• 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

Quag said:
Serated or straight edge blade? After all the wrong blade with the wrong loaf could lead to disaster
Click to expand...

Like the woman who backed into a plane propeller. Distaster
 
The limits of Internet Skeptical discourse once again on display.
 
Angel said:
The limits of Internet Skeptical discourse once again on display.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for you to provide actual proof of God, until then we must amuse ourselves
 
Quag said:
Still waiting for you to provide actual proof of God, until then we must amuse ourselves
Click to expand...

Doesn't he accept Mashmont's proof? When is Mashmont going to be the most famous man in the world?
 
zyzygy said:
Doesn't he accept Mashmont's proof? When is Mashmont going to be the most famous man in the world?
Click to expand...

He gave up on this section after he was outed, he now wastes people time in other parts of DP
 
Angel said:
Rationality is an attribute of order. Period. If some process works in orderly fashion to an end within a larger ordering of things, it is rational.
Click to expand...

Jews were rounded up in Germany in a very orderly fashion even logical.
The Cherokee's Trail of Tears was orderly.
The bombing of the towers was very orderly and well planned
The Mad Hatters tea party was quite orderly
A church service is orderly


The making of the Constitution was about as disorderly as possible.
 
Angel said:
A Short Proof of God
(For the Skeptic on the Go)

If God is not logically impossible, then God exists.
God is not logically impossible.
Therefore, God exists.​
Click to expand...

Angel said:
A Short Proof of God 2
(For the Skeptic on the Go)


That which is inexplicable yet rational must be attributed to inexplicable rationality.
That which goes by the name "God" is Itself inexplicable rationality.
Therefore, that which is inexplicable yet rational must be attributed to that which goes by the name "God."
​
Click to expand...

Angel said:
A Short Proof of God 3
(For the Skeptic on the Go)

Order implies rationality.
The universe is ordered.
Therefore, the universe implies rationality​
Click to expand...

A Short Proof of God 4
(For the Skeptic on the Go)

That which is necessary to explain the existence of an otherwise inexplicable state of affairs is its ground.
God is that which is necessary to explain the existence of an otherwise inexplicable state of affairs.
Therefore, God is Ground.
​
 
Last edited:
Angel said:
A Short Proof of God 4
(For the Skeptic on the Go)

That which is necessary to explain the existence of an otherwise inexplicable state of affairs is its ground.
God is that which is necessary to explain the existence of an otherwise inexplicable state of affairs.
Therefore, God is Ground.
​
Click to expand...

You have posted those logically flawed statements before
What you have not done is post any proof of God
 
Quag said:
You have posted those logically flawed statements before
What you have not done is post any proof of God
Click to expand...

Well...how else would someone prove the existence of something which is by itself logically flawed?
 
Quag said:
You have posted those logically flawed statements before What you have not done is post any proof of God
Click to expand...
Nor should you expect one to be produced. Recognize as FACT that the OP begins with a premise that the word "God" is defined to be the entity responsible for the creation of what exists, the universe, life, and consciousness. All that is needed is recognition that the universe does indeed exist, life does indeed exist, and consciousness does indeed exist, THEREFORE, God exists.

OH, and lest I forget, one must ALSO accept the revised definition of the word "God".
 
Last edited:
Individual said:
Nor should you expect one to be produced. Recognize as FACT that the OP begins with a premise that the word "God" is defined to be the entity responsible for the creation of what exists, the universe, life, and consciousness. All that is needed is recognition that the universe does indeed exist, life does indeed exist, and consciousness does indeed exist, THEREFORE, God exists.

OH, and lest I forget, one must ALSO accept the revised definition of the word "God".
Click to expand...

One must also accept that the universe was created by an entity
 
Quag said:
One must also accept that the universe was created by an entity
Click to expand...

That is what the philosophical "proof" fails to do, at the onset.
 
Angel said:
Two hundred millennia and ignorance continues to be bliss.
Click to expand...
Bliss and Bluster, Angel. Don't forget the bluster. Bluster came with the advent of the internet, the personal computer and anonymous virtual chat.
 
Angel said:
Bliss and Bluster, Angel. Don't forget the bluster. Bluster came with the advent of the internet, the personal computer and anonymous virtual chat.
Click to expand...

Yup all we get from you Bliss and bluster but we never ev er ever get any proof of God seems you are unable to produce what your thread promises yet you persist for some strange reason
 
The experience of the person I am in the world—my consciousness, my life, and the physical world in which my conscious life appears to be set—these phenomena comprise a Stupendous Given. There's no getting around them and no getting outside them and no accounting for them from within the phenomena themselves. These phenomena point to something beyond themselves. The attempt to account for these phenomena from within the phenomena themselves has given rise to science, art and religion and the whole cultural adventure we call "civilization"—the long human struggle for purchase on the Stupendous Given. In the end, however, the only account that accords with reason is the account that infers to a Stupendous Giver. In sum, from the existence of consciousness, the existence of life, and the existence of the physical universe, the inference to the best explanation is God.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...354-w-183-reasons-believe.html#post1069490983
 
Angel said:
The experience of the person I am in the world—my consciousness, my life, and the physical world in which my conscious life appears to be set—these phenomena comprise a Stupendous Given. There's no getting around them and no getting outside them and no accounting for them from within the phenomena themselves. These phenomena point to something beyond themselves. The attempt to account for these phenomena from within the phenomena themselves has given rise to science, art and religion and the whole cultural adventure we call "civilization"—the long human struggle for purchase on the Stupendous Given. In the end, however, the only account that accords with reason is the account that infers to a Stupendous Giver. In sum, from the existence of consciousness, the existence of life, and the existence of the physical universe, the inference to the best explanation is God.
https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...354-w-183-reasons-believe.html#post1069490983
Click to expand...

But where's the PROOF supporting your inference which would compel others to agree?
Basically we are left only to believe that the phenomena you refer to, resulted from a natural or supernatural origin. Neither believe can be proven conclusively, nor does either belief interfere with our existence/life until we begin to define the nature of such belief, and to date the nature of nature alone has provided us with knowledge we can put to use.
 
Individual said:
But where's the PROOF supporting your inference which would compel others to agree?
Basically we are left only to believe that the phenomena you refer to, resulted from a natural or supernatural origin. Neither believe can be proven conclusively, nor does either belief interfere with our existence/life until we begin to define the nature of such belief, and to date the nature of nature alone has provided us with knowledge we can put to use.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to compel others to agree here. I'm giving personal testimony.
As for the rest of your post, maybe it's time we get something straight between us: science has given man nothing in the way of important knowledge. Science has given man nothing in the way of spiritual sustenance. Poetry, literature and art have given man much more than science, indeed much more than science can aspire to give.
 
Angel said:
I'm not trying to compel others to agree here. I'm giving personal testimony.
As for the rest of your post, maybe it's time we get something straight between us: science has given man nothing in the way of important knowledge. Science has given man nothing in the way of spiritual sustenance. Poetry, literature and art have given man much more than science, indeed much more than science can aspire to give.
Click to expand...

So it was just a poor choice of a thread title?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom