-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How to prove God exists.
- Thread starter Pachomius
- Start date
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,751
- 52,534
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Dear readers everyone reading this thread, on How to prove God exists, the way I see the ten most repeated arguments of atheists, by net blogger Eric Hyde, which he sees them to be bad arguments: the way I see them, they are all grounded on nothing but the self-obfuscation and self-obscurantism from atheists - when it comes to the issue of causation as the evidence all the way to the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
See next post from me, when you have read the ten most repeated arguments from atheists - it is about the US Supreme Court in effect telling atheists to not even think that they are going to turn the US into an atheist state.
_______________________
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
From Eric Hyde's Blog
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.
2. If God created the universe, who created God?
3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.
4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.
6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.
7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.
8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.
9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.
10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.
[End of ten most repeated arguments of atheists]
See next post from me, when you have read the ten most repeated arguments from atheists - it is about the US Supreme Court in effect telling atheists to not even think that they are going to turn the US into an atheist state.
_______________________
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
From Eric Hyde's Blog
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.
2. If God created the universe, who created God?
3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.
4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.
6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.
7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.
8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.
9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.
10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.
[End of ten most repeated arguments of atheists]
Upvote
0
- Nov 2, 2016
- 4,819
- 1,644
- 67
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Or perhaps you don't like the evidence!
Plenty of evidence from Eucharistic miracles to observed stigmata and impossible wound healing after , from high energy corona discharge as the only current viable explanation for the shroud marking, to the eyes of the tilma of Guadeloupe that show an optical effect noy discovered for 500 years after it appeared. From medically observed inedia with no fluid only communion, to the incorruptible bodies of saints. From impossible writings, to observed prophecies. And one I really like... the discovery of Mary's house from a vision as it was two millennia ago, buried from sight at the time of discovery.
But then there is absolutely no evidence WHATSOEVER for abiogenesis - life as a chemical accident - but I am sure your faith accepts that without question.
So the problem is not evidence but your blind faith in atheism it seems, that lowers the bar to things you "like", and raises it against things you " don't like". There's no shame in that. Dawkins made a career and swindled a fortune from his readers, by Regurgitating just such abuse of "science" into books ( his kind, not the real kind)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The way I see it, in Town of Greece New York v. Galloway, the US Supreme Court is telling people that the US has a Christian tradition; so atheists, Don't think that you are going to turn it into an atheist state, where you atheists can cuss God calling him like for example, that rat-bastard of a God; and the people with no Christian tradition are welcome but learn to live with the Christian tradition that is the US, period.
Read the article from The Guardian, I am going to go read what atheists say about the reality of the existence of causation.
_________________
From The Guardian:
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You too...
News, sport and opinion from the Guardian's global edition | The Guardian › Opinion › Religion
May 7, 2014 - The supreme court has now allowed the majority religion of the members of a city government to dominate the sectarian prayers offered at its ...
us supreme court and prayer - Google Search
The Guardian > home › opinion > columnists > Religion
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You, too | Anthea Butler
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You, too...
Anthea Butler
Government prayer will continue. But religious Americans might have more to fear from this week's decision than atheists.
Susan Galloway was one of two women to file suit against her town council for its pre-meeting prayers. They lost, but so did we.
Wednesday 7 May 2014 11.30 BST
Last modified on Wednesday 8 February 2017 04.47 GMT
Susan Galloway, who is Jewish, and Linda Stephens, an atheist, felt uncomfortable sitting through the predominately Christian prayers that opened every town meeting in Greece, New York. For years they lived through their discomfort. Then they asked that the town meetings start instead with non-sectarian prayers that did not explicitly reference specific religious ideas. Eventually, the town council told both women that they could stand in the hallway or stick their fingers in their ears.
Instead, they filed suit.
This week, the US supreme court ruled, 5-4, in favor of the town of Greece, and opened up a new battlefield in the culture wars. What Galloway and Stephens experienced will unfortunately continue to occur in many communities throughout the country – those who are part of a minority religious tradition in a particular locale should just "put up or shut up" and wait their turn.
