Provide a proof of existence of a personal god, actively intervening on earth, as described by any major religion, that doesn't resort to: 1. Changing the definition of god to the point where it's so abstract that it no longer reflects a personal, intervening god that most major western religions believe in (no "god by definition is the best of all things and it's better to exist than not to, hence god exists"). 2. Using logical fallacies or unjustified claims (e.g. claiming objective morality exists without explaining why you think so).
People in the last thread all resorted to using one of these two points, so I am making this new thread to make the rules clear. As soon as you do, I will delete this thread and convert to your religion of choice. Otherwise, I will explain to you why you're wrong and call you a moron. Good luck!
Why should I? The concept of a personal god was not brought about by any logical or quantifiable means, so why should they be required to either prove or disprove it?
Juan Rodriguez
Not an argument, moron. If you don't have a proof, don't post in this thread.
Jason Clark
Lol nerd
Adrian Harris
copulate
Nicholas Morales
This guy looks like WB Yeats with a bunch of botox and plastic surgery
Joseph Taylor
>(no "god by definition is the best of all things and it's better to exist than not to, hence god exists").
Almoxt all Christians beleive that God is the greatest possible being, how could that be too abstracted away from their faith? It's foundational to Christianity.
Isaiah Rivera
>no longer reflects a personal, intervening god that most major western religions believe in You mean the idol that surface level religious folk erect? Yeah sure people are dumb, are we not trying to talk about God?
>prove my specific strawman of God exists using a priori rules I've just made up, that exclude the God you actually believe in >can't do it, hehe I win again
>major western religions believe in how retarded could you be? Christianity relies far more on the new testament God, who did never intervene, than the retarded "lol, satan, lemme fuck with this dude's life to prove you wrong xD" jewish mythology g*d. Should take example from Ramsey and die young.
Dylan Allen
First you need to specify what type of evidence and how much is needed.
Jayden Cook
>1: If god doesn't exist, then secure knowledge is impossible. Motivation: Let's define god as a benevolent omnipotent being. Let's then consider the possibility of an evil demon that tricks humans from seeing the real reality. Think brain in a vat. If there is a possiblity of an evil demon manipulating you from experiencing real reality, then you don't have secure knowledge. The only way to rule out this possiblity is that any potential demon is hindered by a benevolent god that wants you to know the truth, otherwise secure knowledge is impossible. >2: This we have secure knowledge about. Motivation: Secure knowledge is knowledge we can't doubt. But what if this premise is caused by a deluding demon or any other irrational process that stops me from attaining the truth? Then premise 1 is true, meaning that any appeal to solipsism/external world skepticism/ the possiblity of some factor making me mistaken is an argument for premise 1 and in turn premise 2, this means that any argument against this argument is an argument for this argument. >3: Therefor, an omnipotent malevolent god exist that grants secure knowledge.
>Objection 1: >Your weird demon fantasy is no necessary for your point of external skepticism. >Answer 1: This is correct.
>Objection 2: >Your presupposing god in the argument. >Answer 2: The argument doesn’t presuppose god. It’s actually a logicaly valid argument whoose conclusion is god, the existence of god isn’t presupposed in the argument. 1: -G -SK 2: SK 3: G
Levi Moore
Because even if you can prove that a “greatest possible being” exists, that still doesn’t prove that this greatest possible being is the Christian God written about in the Bible, or indeed that it is the God of any established religion. “Greatest possible being” is too vague and abstract to imply any specific deity.
Joshua Richardson
How can you claim that we have secure knowledge? There is no solution to hard solipsism.
user everyone knows by now the religions are made-up.
Jaxson Reyes
That's a god point, premise 1 can't be proven if we assume hard solipsism, yet it assumes it for the argument. Seems like the argument was pretty dumb.
Lucas Reyes
Any evidence at all would be preferable to no evidence, which is all I have seen thus far. Not to say that any evidence would convince me of God’s existence, but as of yet I have seen almost no evidence at all. I am utterly unconvinced that any evidence even exists.
Theists always try to skirt around requests for evidence by questioning what type or amount of evidence is acceptable. Just to expedite this process, let’s say that any and all evidence should be taken into account.
