• 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!

Proof of God

Aristotle was wrong about the number of teeth women had, for one; he claimed that they had fewer teeth than men did, and also that they were less possessed of innate shame and self-worth than men (among many other personality traits that Aristotle assumed were purely innate rather than developed). He was one of the earliest proponents of empiricism, but he was comically incorrect in a great many of his conclusions about observations. He assumed that eels randomly grew out of mud, because he could not find testicles in them when he cut them open; he assumed that insects reproduced in much the same manner, randomly spawning out of nature despite provable exceptions to that rule like queen bees that he also observed.

Despite being the most organized of the Greek philosophers, he was laughably incorrect about most of his conclusions. I give him some slack for being wrong about how planets work and the method of gene inheritance in people, but the fact that he lacked a proper method of experimentation shows in his writings.
What works have you read, I asked you?
 
...How would you know what I know? You've made an unsupported claim. I've asked you to provide your burden of proof, through numerous posts, and you simply won't for some reason. Deflection via insult is not going to work.

Once I've seen your proof for your claims, I will be able to comment on them, not before. Please provide your burden of proof.
How would I know? Ftom your posts. How else? There is no burden of proof involved in this contingency/necessity business -- it's a basic distinction learned in an introductory college course, a course, judging from your posts, you have not taken. Now scoot.
 
What works have you read, I asked you?

Oh, my bad. Plato's Law, Republic & a few other works whose names elude me at 2:45 in the morning. Little direct Aristotle, but lots of his interactions with Plato. I'm familiar with his system of logic, which did not have a proper system for experimentation in place. That's not to say that he did not experiment, of course; he was recorded as having broken apart chicken eggs at different ages to observe the growth of a fetal chicken. This is most certainly an experiment.
 
What works [of Aristotle] have you read, I asked you?
Oh, my bad. Plato's Law, Republic & a few other works whose names elude me at 2:45 in the morning. Little direct Aristotle, but lots of his interactions with Plato. I'm familiar with his system of logic, which did not have a proper system for experimentation in place. That's not to say that he did not experiment, of course; he was recorded as having broken apart chicken eggs at different ages to observe the growth of a fetal chicken. This is most certainly an experiment.
I would respectfully suggest that until you've actually read or studied the actual works of Aristotle, or any other philosopher, remarks like those found in the following posts of yours should in good faith be avoided:

I have [read Aristotle], and he's wrong about quite a bit, especially when it comes to women.
... [Aristotle] was comically incorrect in a great many of his conclusions about observations....
Despite being the most organized of the Greek philosophers, he was laughably incorrect about most of his conclusions. I give him some slack for being wrong about how planets work and the method of gene inheritance in people, but the fact that he lacked a proper method of experimentation shows in his writings.

Here are lists of works by Aristotle. I recommend you start with the Ethics.
The Works of Aristotle - Wikisource, the free online library
Aristotle's works
The Internet Classics Archive | Works by Aristotle
 
How would I know? Ftom your posts. How else? There is no burden of proof involved in this contingency/necessity business -- it's a basic distinction learned in an introductory college course, a course, judging from your posts, you have not taken. Now scoot.

If you had actually taken any courses on philosophy you would also know that it is just a concept not a fact and if you want to prove something using it you must prove it first (which you cannot do)
Bringig us back to the problem with all your so called proofs, they all ultimately are nothing more than your personal beliefs
 
Proof of God

My wife swears that chocolate is proof of God. :coffeepap
 
If you had actually taken any courses on philosophy you would also know that it is just a concept not a fact and if you want to prove something using it you must prove it first (which you cannot do)

Exactly.

Bringig us back to the problem with all your so called proofs, they all ultimately are nothing more than your personal beliefs

That's the problem. It's just Angel hand waving and claiming his personal beliefs, and when asked to provide his burden of proof for his claims, he obfuscates, makes personal attacks, and then runs away.
 
Last edited:
How would I know? Ftom your posts. How else?

Considering you refuse to provide your burden of proof so I can comment, you're opinion is obviously based on ignorance.

There is no burden of proof involved in this contingency/necessity business

If you are going to claim something is necessary, you have to provide a proof.

-- it's a basic distinction learned in an introductory college course, a course, judging from your posts, you have not taken.

And obviously you've never passed an introductory college course on the subject, or you would certainly know that you need to provide a proof that something is necessary. There is no way you went to an accredited university, passed an introductory course on Philosophy, and don't know this. Or you are being dishonest, because we both know you can't win this argument.


Now scoot.

Instead of running away, why not pray to your god to provide you with a burden of proof? Or did you try, and he has forsaken you?
 
Considering you refuse to provide your burden of proof so I can comment, you're opinion is obviously based on ignorance.



If you are going to claim something is necessary, you have to provide a proof.



And obviously you've never passed an introductory college course on the subject, or you would certainly know that you need to provide a proof that something is necessary. There is no way you went to an accredited university, passed an introductory course on Philosophy, and don't know this. Or you are being dishonest, because we both know you can't win this argument.




Instead of running away, why not pray to your god to provide you with a burden of proof? Or did you try, and he has forsaken you?

That's a thought. An omnipotent god can create a universe but cannot provide any proof of his/her/its existence.
 
That's a thought. An omnipotent god can create a universe but cannot provide any proof of his/her/its existence.

That's because not knowing allows for Free Will, so we may choose to believe in Yahweh freely. This is of utmost importance to Yahweh. Except for Saul/Paul of course. And Jesus' disciples. And the tens of thousands of children who had their free will taken away when they were raped by Yahweh's representatives.