The part of upstate New York in which Greece is situated was historically known as the "Burned-Over District" in the 19th century for speed with which residents accepted (and some times quickly rejected) a diversity of religions. That diversity, which included Mormons, Millerites, Spiritualists and Evangelicals in the 19th century, looks different in the 21st: according to a 2010 survey by the Association of Religious Data Archives, those who are unaffiliated with a religious tradition made up the largest group in the county – more than twice as many people claimed no religion as said they were Catholic.
What you need to know about the Neil Gorsuch supreme court nomination
Read more
The trend toward non-affiliation in upstate New York mirrors the rise in non-affiliated and non-religious people across the United States. According to the Pew Foundation, the number of people unaffiliated with a religious tradition is just under 20% in America, and on the rise.
Rulings like the latest big one from the Roberts court do not take into account the changing landscape of belief in America. And it will only intensify the clashes between those who want to invoke specific deities, and those who have amorphous or other religious beliefs – as if both of those groups weren't preparing for future battles over prayer already.
The supreme court has now allowed the majority religion of the members of a city government to dominate the sectarian prayers offered at its meetings. In many towns throughout the nation, of course, these councils are populated predominately by conservative Christians (especially in the midwest and southern states).
While the majority opinion in Greece v Galloway affirms that the prayers should be non-coercive (as in, the government cannot force its constituents to participate), it does leave room for a type of coercion: the choice by these councils or groups to only offer the ability to pray at meetings to particular religious leaders who conform to the religious views of the officials issuing the invites.
Interestingly enough, the split between justices on this case also fell across religious lines. The majority opinion came from all the Catholic members of the court, while the dissent came from the Jewish members of the court and Justice Sotomayor, who is a non-practicing Catholic. Like the citizens on whose behalf they have been appointed to rule, even members of the supreme court have different ideas about prayer and the role it plays in public life.
Justice Kennedy stated in the majority decision that "an insistence on non-sectarian or ecumenical prayer as a single fixed standard is not consistent with the tradition of legislative prayer outlined in the Court's cases," which implies that any court ruling forcing governments to respect its citizens' lack of or differing beliefs actually infringed on the rights of believers.
All Galloway and Stephens wanted was to have prayers that were non-sectarian – that did not refer to particular deities. What they got, in addition to hate mail and ridicule, was a supreme court that sided with a government entity's right to not take into account the religious beliefs (or lack thereof) espoused by the people it serves. Given the trend of Americans moving away from religion, that should bother everyone who has strong religious beliefs at least much as those who don't.
Like reading the Guardian?
© 2017 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
[End of article from The Guardian]
Read the article from The Guardian, I am going to go read what atheists say about the reality of the existence of causation.
_________________
From The Guardian:
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You too...
News, sport and opinion from the Guardian's global edition | The Guardian › Opinion › Religion
May 7, 2014 - The supreme court has now allowed the majority religion of the members of a city government to dominate the sectarian prayers offered at its ...
us supreme court and prayer - Google Search
The Guardian > home › opinion > columnists > Religion
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You, too | Anthea Butler
Are you an atheist? Get mad at the US supreme court. Believer? You, too...
Anthea Butler
Government prayer will continue. But religious Americans might have more to fear from this week's decision than atheists.
Susan Galloway was one of two women to file suit against her town council for its pre-meeting prayers. They lost, but so did we.
Wednesday 7 May 2014 11.30 BST
Last modified on Wednesday 8 February 2017 04.47 GMT
Susan Galloway, who is Jewish, and Linda Stephens, an atheist, felt uncomfortable sitting through the predominately Christian prayers that opened every town meeting in Greece, New York. For years they lived through their discomfort. Then they asked that the town meetings start instead with non-sectarian prayers that did not explicitly reference specific religious ideas. Eventually, the town council told both women that they could stand in the hallway or stick their fingers in their ears.
Instead, they filed suit.
This week, the US supreme court ruled, 5-4, in favor of the town of Greece, and opened up a new battlefield in the culture wars. What Galloway and Stephens experienced will unfortunately continue to occur in many communities throughout the country – those who are part of a minority religious tradition in a particular locale should just "put up or shut up" and wait their turn.
