• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In appreciation of the religious here

If I said I was my own god and only had faith in myself, would I get the same compliment?
 
what lack of evidence?

there's actually quite a bit of evidence that God made the world because the world is here whether you interpreted that to mean there is a God or not is irrelevant. I can point the things that exist and say the only reason they exist is because God created the world. Now you can doubt that claim but you can't say it's unreasonable.

Just like I tell dogmatic Christians you are not the Arbiter of what is reasonable

Did you see me make a single claim about God?

I don't understand why you are asking me this.

Once again, you should read your own posts. You claimed that god created the world. And you used as evidence merely the fact that thing exist physically. So you did make a claim about god, then you act as if you didn't.

So, is that all that god did, or do you have any other claims about god?
 
Once again, you should read your own posts. You claimed that god created the world.
no that's incorrect. I said that there's evidence that God created the world.

And you used as evidence merely the fact that thing exist physically.
it is. You can doubt the belief that God made the world. I believe I said that too.

So you did make a claim about god,
no I made a claim about God creating the world.

then you act as if you didn't.
the claim about creating the world which was not a claim about God but a claim about the creation of the world but I digress, wants to show that a beef in God was not unreasonable and somebody had claimed and not supported.

So, is that all that god did, or do you have any other claims about god?
I'm not here to preach so if you want that kind of stuff go to church.

I was arguing that a belief in God was not unreasonable.

Don't get your panties in a bunch at mention of the word god stop thinking about that word I know it causes you an existential crisis but just read past it because there's more important stuff that's being said you're and not even seeing the context.
 
no that's incorrect. I said that there's evidence that God created the world.

it is. You can doubt the belief that God made the world. I believe I said that too.

no I made a claim about God creating the world.

the claim about creating the world which was not a claim about God but a claim about the creation of the world but I digress, wants to show that a beef in God was not unreasonable and somebody had claimed and not supported.

I'm not here to preach so if you want that kind of stuff go to church.

I was arguing that a belief in God was not unreasonable.

Don't get your panties in a bunch at mention of the word god stop thinking about that word I know it causes you an existential crisis but just read past it because there's more important stuff that's being said you're and not even seeing the context.

How is a claim about god creating the world not a claim about god?
 
How is a claim about god creating the world not a claim about god?

Because the claim about the world the subject of that sentence is the world. The conversation was about whether or not people could be reasonable if they believed God created the world.

It was never about the existence of God. Or God in general.
 
Because the claim about the world the subject of that sentence is the world. The conversation was about whether or not people could be reasonable if they believed God created the world.

It was never about the existence of God. Or God in general.

There were two subjects in the sentence, god and the world.
 
There were two subjects in the sentence, god and the world.
Yes there were two nouns but the subject of the sentence and greater the subject of the conversation was whether or not a belief in God is reasonable. I stated that one could believe the world was created by God because the world is here. That was a claim about what one could believe reasonably.

So it wasn't the claim about God the subject of a sentence was God but I never claimed anything about God.
 
Yes there were two nouns but the subject of the sentence and greater the subject of the conversation was whether or not a belief in God is reasonable. I stated that one could believe the world was created by God because the world is here. That was a claim about what one could believe reasonably.

So it wasn't the claim about God the subject of a sentence was God but I never claimed anything about God.

That, of course, it the logical fallacy of 'argument from personal belief' , also known as 'begging the question'. It might be an argument, but it is not rational or reasonable argument.
 
That, of course, it the logical fallacy of 'argument from personal belief' , also known as 'begging the question'. It might be an argument, but it is not rational or reasonable argument.

That would only be the case if I was arguing that god created the world. That was not my position.
 
Last edited:
That would only be the case if I was arguing that god created the world. That was not my position.

But, the idea that it coudl be argued is bad, even if you didn't personally make it.
 
... okay... not sure what this has to do with my position...

It is a position you mentioned, and I pointed out that position had bad logic in it.
 
Back
Top Bottom