Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,971 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 222,543
Pageviews Today: 514,645Threads Today: 299Posts Today: 4,688
07:39 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
Message Subject A Christian's opinion about Atheists arguments against the existence of God. (Discussion thread)
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
( I would also like to make the statement I am more of a spiritual agnostic if that makes sense or Taoist if you will
first of all you are making a few composite fallacies .


1. The first point of "who created god" is a response to the first cause argument and or Kamal cosmology . The first cause argument is attempting to use logic to prove god through the laws of cause and effect. Therefor it must open itself up to logic's criticism . If you are are attempting to prove God this way it is more than a valid question to ask what caused God.


2. You are right that is an assumption . But have never or would never see this as a logical argument from an atheist point of view so it is rather nontopical to a reason based discussion .

3. I have never seen this argument. I think you are once again making a transitional fallacy. An atheist would say one can not prove logically god exists as a response to christian apologetic philosophers . In itself a completely different statement

4. I have never seen this question in any atheist writing and it makes little sense. It is something a 5 year old would ask. Is attempting to prove fallacy but there are so many more worthwhile ways to do this . Hard to know if you are serious with this one .


5. wrong an Atheist has never said prove god as an argument only as a response when a religious philosopher enters in a logic based debate . And it would be " prove God by logic " since that is what you are here to do. Once again taken out of context and transitional



6. This argument does not exist from any Atheist Philosopher I know of , please provide a source


7. this is just ridiculous when dealing with a logic based discussion need I say why . Faith and belief are interchangeable words. So to say my belief is based on immaterial faith is like saying I belief based on belief


ok now onto your logic priori

1. this is called the teleological argument in effect, although you are presenting a rather simple muddled-down version of it . but you are not preventing a thorough enough version to even derive attempted logical proof, it is incomplete and is a "begging the question " fallacy . read up on teleological arguments and try again then I will respond. or "intelligent design as it is also known


2. this question is an "appeal to belief fallacy " try again not logical support, actually the exact opposite .



3. Both appeal to belief and appeal to common practice. try again for a logical argument so far you are failing to understand what logic means



4. once again close to intelligent design argument but too incomplete to warrant a logical response . begs the question once again


As far as Einstein is concerned that is an "appeal to flattery fallacy" I believe but i am not up to date on my fallacies could be wrong about that one . but for a sure a a fallacy



So if you want a logical debate brush up on your arguments and logic . And I will be more than happy to engage from the Atheist side to play devils advocate ( no pun intended)heheh
.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for reporting:







GLP