The part of upstate New York in which Greece is situated was historically known as the "Burned-Over District" in the 19th century for speed with which residents accepted (and some times quickly rejected) a diversity of religions. That diversity, which included Mormons, Millerites, Spiritualists and Evangelicals in the 19th century, looks different in the 21st: according to a 2010 survey by the Association of Religious Data Archives, those who are unaffiliated with a religious tradition made up the largest group in the county – more than twice as many people claimed no religion as said they were Catholic.
What you need to know about the Neil Gorsuch supreme court nomination
Read more
The trend toward non-affiliation in upstate New York mirrors the rise in non-affiliated and non-religious people across the United States. According to the Pew Foundation, the number of people unaffiliated with a religious tradition is just under 20% in America, and on the rise.
Rulings like the latest big one from the Roberts court do not take into account the changing landscape of belief in America. And it will only intensify the clashes between those who want to invoke specific deities, and those who have amorphous or other religious beliefs – as if both of those groups weren't preparing for future battles over prayer already.
The supreme court has now allowed the majority religion of the members of a city government to dominate the sectarian prayers offered at its meetings. In many towns throughout the nation, of course, these councils are populated predominately by conservative Christians (especially in the midwest and southern states).
While the majority opinion in Greece v Galloway affirms that the prayers should be non-coercive (as in, the government cannot force its constituents to participate), it does leave room for a type of coercion: the choice by these councils or groups to only offer the ability to pray at meetings to particular religious leaders who conform to the religious views of the officials issuing the invites.
Interestingly enough, the split between justices on this case also fell across religious lines. The majority opinion came from all the Catholic members of the court, while the dissent came from the Jewish members of the court and Justice Sotomayor, who is a non-practicing Catholic. Like the citizens on whose behalf they have been appointed to rule, even members of the supreme court have different ideas about prayer and the role it plays in public life.
Justice Kennedy stated in the majority decision that "an insistence on non-sectarian or ecumenical prayer as a single fixed standard is not consistent with the tradition of legislative prayer outlined in the Court's cases," which implies that any court ruling forcing governments to respect its citizens' lack of or differing beliefs actually infringed on the rights of believers.
All Galloway and Stephens wanted was to have prayers that were non-sectarian – that did not refer to particular deities. What they got, in addition to hate mail and ridicule, was a supreme court that sided with a government entity's right to not take into account the religious beliefs (or lack thereof) espoused by the people it serves. Given the trend of Americans moving away from religion, that should bother everyone who has strong religious beliefs at least much as those who don't.
Like reading the Guardian?
© 2017 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
[End of article from The Guardian]
Upvote
0
Well, dear readers here, since forever I have been requesting atheists here to tell me, Do you know of the reality in existence of the phenomenon of causation; and yesterday again I asked them to not neglect to tell me
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
Still they are so quiet.
Tell you what, so that we will not be bored from your part wasting the time of everyone here, just copy and paste this sentence in your next post here, like this
I know [or do not know] the reality of causation in existence.
Just choose, know or do not know when you paste the sentence from as above presented.
So, as you want to write so much, then at the start or at the end of your too much writing to comment on my text after text, just at the very top of your post, copy and paste the above statement, but of course choose one or the other, namely, know or do not know.
And also at the end of your post.
See you all readers again tomorrow.
ANNEX
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
Dear everyone reading this thread, this morning I came upon two items in the internet which are very interesting in regard to my knowledge of God existing, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
The first one is from a Christian theist blogger on the ten most repeated arguments of atheists against God, which arguments he takes to be very silly.
The second one is about the decision from the Federal Supreme Court of the US allowing a town council meeting to start with a prayer to God, God as known in philosophy, but not any God in a religion, in particular of concern to atheists, of the Christian faith.
I will just present the ten arguments most repeated by atheists and the decision of the US Supreme Court allowing for prayer in a town legislative body, in starting their law-making work.
Let you readers think on them, and tomorrow I will have more to say about these two items.
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
From Eric Hyde's Blog
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.
2. If God created the universe, who created God?
3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.
4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.
6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.
7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.
8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.
9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.
