× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Page 11 of 21 First ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... Last
Results 201 to 220 of 411
  1. #1
    Array Justufy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    162
    Threads
    4
    Reputation
    249
    Rep Power
    61

    Logical proof for the existence of holy god. (OP)


    When we look at the greatness and perfection of nature it seems that all has been created with intended purpose, gravitational laws, physic laws, natural laws, this goes for all natural bodies present in our universe.

    However natural bodies are unintelligent, they are incapable of deciding of these laws by themselves, however they all act towards a defined end, for example, a planet will orbit around the sun.

    The complex array of cells of the human body all have specific functions, acting towards an end is a characteristic of intelligence.

    Now that this has been said it is obvious that there exists an intelligent being that guides all that exists and dictates these laws.

    And this all men know as God.

  2. #201
    CosmicPathos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the sea
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    3,923
    Threads
    74
    Reputation
    24576
    Rep Power
    77
    Likes (Given)
    315
    Likes (Received)
    790

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Report bad ads?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis View Post
    I'd hope that you loved your mother and would want to spend some time with her at the end of her life. And if you don't... then I'd find it rather shallow for you to spend time with her just for show or to win a celestial prize.
    well I wish I could, but not at the expense of the loss that it could incur (spending money to fly to visit her which I could spend on bettering my health and fitness, taking days off from work, the depression of seeing her die) .... that could really effect me in my struggle to remain fit in this darwinian life. No?

    I would rather find it shallow for you to visit her and implicitly let her think that you are young and living. She might get depressed right before her death that she cant rejoice life anymore as her progeny is enjoying. Many possibilities.
    Last edited by CosmicPathos; 12-13-2009 at 06:16 AM.

  3. Report bad ads?
  4. #202
    Justufy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    162
    Threads
    4
    Reputation
    249
    Rep Power
    61
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wa7abiScientist View Post
    well I wish I could, but not at the expense of the loss that it could incur (spending money to fly to visit her which I could spend on bettering my health and fitness, taking days off from work, the depression of seeing her die) .... that could really effect me in my struggle to remain fit in this darwinian life. No?
    sure could, ha! old people.. who needs em? (*sarcasm)

  5. #203
    tetsujin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    286
    Threads
    3
    Reputation
    333
    Rep Power
    73
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Even if religion made people morally superior it would not lend credence to any of it's claims. It could function completely fine as a placebo.

    Claiming that a religion holds truth, is not the same as claiming a religion is useful.


    All the best,


    Faysal

  6. #204
    Pygoscelis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    4,013
    Threads
    51
    Reputation
    12327
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    320
    Likes (Received)
    675

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wa7abiScientist View Post
    that could really effect me in my struggle to remain fit in this darwinian life. No?
    Why are you all of a sudden concerned about being "fit in this darwinian life"?

    Or are you saying that lacking a god belief leads one to this concern?

    As a non-believer I can assure you that in my case it really hasn't.

    Some atheists don't want to have kids, making themselves genetic dead ends!

    Some atheists even adopt and raise the children of others!

  7. Report bad ads?
  8. #205
    Justufy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    162
    Threads
    4
    Reputation
    249
    Rep Power
    61
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetsujin View Post
    Even if religion made people morally superior it would not lend credence to any of it's claims. It could function completely fine as a placebo.

    Claiming that a religion holds truth, is not the same as claiming a religion is useful.


    All the best,


    Faysal
    You see I am claiming both.

    1: religion holds truth
    2: religion maes people morally superior

  9. #206
    Justufy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    162
    Threads
    4
    Reputation
    249
    Rep Power
    61
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Some atheists don't want to have kids, making themselves genetic dead ends!
    Makes perfect sense to me.

  10. #207
    Pygoscelis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    4,013
    Threads
    51
    Reputation
    12327
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    320
    Likes (Received)
    675

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    You see I am claiming both.

    1: religion holds truth
    2: religion maes people morally superior
    And I deny both and would like to see your arguments made for either.

