Philosophical arguments against the existence of God

[anonymous person]

So stop making the response to irrelevant questions the prerequisite for presenting your promised answer, and answer already.

Patience is a virtue. I am in no rush.

 

[quatona]

The hypothetical is one of many tools at my disposal I utilize in understanding why people hold the views they do. As such I use it whenever and wherever I feel compelled to. As such, for me, they are always relevant.

They are not relevant for the validity of the argument that you dodge by asking these questions.
So to summarize the current state of affairs:
1. You don´t have an answer to the argument against the existence of a God as presented.
2. You don´t have "a strong and comprehensive case" for your God concept.
IOW you come here empty handed and just make a lot of noise.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You're exactly right when you say Ana the Ist's unwillingness to be obedient to the call of Christ would not affect the validity of his argument.

On this, you have spoken correctly.

What it would do is demonstrate that his unwillingness to be obedient to the call of Christ does not stem from some intellectual objection owed to some lack of evidence for the veracity of the truth claims of Christianity, but that it stems from that which causes one to be unwilling to be obedient to the call of Christ even after those obstacles which he claimed prevent him from being a Christian are removed and are no longer an issue.

It doesn't demonstrate that...you don't know what my intellectual objections are. This argument isn't their entirety...or even a large part of them really lol.

Are you going to address the argument? What is the problem...has WLC never spoken on this?

 

[quatona]

Patience is a virtue. I am in no rush.

Seeing your track record, you are not only not in rush to answer inconvenient questions and arguments - you do everything to avoid answering them, relying on the hope that sooner or later they will be forgotten.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Whether or not I can or intend to present the case is irrelevant. The question is "hypothetical" in nature and that is why attempting to avoid it by asserting what I will actually do or not do is to fail to treat the question properly.

I don't see a question deserving of serious consideration. You claim to have a case that should convince us, but you won't present it. So what do you expect?

 

[anonymous person]

I understand your question...and I'll be happy to answer any questions you have concerning my personal beliefs once you answer the argument you've been dodging for about a week now.

Surely you didn't seek council with god and he told you "keep avoiding this subject at all costs!"?

In light of this, I do not think it best to present my rebuttal to your argument at this time.

However, I can provide some links for you to investigate at your leisure. Links to websites where professional philosophers discuss the argument you have made.

Would you like for me to give you these links?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You're exactly right when you say Ana the Ist's unwillingness to be obedient to the call of Christ would not affect the validity of his argument.

On this, you have spoken correctly.

What it would do is demonstrate that his unwillingness to be obedient to the call of Christ does not stem from some intellectual objection owed to some lack of evidence for the veracity of the truth claims of Christianity, but that it stems from that which causes one to be unwilling to be obedient to the call of Christ even after those obstacles which he claimed prevent him from being a Christian are removed and are no longer an issue.

His moral integrity?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Patience is a virtue. I am in no rush.

You're also going no where fast.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Seeing your track record, you are not only not in rush to answer inconvenient questions and arguments - you do everything to avoid answering them, relying on the hope that sooner or later they will be forgotten.

That seems be the pattern here. He paints himself into a corner on this or that topic, then walks nonchalantly over the paint to paint himself into yet another corner, all while pretending that it never happened at all.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

In light of this, I do not think it best to present my rebuttal to your argument at this time.

However, I can provide some links for you to investigate at your leisure. Links to websites where professional philosophers discuss the argument you have made.

Would you like for me to give you these links?

How pusillanimous of you.

 

[quatona]

What it would do is demonstrate that his unwillingness to be obedient to the call of Christ does not stem from some intellectual objection owed to some lack of evidence for the veracity of the truth claims of Christianity, but that it stems from that which causes one to be unwilling to be obedient to the call of Christ even after those obstacles which he claimed prevent him from being a Christian are removed and are no longer an issue.

And even if this were a solid deduction (which I think it isn´t) - what would it have to do with the philosophical discussion at hand?

Some people will answer "yes" to your question, some will answer "no". Why would your rebuttal of the argument presented depend on the way your question is answered? It simply doesn´t.

 

[anonymous person]

And even if this were a solid deduction (which I think it isn´t) - what would it have to do with the philosophical discussion at hand?

Some people will answer "yes" to your question, some will answer "no". Why would your rebuttal of the argument presented depend on the way your question is answered? It simply doesn´t.

It matters to me because I am being trained to redeem the time. My days are short.

 

[quatona]

ap: I do have a response.

Before I provide it, I have two questions:

[questions answered]

In light of this, I do not think it best to present my rebuttal to your argument at this time.

That was to be expected.

 

[quatona]

It matters to me because I am being trained to redeem the time. My days are short.

You seem to have plenty of time to spend on to tap dancing around these questions instead of answering them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

In light of this, I do not think it best to present my rebuttal to your argument at this time.

However, I can provide some links for you to investigate at your leisure. Links to websites where professional philosophers discuss the argument you have made.

Would you like for me to give you these links?

No...I'll take this answer for what it is.

Epic failure.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It matters to me because I am being trained to redeem the time. My days are short.

On a personal level...is it disappointing to you that your god failed to supply you with an answer or the intellectual capacity to find one yourself?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

[questions answered]


That was to be expected.

And yet he thinks he is here providing edification.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You seem to have plenty of time to spend on to tap dancing around these questions instead of answering them.

The funny thing is that since posting my argument...I've thought of two rather solid rebuttals. It's not that I couldn't argue against them...but I'd be shifting goalposts rather badly.

I'll give him till the end of the day to post a rebuttal...then I'll defeat my own argument just for kicks. Once I do, I'll welcome anyone else to destroy my argument.

It's a bit odd to watch someone completely unable to think outside the bubble of their own beliefs twist in the wind like this. It doesn't exactly inspire hope for mankind.

 

[quatona]

The funny thing is that since posting my argument...I've thought of two rather solid rebuttals. It's not that I couldn't argue against them...but I'd be shifting goalposts rather badly.

Yes, I agree: The argument as presented isn´t particularly strong.
But despite posting in the philosophy forum and pretending to create threads for philosophical arguments anonymous obviously isn´t in it for philosophy or logic, anyway.

I'll give him till the end of the day to post a rebuttal...then I'll defeat my own argument just for kicks.

...but that would equal the admission that the God of ap´s concept exists and is worthy of unconditional obedience!!!!

It's a bit odd to watch someone completely unable to think outside the bubble of their own beliefs twist in the wind like this. It doesn't exactly inspire hope for mankind.

Sometimes I get the impression that these apologists have started off as preachers (to the choir), and now feel this is sufficient preparation to convince anyone.
Well, at least Chrillman seems to be impressed....

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, I agree: The argument as presented isn´t particularly strong.
But despite posting in the philosophy forum and pretending to create threads for philosophical arguments anonymous obviously isn´t in it for philosophy or logic, anyway.


...but that would equal the admission that the God of ap´s concept exists and is worthy of unconditional obedience!!!!



Sometimes I get the impression that these apologists have started off as preachers (to the choir), and now feel this is sufficient preparation to convince anyone.
Well, at least Chrillman seems to be impressed....

It's amusing to me, if not much else. I don't know if he genuinely believes that the argument I constructed in the five minutes or so after reading the OP is somehow the underpinnings of everything I believe about god...or whether this is another stall tactic.

I suspect it's a stall tactic, but the amusement is wearing off and I'm apt to put an end to this.