 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Questions about Christianity > Prove GOD! | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 9/15/2007 1:43 PM (GMT -6) |   | | | |
 |
Clete
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2007
Total Posts : 35
| Posted 12/5/2007 8:54 PM (GMT -6) | | nogodblog said...Hey you all evangelical theists, I'm openly challenging you to prove GOD in this discussion thread, lets see who will come forward and give me a concret proof that I will start worshipping your GOD the next moment I'm convinced. If you dont reply to this,  I consider you guys/gals cant prove an non-existant GOD,whom I consider not worthier than the Superman I read in the comics back when I was a Kid, and I still laugh at it, enjoy it but I know its a nice story. Okey lets see, come on, give me the answer guys/gals! I say Religon is a brain wash GOD is bull shit, Jesus is superman!
The fact that you wrote the opening post and that you are now reading this one is proof that God exists.
Having said that and knowing that you will reject it as absurd, lets start at the beginning.
If you do not believe that God exists, then what do you believe? I don't mean for you to tell me everything you believe just something, anything. What is something that you know is true and how do you know its true?
Resting in Him,
Clete | | Back to Top | | |
|
Ronald A. Newcomb
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 45
| Posted 4/12/2008 9:34 AM (GMT -6) | | Sorry for only reading the opening salvo, however, the answer to his atheism, if honets, is the following cosmological argument:
My argument is a series of either-or arguments with the long form containing parenthetical arguments supporting the alternative option (“or”) then concluding each. It then compiles these conclusions.
Long form:
1) Either nothing exists or something exists. (Coginto ergo sum. It is self evident that something exists.) Something exists.
2) If something exists, then, either it had no beginning (necessary things) or it had a beginning (contingent things). (Physical things are contingent, and having no beginning contradicts the 2nd law. Most religions, science, and philosophy al support that it had a beginning.) The universe had a beginning.
3) If it had a beginning, then, either it was self caused (to create something, it must exist, it cannot both exist and not exist at the same time, it cannot create itself), or it was uncaused (Cause and effect, all contingent things have a cause), or it was created by an agent. The universe was created by an agent.
4) If it was created, then, either it was a natural creation (nature would have to exist in order to create something so this is not possible), or it was a super-natural creation (the law of first causes insists on this). The creation of the universe was necessarily caused by a super-natural agent.
5) If it was a supernatural creation, then, either it was an unintelligent agent or it was an intelligent agent. (The highly ordered structure of the universe indicates it was an intelligent agent, teleological arguments demand a designer, we cannot explain our concepts of beauty without an intelligent agent, and so forth.) Intelligence requires that the creator be intelligent.
6) If it was an intelligent agent, then, either the agent was impersonal or a personal agent. (The law of first causes requires a cause for personality, a personal agent best describes reality and all we know from science). Personality of contingent beings requires the creator be personal.
7) Reason demands that something exists; the universe had a beginning; that beginning was caused by an agent; that agent was super-natural, intelligent, and personal. This intelligent, personal, supernatural creators is what we call “God.”
A short form can be written thusly:
1) Either nothing exists or something exists..
2) If something exists, then, either it had no beginning, or it had a beginning.
3) If it had a beginning, then, either it was self caused, or it was uncaused, or it was created by an agent.
4) If it was created, then, either it was a natural creation, or it was a super-natural creation.
5) If it was a supernatural creation, then, either it was an unintelligent agent or it was an intelligent agent.
6) If it was an intelligent agent, then, either the agent was impersonal or a personal agent.
7) Reason demands that something exists; the universe had a beginning; that beginning was caused by an agent; that agent was super-natural, intelligent, and personal. This intelligent, personal, supernatural creators is what we call “God.”
~Professor Newcomb
R.A.Newcomb
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 4/13/2008 9:19 PM (GMT -6) | | Randomness does not rule out causality. If all change is not caused, how can we know WHEN change is caused? Is it even possible to answer that question? If not, why are they debating that question? If so, help me understand the method. I don't believe there is one from where I'm sitting. But I'm open to suggestions. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what he meant by "contingent."
Post Edited (Similtude) : 4/13/2008 9:23:38 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 4/14/2008 5:35 PM (GMT -6) | | J: Randomness does not rule out causality.
Z: huh? If something happens and it's not the outcome of a cause-effect relationship or a will, then I call that 'randomness'. This isn't what is commonly meant?
J: But I'm asking how you can know that random phenomena is not caused. If random phenomena is not caused, what is it that makes us know anything is caused? To me, it's that change implies a cause. I don't know what else it could be.
J: If all change is not caused, how can we know WHEN change is caused?
Z: First, who's talking about ALL change? Second, who cares? What does our knowledge of "WHEN change is caused" have to do with anything?