  11. #208
    CosmicPathos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the sea
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    3,923
    Threads
    74
    Reputation
    24576
    Rep Power
    77
    Likes (Given)
    315
    Likes (Received)
    790

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis View Post
    And I deny both and would like to see your arguments made for either.
    I would like to see your arguments for both denials too.

  12. #209
    tetsujin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    286
    Threads
    3
    Reputation
    333
    Rep Power
    73
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    You see I am claiming both.

    1: religion holds truth
    2: religion makes people morally superior

    Proving the 1st claim would be enough, whether or not moral superiority is achieved.

    You really would be better off with providing logical proof for god's existence, then you could get to religion.


    All the best,


    Faysal

  13. Report bad ads?
  14. #210
    Pygoscelis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    4,013
    Threads
    51
    Reputation
    12327
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    320
    Likes (Received)
    675

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    It is my claim that the abrahamic religions are centred around OBEDIENCE and not morality. And this can be seen in numerous cases where morality and obedience conflict.

    Off the top of my head

    1. Adam and Eve eat the "fruit of knowledge of good and evil". Before they eat it they have no way of knowing if its "good" to obey God, so this is about obedience, not morality.

    2. The ten commandments are suprisingly lacking in moral commands, and suprisingly centred around obedience.

    3. The story of Abraham and Isaac directly pits morality against obedience, and obedience wins. The moral way to end that story would be Abraham saying "no lord, I will not kill an innocent child, you have taught me to be more moral" and god saying "very good Abraham, you have passed the test". But instead God is pleased that Abraham was ready to obey God and murder his son.

    4. Islam is explicitly about surrendering to God and obeying him.

    I fear that people may bury their inate moral compass in religious dogma and enable themselves to do things they wouldn't otherwise do. Dan Dennet is fond of saying "good people do good things and bad people do bad things, but to get good people to do bad things, that takes religion". I'm not sure I'd completely agree (I think there are other things that can also make that leap for you), but he may have the right idea.

  15. #211
    Trumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Buddhist
    Posts
    3,275
    Threads
    21
    Reputation
    10492
    Rep Power
    92
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Never mind... Some things are best unsaid.
    Last edited by Trumble; 12-13-2009 at 08:39 AM.

  16. #212
    Eliphaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    dark side of the teacup
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    238
    Threads
    8
    Reputation
    2487
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    Without God there can be no objective moral values.

    Everything is relative without God, good and bad does not exist.
    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    Well the rapist could argue: why not?? It gives me pleasure! I shall do as I please, pygosellis who are you to tell me what to do?

    as I shall die and go unpunished in the sweetest of sleeps, for now let me rape It is pleasurable to me!
    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    Well thats my entire point! if God does not exist anything goes. And we can be selfish beasts.

    So screw then dying mother! who cares she will die anyways!

    Because in the end it dosen't realy matter! none of it does!
    Quote Originally Posted by Wa7abiScientist View Post
    Think for themselves? Right!

    Would you be with your 80 year old mom on her death bed at the expense of your work responsibilities and career goals and ambitions? Without religion, I would not feel the need to waste my time by spending it with a dying person who has no hope to survive.
    Sorry, but I find this really disturbing.

  17. #213
    Justufy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    162
    Threads
    4
    Reputation
    249
    Rep Power
    61
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trumble View Post
    Never mind... Some things are best unsaid.
    Especially when what you say is rude, offensive and not welcome here, its better to keep quiet.

    you shall agree?

  18. #214
    czgibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Atheism
    Posts
    3,238
    Threads
    37
    Reputation
    15764
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    589
    Likes (Received)
    284

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Greetings,
    Quote Originally Posted by Eliphaz View Post
    Sorry, but I find this really disturbing.
    Absolutely. It demonstrates that (for the people you've quoted at least), obedience is far more important than doing the right thing.

    Peace

  19. Report bad ads?
  20. #215
    Uthman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Warrington, England
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,513
    Threads
    691
    Reputation
    53765
    Rep Power
    121
    Likes (Given)
    20
    Likes (Received)
    69

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    It seems that the discussion has moved from talking about the existence of God to discussing whether atheists are actually better than theists.

    That's an interesting discussion, but it's for another thread. Not this one.
    Logical proof for the existence of holy god.


    "I spent thirty years learning manners, and I spent twenty years learning knowledge."

    ~ 'Abdullāh bin al-Mubārak (rahimahullah)

  21. #216
    IAmZamzam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fort Smith, Arkansas
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,480
    Threads
    50
    Reputation
    7394
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    91

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetsujin View Post
    I didn't point to you specifically, if you read the preceding posts, you will see that the "burden of proof" argument was made before my post.
    It doesn't matter when it was made. Bull is bull, and as you'll see soon enough in that other thread, it's bull.

    Yes, I agree, it is the worst kind of argument. It is like asking for robust evidence for the non-existence of the T-Rex or robust evidence for the non-existence of bridge trolls.

    The first pillar of Islam is a sincere declaration of belief. The first part of the Kalimah e Shahada is a positive claim. When you say "I bear witness (testify) that there is no god but Allah...", the same reasoning applies. you are claiming no other gods exist, and you are claiming there is only one god. How would you invite someone to Islam without resorting to that "jejune" mode of thinking?
    I'll let you know if and when I invite you to Islam. For now I'm going to continue resisting your repeated attempts to divert the topic.

    I think you and I are on the same track, perhaps coming from opposite ends. I specifically stated that religion had nothing to do with the proposition, the existence of god is an independent claim and not affected by the form or influence of any religion, unless and until believers insist on the relationship of god and religion.

    It is possible to be a theist without having religiously motivated social or economic ideologies. I realize that is hard for the pious Muslim to understand. That is why I said you can hold onto your faith for the sake of the argument, I wasn't asking anyone to think outside of their box.
    Wow. Even when you're making a point that's perplexingly irrelevant to the point of a weird non-sequitur, you still manage to make a stereotype!

    I don't know who that someone is, but I said books do not make claims, people make claims. Someone must have written that book. That book is a medium for the exchange of ideas. If you preceive that message as comming from the book itself and not an author, we need to stop discussing everything else. It's not a moot point or a semantic triviality. It's a byproduct of fundamental reasoning skills. If you wish to say that book was authored by god, then please say so, and we'll have a point to talk about because now you have made a claim. If you believe that the followers of muhammad wrote that book, then we have a point to talk about, because now you have made a claim. Books do not write themselves. The bulletin board, the bilboard, the radio station, the television commercial, the internet, the packaging on gum... all of these are mediums to exchange ideas. You should hold their sources accountable, not the medium itself.
    My claim was a refutation of a claim previously made in this thread that the Koran does not say that it is God-inspired. I pointed out that it does indeed say that. And that's it. That's all I said. Stop trying to build monuments out of anthills.

    Boy am I delighted to read the implication that, by your methods of reasoning, the Koran is not proof of god's existence. At least we're on the same page.
    I say that I wasn't claiming that the Koran's claim of its being God-inspired was proof of itself (as some Christians do with 2 Timothy 3:16) and that automatically means that there is no proof of any kind to be found in it anywhere, in any way, of God's existence?? That particular subset of the issue wasn't even on the table! Work on your reading comprehension skills!

    I'm so sorry. I'll be delighted to correct myself and say. I claim that it (the Koran) is a book written for believers and doesn't spend much time trying to convince anyone of the truth. :-) Repeating a claim, no matter how many times for poetry or symbolism, does not count as making a logical argument. In any case, that discussion is what you would call a diversion.
    Again, work on your reading comprehension skills. I urge you very strongly to read the book again and this time pay attention to its arguments. And stop acting as though I've said things I haven't said, like that its repetitions amount to argumentation.
    Last edited by IAmZamzam; 12-13-2009 at 05:51 PM.
    Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Peace be to any prophets I may have mentioned above. Praised and exalted be my Maker, if I have mentioned Him. (Come to think of it praise Him anyway.)

