Best Argument For or Against God's Existence

[Kirsten]

Then let him come forth and defend that claim.

He has already done so, and will do it again. Wait for it.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

He has already done so, and will do it again. Wait for it.

Where has he already done so?

 

[Kirsten]

Where has he already done so?

John 8
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

John 8
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

 

[Kirsten]

And?

 

[KCfromNC]

A doctrine that has been defined by the church up and down, from side to side, in almost redundant detail, can indeed by called "coherent," yes.

Weird that such any easy to understand concept is often defined by rejecting all of the misunderstandings believers have of it rather than just saying what it is. That's much more consistent with my idea that it is an incoherent mystery than it being some well defined concept.

I mean, yeah, it is also what you'd expect considering it was a committee document which created the idea in the first place to get rid of heretical ideas. The committee needed to mix and match a few contradictory ideas from the most powerful voting blocks in order to beat down the ideas they didn't like. So obviously there's going to be some contradictions in there. But still, there's been a lot of time since then to fix it up into something more meaningful with no progress.

When the church calls something a "mystery" it doesn't mean that it's beyond all understanding. It means that how it comes to be is beyond our abilities to know; but it's not beyond our abilities to understand that it IS what it is.

I guess you just have to take it on faith that the idea is coherent.

We usually just say that that's a lack of understanding on your part.

"We" would be wrong in this case.

Other people do understand, you know.

That doesn't fit with my experience on the topic, passive-aggressive smiley or not.[/QUOTE]

 

[KCfromNC]

That only applies within our understanding of time.

Which implies you're talking about stuff even you don't understand.

An intelligent designer can be deduced based on reason.

As can any number of other imaginary things.

 

[Albion]

Weird that such any easy to understand concept is often defined by rejecting all of the misunderstandings believers have of it rather than just saying what it is.

That would indeed be weird if it were true. If individuals use short answers when replying to non-believers, that's their choice. However, and as I said before, the idea that the Trinity is some vague concept or incoherent mystery isn't true for the very reason that, of all Christian doctrines, it is one that has been defined, at the highest levels, in almost excruciating detail.

Other critics, as a matter of fact, often make the point of their criticism the idea that it has been defined and explained in TOO MUCH detail.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That would indeed be weird if it were true. If individuals use short answers when replying to non-believers, that's their choice. However, and as I said before, the idea that the Trinity is some vague concept or incoherent mystery isn't true for the very reason that, of all Christian doctrines, it is one that has been defined, at the highest levels, in almost excruciating detail.

Other critics, as a matter of fact, often make the point of their criticism the idea that it has been defined and explained in TOO MUCH detail.

It's amazing how much one can write about things that don't make sense.

 

[Albion]

It's amazing how much one can write about things that don't make sense.

I hear that from a lot of college students...and yet, Physics, Macro-Economics, Philosophy, Accounting, and other subjects turn out NOT to be just a mass of incoherent jabber. But not in everyone's case, of course.

Some people will never understand; and many of them will say that it's because of the subject matter, not them. No, it's never just that they didn't "get it," or, in some cases, didn't want to bother.

 

[KCfromNC]

Well if God isn't physical then how am I supposed to show you an example?

You tell me, you're the one claiming that all of this stuff about gods is real. How do you know?

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is based off of deductive reasoning. I contend that it's based off of sound deductive reasoning. I'd like to ask you why you think otherwise.

Because I don't see any good reasons to accept either of the premises. Feel free to present any.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I hear that from a lot of college students...and yet, Physics, Macro-Economics, Philosophy, Accounting, and other subjects turn out NOT to be just a mass of incoherent jabber. But not in everyone's case, of course.

Some people will never understand; and many of them will say that it's because of the subject matter, not them. No, it's never just that they didn't "get it," or, in some cases, didn't want to bother.

Some people will never understand, but they'll pretend to by writing copious volumes of obscurity.

 

[KCfromNC]

I see the end of this train of thought as being some form of solipsism.

It more often ends up in something like "since we can never know anything with 100% certainty, anything I make up is just as reasonable as stuff supported by multiple lines of independent objective evidence". I'm not sure that is solipsism as much as a powerful way to rationalize away the uncomfortable parts of reality.

 

[Albion]

Some people will never understand, but they'll pretend to by writing copious volumes of obscurity.

Just a minute. It's not the ones who DO understand the doctrine of the Trinity that engage in the pouting and grumping on threads like this one, complaining about not being able to make sense of it.

 

[KCfromNC]

There is only one God. He is outside of our time, space and understanding. It is foolish to attempt to understand Him in our limited knowledge.

Like I said, the whole "it is a mystery thing" is in practice a way to avoid thinking about the fact that this god as believed by actual believers doesn't make sense.

 

[KCfromNC]

That would indeed be weird if it were true.

Can you find an explanation of the trinity which doesn't spend a bunch of time explaining how it isn't what believers mistakenly think it is?

If individuals use short answers when replying to non-believers, that's their choice. However, and as I said before, the idea that the Trinity is some vague concept or incoherent mystery isn't true for the very reason that, of all Christian doctrines, it is one that has been defined, at the highest levels, in almost excruciating detail.

Being defined in detail doesn't prevent the definition from being incoherent, not does it prevent it from being defined as a mystery.

Other critics, as a matter of fact, often make the point of their criticism the idea that it has been defined and explained in TOO MUCH detail.

As you say, "That would indeed be weird if it were true."

 

[Albion]

Like I said, the whole "it is a mystery thing" is in practice a way to avoid thinking about the fact that this god as believed by actual believers doesn't make sense.

We don't seem to be getting anywhere fast in this discussion, so why don't we just take note that you don't understand, although others do, and it annoys you. We're sorry that's the case, and your irritation is duly noted, so let's move on to something more productive.

 

[KCfromNC]

We don't seem to be getting anywhere fast in this discussion, so why don't we just take note that you don't understand, although others do, and it annoys you. We're sorry that's the case, and your irritation is duly noted, so let's move on to something more productive.

If you're unable to provide any more meaningful contribution to the discussion there's nothing compelling you to continue posting in this thread. We'll continue without you.

 

[HitchSlap]

And?

So why post verses from a book some here consider fatuous?

 

[HitchSlap]

We don't seem to be getting anywhere fast in this discussion, so why don't we just take note that you don't understand, although others do, and it annoys you. We're sorry that's the case, and your irritation is duly noted, so let's move on to something more productive.

Sounds like you're giving up?