose, act of creating...that make if a bit more universal word. Since these core concepts exist, whatever definition make of God (as a person, with a beard) doesnt matter. The underlining principles exist even without labeling it.

 

[leibowde84]

Um. You completely missed my "definition" not attribution of the word God.

God is not an entity nor is "he" anything to where it would make logical sense to attribute anything to. Thats like atrributing love to air beyond symbolism.

There is no entity in this thread. Unless that is how you define God?

If it is, I am an atheist I cant provide evidence for a claim of my attributing life to a word that, of itself, is just a word with multiple meanings.

What type of God am I attributing life to? Whose God?

My point is this: Anything can be proven if the definition of it is arbitrary and unsupported. My question is what is your reasoning for defining God in the way that you do. What evidence do you have to support your definition. If you don't have any, then nothing has been proven beyond your opinion of what the linguistic concept means.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

My point is this: Anything can be proven if the definition of it is arbitrary and unsupported. My question is what is your reasoning for defining God in the way that you do. What evidence do you have to support your definition. If you don't have any, then nothing has been proven beyond your opinion of what the linguistic concept means.

Its linguistical because that word is used for some common themes supernatural or not that religions share. Its also a word used in my area when refering to some form of gratitude outside of materialism, egotism, etc. So, its easier to put my opinion in their language (we dont have many atheist here)

Its a personal choice to use God depending on who I speak to. Pagans have different views on gods than abrahamics. So i cant clip flop with paganism. I dont know mythology.

If you want personal view, there is no language for life just what meanings and labels we use to define it and our experiences (and soo forth). So no God, cosmos, stuff like that.

I live a simple life. Whatever spiritual thing I do is taking care of myself naturally.

How to give support for my belief, its not even a belief or opinion. We need to take care of ourselves. Many people are grateful to live for many reasons and they show it by many. They dont need to be supernatural. If someone wants to define their relationship with life, by the word God, so be it. If it is that def. only, I cant list all the evidence that life exists. We just have to experience it by living.

 

[leibowde84]

Its linguistical because that word is used for some common themes supernatural or not that religions share. Its also a word used in my area when refering to some form of gratitude outside of materialism, egotism, etc. So, its easier to put my opinion in their language (we dont have many atheist here)

Its a personal choice to use God depending on who I speak to. Pagans have different views on gods than abrahamics. So i cant clip flop with paganism. I dont know mythology.

If you want personal view, there is no language for life just what meanings and labels we use to define it and our experiences (and soo forth). So no God, cosmos, stuff like that.

I live a simple life. Whatever spiritual thing I do is taking care of myself naturally.

How to give support for my belief, its not even a belief or opinion. We need to take care of ourselves. Many people are grateful to live for many reasons and they show it by many. They dont need to be supernatural. If someone wants to define their relationship with life, by the word God, so be it. If it is that def. only, I cant list all the evidence that life exists. We just have to experience it by living.

That's fine. It just doesn't prove anything about God's existence.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's fine. It just doesn't prove anything about God's existence.

I dont actually understand what you mean. I dont know what God you are refering to or believe in to understand how my support does not agree with you.

We need a common foundation of what God means.

Im saying God is life. Take the word God out, the proof is all around you. You are a part of life not seperate from it.

What is your definition of God? My support canr be proof if youe def. of God is differenr from mine

If its a specific god, at least i can give an interpretation based on that "God-faith" language.

Without that, I dont understand how to give proof for an undefined word.

 

[leibowde84]

I dont actually understand what you mean. I dont know what God you are refering to or believe in to understand how my support does not agree with you.

We need a common foundation of what God means.

Im saying God is life. Take the word God out, the proof is all around you. You are a part of life not seperate from it.

What is your definition of God? My support canr be proof if youe def. of God is differenr from mine

If its a specific god, at least i can give an interpretation based on that "God-faith" language.

Without that, I dont understand how to give proof for an undefined word.

Alright, we know that life exists. No argument there. But, what is your support for the claim that "God is life"? In other words, you are merely supporting your claim that life exists. And then you are merely replacing the word "life" with the word "God". Nevertheless, you still only showed that life exists. You haven't explained why the notion of "God" is necessary in any way.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Since God is just a word that can be described for life its the same as asking me to support the existence of RF since I didnt spell out Religious Forums in full.

Alright, we know that life exists. No argument there. But, what is your support for the claim that "God is life"? In other words, you are merely supporting your claim that life exists. And then you are merely replacing the word "life" with the word "God". Nevertheless, you still only showed that life exists. You haven't explained why the notion of "God" is necessary in any way.

Its the circular logic. I am using the claim "Life exists" by stating what does exist(what makea up life) "mind, purpose, action" as evidence and showing my proof by restating support such as our conversation, our motivation to take care of family, a need for me to eat breakfast some time today.

I have taken the word God out of the whole equation. Without using the word God, we would be in agreement, yes?

Since I did use the word God, although now unnecessary, and using this word in the same context as I did life, how wouls that change the proof and examples I gave above?

What about the word God makes you feel I have not supported my claim?

The only way I can see the confliction is if you have another definition of God. If not, I am at a total loss.

 

[leibowde84]

Since God is just a word that can be described for life its the same as asking me to support the existence of RF since I didnt spell out Religious Forums in full.



Its the circular logic. I am using the claim "Life exists" by stating what does exist(what makea up life) "mind, purpose, action" as evidence and showing my proof by restating support such as our conversation, our motivation to take care of family, a need for me to eat breakfast some time today.

I have taken the word God out of the whole equation. Without using the word God, we would be in agreement, yes?

Since I did use the word God, although now unnecessary, and using this word in the same context as I did life, how wouls that change the proof and examples I gave above?

What about the word God makes you feel I have not supported my claim?

The only way I can see the confliction is if you have another definition of God. If not, I am at a total loss.

This is not true. I am asking for a reasoned argument for your equating God with these things that do exist.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This is not true. I am asking for a reasoned argument for your equating God with these things that do exist.

The word itself?

 

[leibowde84]

The word itself?

What you identify as God. How do you support your claim that "God is life"?