10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Town legislature can start work with a prayer to God
Town of Greece v. Galloway - Wikipedia
Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. ___ (2014), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court decided that the Town of Greece, New York may permit volunteer chaplains to open each legislative session with a prayer.[2][3] The plaintiffs were Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens, represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.[4] They argue that the prayers violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against the town, and on May 20, 2013 the Supreme Court agreed to rule on the issue.[5] On May 5, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Town of Greece, and that the town's practice of beginning legislative sessions with prayers does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.[6]
Town of Greece v. Galloway - Wikipedia
Pachomius, Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440
[End of ANNEX]
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
Still they are so quiet.
Tell you what, so that we will not be bored from your part wasting the time of everyone here, just copy and paste this sentence in your next post here, like this
I know [or do not know] the reality of causation in existence.
Just choose, know or do not know when you paste the sentence from as above presented.
So, as you want to write so much, then at the start or at the end of your too much writing to comment on my text after text, just at the very top of your post, copy and paste the above statement, but of course choose one or the other, namely, know or do not know.
And also at the end of your post.
See you all readers again tomorrow.
ANNEX
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
Dear everyone reading this thread, this morning I came upon two items in the internet which are very interesting in regard to my knowledge of God existing, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
The first one is from a Christian theist blogger on the ten most repeated arguments of atheists against God, which arguments he takes to be very silly.
The second one is about the decision from the Federal Supreme Court of the US allowing a town council meeting to start with a prayer to God, God as known in philosophy, but not any God in a religion, in particular of concern to atheists, of the Christian faith.
I will just present the ten arguments most repeated by atheists and the decision of the US Supreme Court allowing for prayer in a town legislative body, in starting their law-making work.
Let you readers think on them, and tomorrow I will have more to say about these two items.
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
From Eric Hyde's Blog
Top 10 Most Common Atheist Arguments, and Why They Fail
1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.
2. If God created the universe, who created God?
3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.
4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.
6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.
7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.
8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.
9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.
10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Town legislature can start work with a prayer to God
Town of Greece v. Galloway - Wikipedia
Town of Greece v. Galloway, 572 U.S. ___ (2014), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court decided that the Town of Greece, New York may permit volunteer chaplains to open each legislative session with a prayer.[2][3] The plaintiffs were Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens, represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.[4] They argue that the prayers violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against the town, and on May 20, 2013 the Supreme Court agreed to rule on the issue.[5] On May 5, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Town of Greece, and that the town's practice of beginning legislative sessions with prayers does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.[6]
Town of Greece v. Galloway - Wikipedia
Pachomius, Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440
[End of ANNEX]
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,751
- 52,534
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Oct 31, 2012
- 14,412
- 2,580
- 44
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- AU-Labor
By the way Pachomius its rude to shout. And if you were wondering this site does have rules.
Upvote
0
Kylie
Defeater of Illogic
- Nov 23, 2013
- 15,069
- 5,309
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Dear everyone reading this thread on How to prove God exists, you know what? today, anyone who thinks and publishes his thoughts, these thoughts get to be available in the internet.
So I tried this experiment with the phrase, atheists, God, and causation, to see what thinkers say about atheists, God, and causation.
Here, look up the links of hits in the first page from google on the phrase, atheists, God, and causation.
I looked up the links in the first page, and I see that atheists are afraid, scared stiff of causation.
Because causation is the evidence to God existing in concept as first and foremost: the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
Read the links from page 1 of google hits on atheists, God, and causation, in the meantime I am going to see whether any atheists at all have answered my question to them, Do you know that causation is one component in the reality of existence?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Google: atheists, God, and causation
About 440,000 results (0.82 seconds)
Search Results
Causation and the Logical Impossibility of a Divine Cause - Secular Web
Quentin Smithcausation.html
I think that virtually all contemporary theists, agnostics and atheists believe this is ... Further, it is logically possible that God exists in time and that a pre-universe ...
Atheist killers; correlation not causation. - Patheos
www.patheos.com/blogs/tippling/2015/10/.../atheist-killers-correlation-not-causation/
Oct 25, 2015 - But at the same time, people invariably do not commit atrocities on account of their lack of belief in a god, or their belief that there is no god.
Apologetics Press - God and the Laws of Science: The Law of Causality
www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?article=3716
THE LAW OF CAUSALITY—A PROBLEM FOR ATHEISTS. Creationists have absolutely no problem with the truth articulated by this God-ordained law from ...
BBC - Religions - Atheism: Reasons people choose atheism
www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/beliefs/reasons_1.shtml
Jump to Arguments for God aren't convincing - Weakness of the proofs that God exists ... that God exists; however, none of them convinces atheists.
A Mormon and Atheist Debate: Is God Necessary to Explain a First ...
https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/2015/11/20/a-mormon...atheist...is-god.../38073
Nov 20, 2015 - The fifth installment in a debate series between a young atheist and ... Causation began as a philosophical concept in the good ol' days of ...
Entropy and causality used as a proof for God's existence | CARM ...
https://carm.org/entropy-and-causality-used-proof-gods-existence
Entropy and causality used as a proof for God's existence. by Matt Slick ... that God is uncaused. Therefore, the God of the Bible is the uncaused cause of the universe. ... The Failure of Atheism to Account for Rationality · Is atheism viable?
Hume on Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Hume on Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Oct 4, 2005 - The Cosmological Argument and God's Necessary-Existence; 4. ... Religious Philosophers and Speculative Atheists ..... In the Treatise Hume develops an account of causation that directly contradicts these causal principles.
The Efficient Causality Argument for God : Strange Notions
strangenotions.com/the-efficient-causality-argument-for-god/
Sure, the inclusion of God adds a variable to the brute fact, but this is no more satisfying to the atheist than the exclusion is to the theist because the reason to ...
The Cosmological Argument - Arguments for the Existence of God ...
www.argumentsforatheism.com/arguments_god_cosmological.html
... Atheism - Arguments for the Existence of God - The Cosmological Argument. ... and this chain of causation can be traced back to a first cause, which was not ...
Atheism & the Law of Causality - "Cause and Effect" (by Intelligent ...
▶ 3:21
Apr 19, 2013 - Uploaded by IntelligentFaith315
Atheism & the Law of Causality - "Cause and Effect" (by Intelligent .... of the principle of causality, the ...
Searches related to atheists, God, and causation
divine causation definition
divine causality in the iliad
divine definition
12345678910 Next
[End of page 1 of google’s hits on atheists, God, and causation]
So I tried this experiment with the phrase, atheists, God, and causation, to see what thinkers say about atheists, God, and causation.
Here, look up the links of hits in the first page from google on the phrase, atheists, God, and causation.
I looked up the links in the first page, and I see that atheists are afraid, scared stiff of causation.
Because causation is the evidence to God existing in concept as first and foremost: the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
Read the links from page 1 of google hits on atheists, God, and causation, in the meantime I am going to see whether any atheists at all have answered my question to them, Do you know that causation is one component in the reality of existence?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Google: atheists, God, and causation
About 440,000 results (0.82 seconds)
Search Results
Causation and the Logical Impossibility of a Divine Cause - Secular Web
Quentin Smithcausation.html
I think that virtually all contemporary theists, agnostics and atheists believe this is ... Further, it is logically possible that God exists in time and that a pre-universe ...
Atheist killers; correlation not causation. - Patheos
www.patheos.com/blogs/tippling/2015/10/.../atheist-killers-correlation-not-causation/
Oct 25, 2015 - But at the same time, people invariably do not commit atrocities on account of their lack of belief in a god, or their belief that there is no god.
Apologetics Press - God and the Laws of Science: The Law of Causality
www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?article=3716
THE LAW OF CAUSALITY—A PROBLEM FOR ATHEISTS. Creationists have absolutely no problem with the truth articulated by this God-ordained law from ...
BBC - Religions - Atheism: Reasons people choose atheism
www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/beliefs/reasons_1.shtml
Jump to Arguments for God aren't convincing - Weakness of the proofs that God exists ... that God exists; however, none of them convinces atheists.
A Mormon and Atheist Debate: Is God Necessary to Explain a First ...
https://www.onfaith.co/onfaith/2015/11/20/a-mormon...atheist...is-god.../38073
Nov 20, 2015 - The fifth installment in a debate series between a young atheist and ... Causation began as a philosophical concept in the good ol' days of ...