Except for those cases, Free Will is very important to Yahweh.
 
...Instead of running away, why not pray to your god to provide you with a burden of proof? Or did you try, and he has forsaken you?
Instead of baiting me with religious bigotry, read the links and learn something.
 
Last edited:
Instead of baiting me with religious bigotry, read the links and learn something.

Quit whinging for Pete's sake. You made a claim regarding necessity. You have the burden of proof. Copying and Pasting a link is NOT providing your burden of proof. Even then the one link I looked at required belief in god to make him necessity. ie...handwaving. I can claim belief in Santa, and he becomes a necessity too.

And why is asking if you prayed to your god "baiting"? I thought praying to your god for help was a regular Christian thing. It was when I was a Christian.
 
Last edited:
Quit whinging for Pete's sake. You made a claim regarding necessity. You have the burden of proof. Copying and Pasting a link is NOT providing your burden of proof. Even then the one link I looked at required belief in god to make him necessity. ie...handwaving. I can claim belief in Santa, and he becomes a necessity too.

And why is asking if you prayed to your god "baiting"? I thought praying to your god for help was a regular Christian thing. It was when I was a Christian.
Quit trolling. I did not make a claim, I relied on a definition. No burden of proof. The link was for your education. Shoo!
 
Quit trolling. I did not make a claim, I relied on a definition. No burden of proof. The link was for your education. Shoo!

You created a thread titled "Proof of God", which in my opinion implies you felt capable of providing such proof.
Perhaps you should accept as fact that NO ONE, including yourself, is capable of providing undeniable proof that a God or Gods exist and leave it at that.
Real education reduces a need to believe in the supernatural.

"The Mayans worshipped a god of cacao and reserved chocolate for rulers, warriors, priests and nobles at sacred ceremonies."
 
Last edited:
Quit trolling. I did not make a claim

Now you are being untruthful. Claims:

God, if such a being exists, is a necessary being, whereas Santa Clause, Bigfoot, unicorns and the rest of the New Skeptic's menagerie, following the New Atheists in this particular bit of silliness, are contingent beings. The proof is not designed for contingent beings.

Untruth:
I did not make a claim

Angel playing the roll of brave brave Sir Robin:

 
Last edited:
Welcome to Godchecker
We have more Gods than you can shake a stick at.
Deity of the day
Hecate
Crossroads Goddess from Greek mythology
Moon Goddess of Hidden Wisdom, Change and Darkness
Our legendary mythology encyclopedia now includes nearly four thousand weird and wonderful Gods, Supreme Beings, Demons, Spirits and Fabulous Beasts from all over the world. Explore ancient legends and folklore, and discover Gods of everything from Fertility to Fluff with Godchecker...

Godchecker.com - Your Guide To The Gods
 
Quit trolling. I did not make a claim, I relied on a definition. No burden of proof. The link was for your education. Shoo!

You made the claim using a definition that can apply to anything. your Definiton is flawed, so your conclusion is flawed. Deal with it.
 
Welcome to Godchecker
We have more Gods than you can shake a stick at.
Deity of the day
Hecate
Crossroads Goddess from Greek mythology
Moon Goddess of Hidden Wisdom, Change and Darkness
Our legendary mythology encyclopedia now includes nearly four thousand weird and wonderful Gods, Supreme Beings, Demons, Spirits and Fabulous Beasts from all over the world. Explore ancient legends and folklore, and discover Gods of everything from Fertility to Fluff with Godchecker...

Godchecker.com - Your Guide To The Gods

Great link. My favourite myths are from The Dreaming. No need to kill non-believers. No need to kill people who work on the wrong day of the week. What a comparatively kind and loving culture.
 
Last edited:
You created a thread titled "Proof of God", which in my opinion implies you felt capable of providing such proof.
Perhaps you should accept as fact that NO ONE, including yourself, is capable of providing undeniable proof that a God or Gods exist and leave it at that.
Real education reduces a need to believe in the supernatural.

"The Mayans worshipped a god of cacao and reserved chocolate for rulers, warriors, priests and nobles at sacred ceremonies."
A proof which relied on a definition. Please get up to speed on the dispute you deign to comment on. Thank you.
 
Now you are being untruthful. Claims:

Untruth:

Angel playing the roll of brave brave Sir Robin:
That post was in the way of answering challenges to the definition used in the proof. The ignorance of your posts on this matter appears willful. Look to it.
 
You made the claim using a definition that can apply to anything. your Definiton is flawed, so your conclusion is flawed. Deal with it.
No, you are mistaken. And I weary of this mistake, as I provided links to disabuse the philosophically unsophisticated of this error and yet you all persist in the error.
 
Welcome to Godchecker
We have more Gods than you can shake a stick at.
Deity of the day
Hecate
Crossroads Goddess from Greek mythology
Moon Goddess of Hidden Wisdom, Change and Darkness
Our legendary mythology encyclopedia now includes nearly four thousand weird and wonderful Gods, Supreme Beings, Demons, Spirits and Fabulous Beasts from all over the world. Explore ancient legends and folklore, and discover Gods of everything from Fertility to Fluff with Godchecker...

Godchecker.com - Your Guide To The Gods
I'm afraid you've been misled. Your post is about religion. This thread is not about religion, except in the tortured mind of the obsessed atheist and skeptic, and I'm busy providing the type with therapy even as you post this silly link of yours.
Peace out, pilgrim.
 
Back
Top Bottom