  22. #217
    Trumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Buddhist
    Posts
    3,275
    Threads
    21
    Reputation
    10492
    Rep Power
    92
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justufy View Post
    Especially when what you say is rude, offensive and not welcome here, its better to keep quiet.

    you shall agree?
    I try not to be rude and offensive, even when deserved - which is why I deleted something that certainly was. I have no regard for your opinion of what is or is not welcome here. If anything I post is unsuitable, no doubt the moderators will remove it.

  23. #218
    IAmZamzam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fort Smith, Arkansas
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,480
    Threads
    50
    Reputation
    7394
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    91

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pyogscelis
    Religion does not provide morality. It provides obedience. Islam doesn't teach you to be good for the sake of good, it teaches you to submit to the will of Allah.
    That's rather a moot point when a religion subscribes to Divine Command Theory in the first place, wherein morality is synonymous with conformity to the higher law of the Higher Power, which in many ways only stands to reason, though that would take us off track, because...

    Message for everyone: As valid as the Moral Argument for God's Existence is, it tends not to be effective all the same--at least when not presented by the very most superb of presenters, which we may not have here: if you want a superb presentation, read the first few chapters of Mere Christianity, the only chapters worth reading (I refuted much of the rest of the book in this thread), which was so effective that when even Dan Barker attempted refuting it--and he's one of the best atheistic debaters (d-a-m-n-ing with faint praise), a few of his counter-arguments were misrepresentations or diversions and most were just things Lewis had already responded to in the text. Anyway, the Moral Argument, valid as it is, tends to be ineffective when most amateurs present it for three reasons: (1) because it leads to situations like the one we have here, (2) because like the disease it is absolute cultural relativism has infected the human race in such a worldwide epidemic that now even religious people often tend to have their minds utterly closed to the ideas that there is any remote trace of anything inherent or universal in us of morality, and (3) because morality is a more abstract thing with less tangible evidence to point to than matters of teleology or cosmology or what not. I suggest we shift gears. In fact, since it was so overlooked....
    Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Peace be to any prophets I may have mentioned above. Praised and exalted be my Maker, if I have mentioned Him. (Come to think of it praise Him anyway.)

  24. #219
    IAmZamzam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fort Smith, Arkansas
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,480
    Threads
    50
    Reputation
    7394
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    91

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Let me try my hand at this again; here's something (admittedly a very heavily edited version of a quite excerpted portion from an extremely rough draft of a work in progress--I hope the ellipses don't make it too choppy) from the book on Islam I'm writing:

    Consider what [“the forces of nature”] do to the world. They give it mechanism, organization, structure, intricacy, and what is generally seen as beauty. In other words, all their operationally defining characteristics are the marks of design. Think of a Rubix Cube. It may not be easy to solve the puzzle of precisely how the whole thing works but you can still observe with much ease that it is a designed thing. Its main characteristics are mechanism, organization, structure, intricacy, and (color-based) aesthetics. Would a Rubix Cube have simply happened to come to be somehow if no intelligent being had made it? So it is with the world, as far as we can observe. Do its laws or “forces” not provide it with a great degree of organization and structure by their mere existence? Is the world not intricate? Everyone knows it is, even the infant who has got a single glimpse out of the nursery room window. Are not many things in the way the world works—the hydrological cycle, for example—not mechanism of a sort? Is there not what most would agree is beauty in the world’s rich, lush verdure, gorgeous mountains, dazzling rivers and cataracts, and wondrous colorful caves? There might not be much meaning to any of these characteristics if they were alone (I have found that many people posing teleological theistic arguments make too singular a focus on intricacy) but they all coexist…

    Think of the arts—any of them. A painter makes a painting with the use of the three primary colors (blue, yellow, and red), using and combining them in different ways to make his intricate, organized, aesthetic work of design. An author uses the three types of sentences (statements, questions, and commands) to do the same thing when constructing a story. So it is with a composer of music using the three building blocks and shaping tools for the music (rhythm, melody, and lyrics), or an architect with his ceilings, walls and floors. So it is with gravity, the strong nuclear force, and the electro-weak force. They combine with each other in different patterns to produce the world with the same characteristics. Experience teaches us that they could not were there not an Artist behind them…

