by CinemaBlend 257 Replies latest watchtower bible
this sounds like a variation of the Ontological arguement, first given by Anslem of Canterbury in 1077 CE? defined in his usual muddled way as:
It's not! It's more Epistemological. I guess you will have to listen, or are you as arrogant as Dr. Gordon Stein
I thought you needed the practice?
Greg L.Bahnsen was a student of Cornelius Van Til.
:1.Define your terms. What EXACTLY do you mean when you use the term "god"?
good point terry. and the onus for the definition rests upon the theist, as i descibe in this thread:
your assertion is implicit: the supernatural exists. any assertion made by you is under the assumtion that the supernatural exists. The word "supernatural" or "spiritual" hasn't even been defined and the nature of belief in the supernatural has not been described; these must take place before any substantial discussion about the nature of "supernatural" can begin. I have no reason to provide these descriptions - without any beliefs in the supernatural, i have no reason to do so. It must be presumed that this onus rests upon you. The mere mention of one's belief in supernatural serves as an assertion that supernatural exists.
TS
:or are you as arrogant as Dr. Gordon Stein
careful.
:Greg L.Bahnsen was a student of Cornelius Van Til.
appeal to authority? who cares who he studied with?
:It's more Epistemological.
okay. so, to help narrow the discussion, what classification of epistemological theory does it fall under? Rationalism, Impiricism, Naive Realism, Representationalism, Idealism or Phenomenalism?
No you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, however this does not make the theist's point any more valid than making the claim, "You cannot prove or disprove the existence of a unicorn with a coldsore on his lip". Just because you cannot disprove the existence of God doesn't mean a person should go on a wild goosechase and claim that they know God or his name, or his purposes or even if he is the only God. It's almost lieing to claim these things without evidence. I know this will go on deaf ears so I'll just let the arguement insue. Sorry if I sounded like a jerk I have a habit of that when I'm not meaning to.
I made no appeal to authority. I was simply giving you some backround
okay. so, to help narrow the discussion, what classification of epistemological theory does it fall under? Rationalism, Impiricism, Naive Realism, Representationalism, Idealism or Phenomenalism?
If you really want to know, you will listen.
Here's a clue. The fact that you want to debate this topic, proves that you know God does exist.
depdog,
so now everyone who wants to come to the debate has to listen to the debate you posted the link for? come on.
:Here's a clue. The fact that you want to debate this topic, proves that you know God does exist.
okaydokee. thanks for the clue. since we're swapping hints, here's one for you: The fact that you want to debate this topic, proves that you know God does not exist.
This may be off topic a little bit but for me it isn't wheather or not God exists but wheather or not it's benefical to believe in Him. Does it do a person good to believe in God and follow a set of rules?
Very good question Roybatty. Another layer to add on the whole validity of God thing. Throughout history religion and belief in God has stalled intelligence, growth of a human race, created a "me vs you" attitude. Of course this may be just an extension of human ignorance, but religion has been the forfront in this, breeding hatred. Of course many people have grown happier and actually became better people while believing in God. All I can say to this is, delusion can equate happiness. Denial that things are bad can make things look very good. But we've all been JW's, we know where this road leads.
so now everyone who wants to come to the debate has to listen to the debate you posted the link for? come on.
Don't listen then
okaydokee. thanks for the clue. since we're swapping hints, here's one for you: The fact that you want to debate this topic, proves that you know God does not exist.
Wrong again! It's really not open for debate. It is impossible for God not to exist.
I use to live across the street from a little kid named Richard. He had an invisible friend named "Shoogy". Richard talked to Shoogy all the time and even "shared" his food with him at the table. Richard's activities each day were impacted by Shoogy. You might say Shoogy changed Richard's life.
Did Shoogy exist?
The test of our sanity often comes to whether we can distinguish between what we need to regard as true as distinguished from what is actually true. When we lose track of that we pass from the real world into a meta-world blend of real/fantasy that may be more interesting and comforting to us. But, would we want this sort of person performing open-heart surgery or working in a Nuclear facility?
Or, worse, making policies for our Nation based on the advice of their invisible friend?
Think about it.