Asher White
I didn't resort to the definition of God being an abstraction and an unknown it's just what I believe. Read the I Ching.
Luke Martinez
If you think there’s no evidence, then you have to believe that all the prophecies and miracles surrounding Jesus were completely made up. That all of Christianity is one huge conspiracy spanning millennia. If you reject prophecies, then what other proof will you accept?
Christianity may draw more deeply from the New Testament but it doesn’t invalidate the Old Testament. Christians still believe that God did indeed intervene in the time before the New Testament. The New Testament doesn’t “revise” the Old Testament, it’s still the same deity just at a separate time. Christian’s still believe events from the Old Testament happened.
Sebastian Taylor
If you take the myths of the torah and new testiments literally you are a pants on head retard
Camden Bell
>Provide a proof of existence of a personal god Definition 1: A being is divine if it possesses all positive qualities. Definition 2: A quality of a being is called essential if all further qualities of this being necessarily follow from it. Definition 3: A being exists necessarily if all its essential qualities are necessary. Axiom 1: Every property is either positive or not positive. Axiom 2: What necessarily contains a positive property is itself positive. Theorem 1: If a property is positive, it is possible that there is something that has that property. Axiom 3: Divinity is a positive property. Theorem 2: In a possible world, a divine being is logically possible. Axiom 4: Every positive quality is necessarily positive. (This means that necessity is contained in the positivity of a property. Thus necessity itself is a positive property.) Theorem 3: If a being is divine, then its divinity is an essential quality. (It follows from this that there can be at most one divine being.) Axiom 5: The quality of necessary existence is positive. Theorem 4: If the existence of a divine being is logically possible, then it is necessary. (Since we have already established the logical possibility of divinity in Theorem 2, it follows that exactly one divine being necessarily exists.)
Juan Wilson
>That all of Christianity is one huge conspiracy spanning millennia No need to see it as a "conspiracy" to trick people. It's just shit people used to believe, shit they couldn't agree on, shit that changes constantly. It's really a LARP, a live-action roleplaying, real people from the real world take on a role for various reasons, and then they die, but they had fun. It's like foam swords battles, except there are so many that took it seriously, now it's harder to see that it is.
why bother convincing someone as retarded as you, you wouldn't see the word of God if he himself descended and told you it.
Nolan Hughes
So you’re assuming that it’s fake. That’s why I asked for specific evidence that might change your mind. No, it’s all made up, even the grand coincidences. You can explain away any proof with claiming it’s made up, and then you claim that there’s no evidence at all. Why ask for proof when none is possible to you?
Hudson Young
>Non-religious person: I'm not convinced your religious texts are divinely inspired. If a god exists I can't even be sure it's the god described in your religious texts rather than any others. I've not found a reason to believe you over anyone else. Why do you think I should believe you? >Religious person: Ummm because you should? lol even if we had proif (you're a retard for asking for it because reasons) you wouldn't understand, sweaty :) Repeat every thread
Jayden Thompson
Every post in this thread is direct evidence of an interventionist God
You trying to bait me into posting something that will get me banned; I caught on to you devil.
William Peterson
Years already looks super plastic. No wonder Maud wouldn't tap that.
Mason Sanders
God is beyond our comprehension Therfore any evidence for god is beyond our comprehension
Chase Diaz
Read Spinoza and stfu
Isaac Butler
Are the extensive prophecies fulfilled by Jesus plausible data to suggest that Christianity should be believed? If no, the what other proof do you want?!
Blake Wright
Why bother then
Sebastian Lee
What about the prophecies he didn't fulfill?
Carson Reed
Because people have an innate desire for God and are satisfied when believing. Suicide and depression are mostly atheist phenomena.
Chase Fisher
Give an example
Isaiah Adams
Knowledge of God will fill the world
Grayson Barnes
Christianity is the first religion to cover every part of the world.
Jayden Reed
So you take knowledge to mean at least a vague idea of or minor exposure to the Christian conception of god?
Alexander Green
The verse didn’t say that every person would know God.