    I hear…all the time from atheists…the appeal to natural selection, an example of the self-negating idea of order from chaos, used as evidence against the notion of the world having been designed. Of what use is this argument when one could at least as easily use it as evidence of the opposite position? To start with the premise that natural selection happens because of impersonal or random things instead of being part of an ultimate purpose, and then use that premise on which to build an argument against the existence of that ultimate purpose, is to form yet one more bit of atheistic circular reasoning…

    The agnostic philosopher Bertrand Russell raised objections of his own the better part of a century ago and they are still paralleled or parroted by nontheists everywhere. These objections come from Russell’s famous essay “Why I Am Not a Christian”, in which he spends much less time on the subject of Christianity than the principal subject of God’s existence. He said on the subject of the world’s design by natural law, “Nowadays we explain the law of gravitation in a somewhat complicated fashion that Einstein has introduced...You no longer have the sort of Natural Law that you had in the Newtonian system, where, for some reason that nobody could understand, nature behaved in a uniform fashion…Where you can get down to any knowledge of what atoms actually do, you will find that they are much less subject to law than people thought, and that the laws at which you arrive are statistical averages of just the sort that would emerge from chance. There is, as we all know, a law that if you throw dice you will get double sixes only about once in thirty-six times, and we do not regard that as evidence that the fall of the dice is regulated by design; on the contrary, if the double sixes came every time we should think that there was design. The laws of nature are of that sort as regards to a great many of them. They are statistical averages such as would emerge from the laws of chance; and that makes the whole business of natural law much less impressive than it formerly was.”

    Do you see what Russell’s doing here, dear reader? He’s trying to explain one kind of law (the laws of physics) by appealing to another kind of law (the laws of mathematics). That just brings us back to square one. It’s yet more nontheistic circular reasoning at worst and utter futility at best. The material world itself offers no more actual explanation for the existence of the mathematical laws (or rather the realities they’re describing) than it does for the physical ones. I would respond to Russell with his own words from the same essay:

    “It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu’s view, that the world rested upon an elephant, and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, ‘How about the tortoise?’ the Indian said, ‘Suppose we change the subject.’ The argument is really no better than that.”

    On the subject of design by law Russell continues, “You are then faced with the question, Why did God issue just those natural laws and no others? If you say that he did it simply from his own good pleasure, and without any reason, you then find that there is something which is not subject to law, and so your train of natural law is interrupted.”…If God exists then by He is a supernatural Being, which means that He is not a part of nature but beyond it. Natural law, by definition, applies to nature. So of course the train of natural law ends before God: how could it not when it’s only natural law? Were God to be subject to any sort of law, it would be a supernatural law, not a natural one, and we have no reason to believe there is any supernatural equivalent to natural law.

    But by far the weakest argument Russell makes is: “If you accept the ordinary laws of science, you have to suppose that human life and life in general on this planet will die out in due course: it is merely a flash in the pan; it is a stage in the decay of the solar system; at a certain stage of decay you get the sort of conditions and temperature and so forth which are suitable to protoplasm, and there is life for a short time in the life of the whole solar system. You see in the moon the sort of thing to which the earth is tending—something dead, cold, and lifeless.” Will a Rubix Cube last forever? Do paintings not peel, fade, decay? Does the paper on which literature, scripts and poetry are written not peel, fade, decay? Do great works of architecture not eventually fall apart? Do the sounds produced by the instruments of a band not dwindle into silence? Come now! Whether or not something is designed has nothing whatsoever to do with its transience…

