Dear Atheists/Non-Believers

Lol. Had nothing to do with the existence of God? Whatever you have to tell yourself people are free to look back and see you get your ass handed to you. And yet you still post hilarious bullshit like the existence of God has been proven.

No it hasn’t and if it did we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Do whatever you need to do eat your bread and say it is flesh or whatever other creepy weirdo things the sky man tells you to do but don’t act like the existence of God has been proven. Hell I don’t believe and I certainly wouldn’t say we have proved a higher power doesn’t exist.

They are. I am not asking anybody to take my word for anything. I encourage everybody to do their own research. That is all I am saying.

We’ve had this conversation, some million times on this forum. And we will have it again and again. This conversation is happening all over the forums all over the internet.
And I will do what I do, and you are free to do what you do. Insulting me won’t change a thing.

No it’s not. It’s the opposite, its a deductive argument, which is the complete opposite of a subjective claim.

And please provide an example of what you are saying. Please provide an example of the argument that assumes God’s existence and works backwards from the conclusion.

The link provided spends the majority of the time going through the objections to the argument, laying out new premises to deal with the objections, and discussing new objections. It does not say that the logic is 100% proven as you do.

I’m new to the argument so trying to understand both sides, but all of the research says you’re wrong, and any debates around here are very clear on their conclusion. I’m honestly surprised you keep making the same point when it is easily countered time and time again.

Why are these conversations happening? You said the existence of god has been proven. Tell wikipedia to close this article because it has been proven. I’m sorry but that’s simply an idiotic statement. You would think the scientific evidence would be a bit more in something proven.

What’s the counter?

Tell you what, here is an argument from the article itself:

1.A contingent being (a being such that if it exists, it could have not-existed or could cease to exist) exists.
2.This contingent being has a cause of or explanation[1] for its existence.
3.The cause of or explanation for its existence is something other than the contingent being itself.
4.What causes or explains the existence of this contingent being must either be solely other contingent beings or include a non-contingent (necessary) being.
5.Contingent beings alone cannot provide a completely adequate causal account or explanation for the existence of a contingent being.
6.Therefore, what causes or explains the existence of this contingent being must include a non-contingent (necessary) being.
7.Therefore, a necessary being (a being such that if it exists, it cannot not-exist) exists.
8.The universe is contingent.
9.Therefore, the necessary being is something other than the universe.

Where is the flaw?

It’s a great article on the history of the debate. It draws no conclusions. And if your attempting to change my mind, your attempts will be futile, I have been researching this stuff for years. I sit in the camp of Carl Jung.

Again, I am encouraging people to put down their bias’s and research it for themselves, with facts and the real arguments that have been put forth throughout history, as well as their counters and see if they measure up. Don’t take my word for it. I am not asking anybody to do that.

It draws no conclusions on purpose. I won’t try to change your mind. SMH shot down all your arguments and you didn’t change your mind.

Maybe God will call my cell phone? You think he doesn’t have service in heaven?

It’s draws no conclusions because it’s a history, not an argument.

Why do you need somebody else to do things for you? Think for yourself.

You have no idea why I posted the article apparently but here’s a hint…I didn’t post it to make an argument.

But speaking of arguments remember that time you tried to debate something you say is proven and couldn’t do it?

To prove that people are still arguing about it? I never said they are not. Just because the fight goes on, does not mean the arguments are false or the conclusions are false. It means people still discuss it.

I never said that people accept it as a settle matter, I am saying the pro-theistic arguments are still unrefuted, does not mean people won’t stop trying.

The ones you posted in the thread that were shot down and you couldn’t argue against? Or magical new ones you didn’t post then?

No need to beat it up people can go back and read.

Even I would say I don’t think God exists but I could be wrong. I wouldn’t say I can prove she doesn’t

I agree. So if they want to they are welcome to it. I have nothing to hide. I made a mistake, it happens. But it was one, not “everything I ever said”. So quit trying to make things what they are not. Are you perfect? You want people to look at every mistake you made? And it wasn’t even you who caught it. So you don’t have anything to brag about. All you are doing is to try and drag my name through the mud. Let people draw their own conclusions about me.

To be clear I’m not trying to drag you through the mud, just saying you say it’s a proven fact and in a thread where you were arguing the proof you couldn’t do it.

By no means am I saying you’re a bad person merely that your argument was flawed and you couldn’t prove it despite you claiming it is bulletproof

I think a difference exists between I believe in God and it’s proven fact god exists. I fully admit I could be wrong I wouldn’t approach saying it’s proven

It’s fine for you to believe with all your heart and soul that God exists. But you are completely mistaken if you think the existence of a supernatural creator of the Universe has been proven. In fact, I had been thinking you were joking, but you’ve kept with it so apparently you really believe this.

I am a professor at a Catholic University that has a substantial Religious Studies department. I can tell you with 100% certainty that the professors in that department do not for one second think that the existence of God has been irrefutably proven. At my previous institution, a couple of my best friends were Religious Studies professors specializing in Buddhism and Christianity. The Christianity professor was himself was not only a scholar in the field but also a practicing Christian. As a scientist, I was interested in hearing his views. He, of course, realized that Christianity and the existence of a God requires faith, which is a much different approach than is made by scientists who must rely on experimental proof.

I am not trying to convince you that you are wrong to be a Christian. Only that, for the love of God, please don’t go around telling people that the existence of God is a fact.

4 Likes

Unfortunately, when l wrote this portion, l erased a key component that you should have been able to infer. That these life changes are attributable to the person’s relationship to God. Not some work of the person themself, suddenly acting more noble.
Are you aware of great numbers of people doing this on their own accord, that the rest of us aren’t?

But again, l credit God for improving me.
It certainly had no genesis from me.

And again God is not required for any of this. My wife’s cousin kicked a deadbeat dad to the curb and a meth habit of 3 years.

Turning your life around can be done by anyone doesn’t matter if they are Buddhist, Mormon, or agnostic

1 Like

Yes. My own brother has dramatically turned his life around and made life style changes that have made him a far better person. The changes were as dramatic as any. This has happened again and again to many people, some of whom have been religious, others have not.

Exactly.

I should also point out that non religious people are certainly capable of being child molestors even though most people think it’s just Catholics