20 arguments for the existence of God

[hamashiachagape]

So the moment we have a conscious, we believe there is a God, and even have full knowledge of the Christian bible? Would you like me to lower the straws so they are within reach?

Oh....no no. Now it becomes essential to evaluate what the true nature of God is. Antony Flew was wise enough not to jump to that conclusion himself. I would have loved for him to evaluate the validity of the Bible though more thoroughly than he did.

 

[KIYX]

You are evaluating them the wrong way. One is a posteriori, the other is A Priori.

You are incorrect. Both are man made delusions.

And it's up to you to prove that your god is a priori.

 

[hamashiachagape]

You are incorrect. Both are man made delusions.

And it's up to you to prove that your god is a priori.

One exists within the world, one does not. Who are you to dogmatically make this assertion about God? You can't, otherwise you'd be God himself, and then that would be self refuting too. So as such, Theism is the Philosophically default position and does not need to be proven.

Blah. Not interested. As I've demonstrated its redundant to do so.

 

[KIYX]

No thanks, I've just refuted Atheism. No need to. Theism is the Philosophically default position.

I accept your concession.

 

[KIYX]

Thanks for ad hominem attack.

Maybe you should try being intellectually honest and seek out the existing God I am speaking of instead of attacking those who believe in him.

You mean that existing god you refused to prove existed?

If even his followed can't prove his existence why should anybody else care about your religion?

 

[hamashiachagape]

You mean that existing god you refused to prove existed?

If even his followed can't prove his existence why should anybody else care about your religion?

It exists by default.

 

[hamashiachagape]

I accept your concession.

Great then you should be more than willing to accept there is a God, if you're more logical and intellectually honest than your counterparts and kindly remove the religious symbol of Atheism.

 

[hamashiachagape]

Is that the same 'new evidence' that says the FSM 'Demands a Verdict'.

I've already refuted the FSM.

 

[KIYX]

So attack the supreme court.

Why would I?

Sorry you can't hold up your own position, and that it collapses itself.

My position is very clear, "I've seen no evidence for a god and thus don't believe in one", it is you who have refused to provide the smallest bit of evidence of your god.

I understand how hard it is to give up a belief system.

Like which much of this thread it's pretty clear that your using words you have no business using as you have no concept of what they mean.

You might want to look up the phrase "belief system" before using it again.

 

[hamashiachagape]

Why would I?

My position is very clear, "I've seen no evidence for a god and thus don't believe in one", it is you who have refused to provide the smallest bit of evidence of your god.




Like which much of this thread it's pretty clear that your using words you have no business using as you have no concept of what they mean.

You might want to look up the phrase "belief system" before using it again.

Back and forth, back and forth.

God doesn't need evidence to exist.

 

[hamashiachagape]

Then why don't you try refuting your God?

I have. And I can't.

An Apologist from another forum corrected me when I tried.

 

[KIYX]

One exists within the world, one does not. Who are you to dogmatically make this assertion about God? You can't, otherwise you'd be God himself, and then that would be self refuting too. So as such, Theism is the Philosophically default position and does not need to be proven.

If one exists within the world then you should find it extremely easy to provide some evidence.

Blah. Not interested. As I've demonstrated its redundant to do so.

You concede too easily.

 

[hamashiachagape]

If one exists within the world then you should find it extremely easy to provide some evidence.

You concede too easily.

No need to prove that which is self evident in its existence.

 

[KIYX]

Great then you should be more than willing to accept there is a God, if you're more logical and intellectually honest than your counterparts and kindly remove the religious symbol of Atheism.

Apparently concession is another word you clearly do not understand.

By refusing to provide any evidence you have concede that you cannot.

 

[hamashiachagape]

There is evidence, but theres no need to provide it.

 

[hamashiachagape]

Apparently concession is another word you clearly do not understand.

By refusing to provide any evidence you have concede that you cannot.

No need to prove something A Priori through A Posteriori means either.

 

[KIYX]

God doesn't need evidence to exist.

This is beyond laughable. Honestly you dare to ask others to be intellectually honest and you give us that as an argument?


Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[hamashiachagape]

But the FSM and your God both have the same legitimacy, which is basically NONE.

Can you prove the God of the Bible has no legitimacy?

 

[hamashiachagape]

This is beyond laughable. Honestly you dare to ask others to be intellectually honest and you give us that as an argument?


Hypocrisy at it's finest.

Prove it.

 

[hamashiachagape]

I refuted Atheism. There is no need to then declare any other position besides Theism. Which type of Theism needs thorough research.