    In his essay “A Designer Universe?” [Scott] Weinberg admits, “I’d guess that if we were to see the hand of the designer anywhere, it would be in the fundamental principles, the final laws of nature, the book of rules that govern all natural phenomena.” But then he adds: “We don’t know the final laws yet, but as far as we have been able to see, they are utterly impersonal and quite without any special role for life.” Without any special role for life? What, then, do you call the laws making this planet form into the only one of its kind within interminable and uncrossable gulfs, if not altogether anywhere? What do you call the laws which keep this planet spinning in orbit in just the rate we need upon it if we are to remain on it and be graced by cool winds without which our weather would fall apart? Or keeping the earth in an orbit rather than allowing it to drift too close to the sun? What do you call the laws causing living things to grow and thrive? No special role for life indeed! Here’s an exercise, dear reader: walk around outside for just an hour and see how many instances you can spot of physical laws having special roles in our living…

    The atheistic scholar Kai Nielsen objects to the concept of design in the world by saying that were the world to be designed via its laws, it would not be like it is today but instead would be more like the growth of vegetation or fungus—another mere assertion. The only way that Nielsen’s argument could work is if the kind of growth in question were a natural mark of design, like the marks I listed in the previous section—but that’s not the case, now is it? Is the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel a vegetation-or-fungus-like growth? Is a computer a vegetation-or-fungus-like-growth? Is a Parcheesi board a vegetation-or-fungus-like-growth?


    Once more, this is quite an edited excerpt; considering the predictability of atheistic counter-argumentation, though, I'm sure any responses I'll hear to it which aren't covered above will be from the parts I put ellipses over or am already planning for the "atheistic chestnuts refuted" series. So let's hear it.
    Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Peace be to any prophets I may have mentioned above. Praised and exalted be my Maker, if I have mentioned Him. (Come to think of it praise Him anyway.)

  25. Report bad ads?
  26. #220
    Trumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Buddhist
    Posts
    3,275
    Threads
    21
    Reputation
    10492
    Rep Power
    92
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Re: Logical proof for the existence of holy god.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahya Sulaiman View Post
    I hear…all the time from atheists…the appeal to natural selection, an example of the self-negating idea of order from chaos, used as evidence against the notion of the world having been designed. Of what use is this argument when one could at least as easily use it as evidence of the opposite position? To start with the premise that natural selection happens because of impersonal or random things instead of being part of an ultimate purpose, and then use that premise on which to build an argument against the existence of that ultimate purpose, is to form yet one more bit of atheistic circular reasoning…
    It is not 'circular reasoning' at all. The significance of evolution by natural selection to the atheistic argument is simply that it provides a naturalistic explanation of how many events that might otherwise be assumed the consequence of deliberate design by God or gods might occur without such deliberate design. The fact that it could be argued that the evolution mechanism could itself be the product of design doesn't affect that utility in the slightest unless, of course, the theist can prove that it is.

    I fully agree that evolution by natural selection could theoretically be a designed process, indeed such an extremely elegant designed process compared with the alternatives suggested by creationists (and creation myths) it never ceases to amaze me why so many theists are so quick to dismiss it! To adopt the theistic counter you suggest necessitates accepting that evolution by natural selection exists. As a considerable number of those participating on the theist side of such debates resolutely refuse to do so, that alone makes it a worthwhile addition to the atheistic armory!
    Last edited by Trumble; 12-13-2009 at 07:46 PM.


  27. Hide
Page 11 of 21 First ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... Last
Hey there! Logical proof for the existence of holy god. Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Logical proof for the existence of holy god.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. A proof for the existence of angels
    By selsebil in forum Aqeedah
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-12-2011, 03:51 PM
  2. Proof for the existence of hereafter?
    By greenvalley in forum The Hereafter
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-19-2011, 10:10 AM
  3. Simple, logical arguments to prove the existence of God
    By crayon in forum Comparative religion
    Replies: 187
    Last Post: 02-27-2010, 09:19 PM
  4. An Amazing Proof for the Existence of God
    By Questfortruth in forum Comparative religion
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 11-29-2008, 06:49 AM
  5. Will atheist really get the proof of God's existence?
    By gang4 in forum Comparative religion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-19-2008, 03:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create