Entropy and causality used as a proof for God's existence | CARM ...
https://carm.org/entropy-and-causality-used-proof-gods-existence
Entropy and causality used as a proof for God's existence. by Matt Slick ... that God is uncaused. Therefore, the God of the Bible is the uncaused cause of the universe. ... The Failure of Atheism to Account for Rationality · Is atheism viable?
Hume on Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Hume on Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Oct 4, 2005 - The Cosmological Argument and God's Necessary-Existence; 4. ... Religious Philosophers and Speculative Atheists ..... In the Treatise Hume develops an account of causation that directly contradicts these causal principles.
The Efficient Causality Argument for God : Strange Notions
strangenotions.com/the-efficient-causality-argument-for-god/
Sure, the inclusion of God adds a variable to the brute fact, but this is no more satisfying to the atheist than the exclusion is to the theist because the reason to ...
The Cosmological Argument - Arguments for the Existence of God ...
www.argumentsforatheism.com/arguments_god_cosmological.html
... Atheism - Arguments for the Existence of God - The Cosmological Argument. ... and this chain of causation can be traced back to a first cause, which was not ...
Atheism & the Law of Causality - "Cause and Effect" (by Intelligent ...
▶ 3:21
Apr 19, 2013 - Uploaded by IntelligentFaith315
Atheism & the Law of Causality - "Cause and Effect" (by Intelligent .... of the principle of causality, the ...
Searches related to atheists, God, and causation
divine causation definition
divine causality in the iliad
divine definition
12345678910 Next
[End of page 1 of google’s hits on atheists, God, and causation]
Upvote
0
No, no atheists here have the courage to answer my question to them (see ANNEX below), Do you know that causation exists in the total reality of things - which reality is the default status namely of existence?
And it is because you atheists know that causation is the evidence leading mankind to the certainty of the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
What about you, dear lady atheist, KTS, mistress of falsifiability, what about you bringing up correlation is no causation; and also whatever you read from David Hume, will you care to tell me what you think about the causation phenomenon being a reality in the default status of things which is existence?
What happened to your exchange with Michael, he also has left this thread when I started to invite him to do some thinking on evidence from babies and the nose in our face, instead of talking about things which are verbose, serving at most only both your vanity with both your self-gratifying sense of erudition, but all empty verbosity.
Now, I will go forth and look up atheists who host threads on God not existing, and give them a piece of my mind, to think about babies which are evidence of causation, which then leads man all the way to God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
Tell you what, Oh lady atheist, KTS, you are so erudite with ideas from socalled philosophers of science like Popper who is popped up with falsifiability, by which falsifiability he can be seen clearly to have falsified his pet idea about how science is science because it is falsifiable.
Go to David Hume and master his thinking on what, causation is not correlation or correlation is not causation, or what else? constant conjunction is not causation, etc. etc. etc., all verbose emptiness or vacuity.
The man never produced a baby with a woman, he was a lifelong bachelor celibate with his sexual morality intact,* unlike Bertrand Russell who was a prodigious womanizer, a preacher of free love.**
__________________
*See Wikipedia on David Hume:
“David Hume was a Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist, ... who never married… argument that morals cannot have a rational basis alone "would have been enough to earn him a place in the history of ethics".
David Hume - Wikipedia
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...oxx-0bIExJbAasXFA&sig2=8J6X-ZCoIouA2Bita_zeYg
**[Obituary] February 3, 1970
Bertrand Russell Is Dead; British Philosopher, 97
[…]
Governed by 3 Passions
"Three passions, simple but strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind."
[...]
In those words [he] ... described the motive forces of his extraordinarily long, provocative and complex life. only one yearning, that for love, was fully satisfied... and only when he was 80 and married his fourth wife, Edith Finch, then a 52-year-old American.
[...]
Of his search for knowledge, he reflected, "a little of this, but not much, I have achieved."
[…]
Bertrand Russell Is Dead; British Philosopher, 97
ANNEX
Yesterday at 8:16 AM #1447 Pachomius wrote:
Well, dear readers here, since forever I have been requesting atheists here to tell me, Do you know of the reality in existence of the phenomenon of causation; and yesterday again I asked them to not neglect to tell me
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
Still they are so quiet.
Tell you what, so that we will not be bored from your part wasting the time of everyone here, just copy and paste this sentence in your next post here, like this
I know [or do not know] the reality of causation in existence.
Just choose, know or do not know when you paste the sentence from as above presented.
So, as you want to write so much, then at the start or at the end of your too much writing to comment on my text after text, just at the very top of your post, copy and paste the above statement, but of course choose one or the other, namely, know or do not know.
And also at the end of your post.
See you all readers again tomorrow.
[End of invitation to atheists to answer question on the reality of causation]
And it is because you atheists know that causation is the evidence leading mankind to the certainty of the existence of God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
What about you, dear lady atheist, KTS, mistress of falsifiability, what about you bringing up correlation is no causation; and also whatever you read from David Hume, will you care to tell me what you think about the causation phenomenon being a reality in the default status of things which is existence?
What happened to your exchange with Michael, he also has left this thread when I started to invite him to do some thinking on evidence from babies and the nose in our face, instead of talking about things which are verbose, serving at most only both your vanity with both your self-gratifying sense of erudition, but all empty verbosity.
Now, I will go forth and look up atheists who host threads on God not existing, and give them a piece of my mind, to think about babies which are evidence of causation, which then leads man all the way to God, in concept as first and foremost the creator cause and operator cause of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.
Tell you what, Oh lady atheist, KTS, you are so erudite with ideas from socalled philosophers of science like Popper who is popped up with falsifiability, by which falsifiability he can be seen clearly to have falsified his pet idea about how science is science because it is falsifiable.
Go to David Hume and master his thinking on what, causation is not correlation or correlation is not causation, or what else? constant conjunction is not causation, etc. etc. etc., all verbose emptiness or vacuity.
The man never produced a baby with a woman, he was a lifelong bachelor celibate with his sexual morality intact,* unlike Bertrand Russell who was a prodigious womanizer, a preacher of free love.**
__________________
*See Wikipedia on David Hume:
“David Hume was a Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist, ... who never married… argument that morals cannot have a rational basis alone "would have been enough to earn him a place in the history of ethics".
David Hume - Wikipedia
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...oxx-0bIExJbAasXFA&sig2=8J6X-ZCoIouA2Bita_zeYg
**[Obituary] February 3, 1970
Bertrand Russell Is Dead; British Philosopher, 97
[…]
Governed by 3 Passions
"Three passions, simple but strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind."
[...]
In those words [he] ... described the motive forces of his extraordinarily long, provocative and complex life. only one yearning, that for love, was fully satisfied... and only when he was 80 and married his fourth wife, Edith Finch, then a 52-year-old American.
[...]
Of his search for knowledge, he reflected, "a little of this, but not much, I have achieved."
[…]
Bertrand Russell Is Dead; British Philosopher, 97
ANNEX
Yesterday at 8:16 AM #1447 Pachomius wrote:
Well, dear readers here, since forever I have been requesting atheists here to tell me, Do you know of the reality in existence of the phenomenon of causation; and yesterday again I asked them to not neglect to tell me
Yesterday at 7:23 AM #1440 Pachomius wrote:
See all you guys again tomorrow, AND PLEASE DEAR ATHEISTS DO NOT NEGLECT TO TELL ME WHETHER YOU KNOW THAT CAUSATION IS A COMPONENT OF THE REALITY OF EXISTENCE.
Still they are so quiet.
Tell you what, so that we will not be bored from your part wasting the time of everyone here, just copy and paste this sentence in your next post here, like this
I know [or do not know] the reality of causation in existence.
Just choose, know or do not know when you paste the sentence from as above presented.
So, as you want to write so much, then at the start or at the end of your too much writing to comment on my text after text, just at the very top of your post, copy and paste the above statement, but of course choose one or the other, namely, know or do not know.
And also at the end of your post.
See you all readers again tomorrow.
[End of invitation to atheists to answer question on the reality of causation]
Upvote
0
Existence is temporal. If something is outside time, then it cannot be said to have the property of existing.So, riddle me this Batman: How does causation work outside of temporal existence? How can something be non-temporal and create temporal things?
Also this sentence is about as good an example of circular reasoning as I've seen in a while:
Also this sentence is about as good an example of circular reasoning as I've seen in a while:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