J: We wouldn't even seek for specific causal explanations if we did not believe changes imply causality, in the first place, as far as I can tell. If it's not change that is caused, what IS the criteria for knowing when an event is caused?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Clete
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2007
Total Posts : 35
| Posted 4/22/2008 10:37 PM (GMT -6) | | Ronald A. Newcomb said...Sorry for only reading the opening salvo, however, the answer to his atheism, if honets, is the following cosmological argument: <H2 style="MARGIN: 12pt 0in 3pt"><A name=_Toc103043675> Newcomb’s Cosmological Argument</A></H2> My argument is a series of either-or arguments with the long form containing parenthetical arguments supporting the alternative option (“or”) then concluding each. It then compiles these conclusions.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o  > </o > Long form:1)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> Either nothing exists or something exists. (Coginto ergo sum. It is self evident that something exists.) Something exists.</FONT> 2)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If something exists, then, either it had no beginning (necessary things) or it had a beginning (contingent things). (Physical things are contingent, and having no beginning contradicts the 2nd law. Most religions, science, and philosophy al support that it had a beginning.) The universe had a beginning.</FONT> 3)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it had a beginning, then, either it was self caused (to create something, it must exist, it cannot both exist and not exist at the same time, it cannot create itself), or it was uncaused (Cause and effect, all contingent things have a cause), or it was created by an agent. The universe was created by an agent.</FONT> 4)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was created, then, either it was a natural creation (nature would have to exist in order to create something so this is not possible), or it was a super-natural creation (the law of first causes insists on this). The creation of the universe was necessarily caused by a super-natural agent.</FONT> 5)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was a supernatural creation, then, either it was an unintelligent agent or it was an intelligent agent. (The highly ordered structure of the universe indicates it was an intelligent agent, teleological arguments demand a designer, we cannot explain our concepts of beauty without an intelligent agent, and so forth.) Intelligence requires that the creator be intelligent.</FONT> 6)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was an intelligent agent, then, either the agent was impersonal or a personal agent. (The law of first causes requires a cause for personality, a personal agent best describes reality and all we know from science). Personality of contingent beings requires the creator be personal.</FONT> 7)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> Reason demands that something exists; the universe had a beginning; that beginning was caused by an agent; that agent was super-natural, intelligent, and personal. This intelligent, personal, supernatural creators is what we call “God.”</FONT> <o > </o > A short form can be written thusly:<o > </o > 1)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> Either nothing exists or something exists..</FONT> 2)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If something exists, then, either it had no beginning, or it had a beginning. </FONT> 3)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it had a beginning, then, either it was self caused, or it was uncaused, or it was created by an agent.</FONT> 4)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was created, then, either it was a natural creation, or it was a super-natural creation. </FONT> 5)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was a supernatural creation, then, either it was an unintelligent agent or it was an intelligent agent. </FONT> 6)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> If it was an intelligent agent, then, either the agent was impersonal or a personal agent. </FONT> 7)<SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"> Reason demands that something exists; the universe had a beginning; that beginning was caused by an agent; that agent was super-natural, intelligent, and personal. This intelligent, personal, supernatural creators is what we call “God.”</FONT> ~Professor Newcomb
Isn't it interesting that the initial claim of this post is that the cosmological argument is the answer to atheism, but right away an atheist (I presume he's an atheist anyway) starts picking nits about one of the premises and thus the preceding debate began with no progress made?
The reason this happens is because the Cosmological Argument grants to the atheist precious ground to which only the Christian is entitled. In so doing the Christian loses the debate before it even begins. In actual fact the atheist could not even read the Cosmological Argument if God did not exist and every time the atheist speaks he contradicts his own worldview. His every thought testifies to the existence of God, even the one's which deny His existence.
Sounds nuts, right!?
I would ask the atheist the following question...
By what means do you test the veracity of a truth claim? How do you know when something is or is not true?
Resting in Him,
Clete | | Back to Top | | |
|
moughera
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2008
Total Posts : 1
| Posted 11/29/2008 8:33 AM (GMT -6) | | |
asalam-o-alikum
brother i welcome you with the islamic greetings, the mercy and the blessings of Almighty Allah be on you.
i came across of your post. i also read some of the starting replies, but so far i think you have no one who could have convinced you about the existance of GOD. and so far i've not seen across any of the muslim post. well about you challange, i need to say only one thing, either you are very over confident or you have not read the scriptures of the religions. and if you have then you could not find any thing of your interest. well i don't have any personal envy with you, or any atheist. i would love to satisfy you in what ever manner you'd like to. just give the answer to my one question "If there is no GOD then how can a so systematic, logical and reasonable universe could come into being by ITSELF?
no religion except ISLAM has the answers for your quest for truth if there is any. if you are really serious about the topic then i think we can go further in debate, as you will. you are always welcomed with questions, comments and criticism about ISLAM. it'll be my pleasure to satisfy you.
sincerly
moughera muslim | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/30/2008 6:27 AM (GMT -6) | | wa 'alaikum asalaam
I'd like to know, Mougera, whether Osama bin Laden is embraced by you as a Muslim. Specifically, is there room in "Islam" for Osama bin Laden?
Secondly, why do Muslims as a rule kill other Muslims who choose to leave Islam and believe in something else?
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Chaz Finney
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2008
Total Posts : 102
| Posted 2/7/2009 1:13 PM (GMT -6) | | The universe could not have eternally existed for this would constitute an "actual infinite" set of events which cannot exist in time and space (reality); therefore, the universe had to have a begining.
Now Tom you can either believe that something (the orderly complex universe) came from nothing by nothing, or you can believe in an architect and designer. What is more cogent for you to believe? Additionally the mathematical probability of something coming from nothing in the absence of a mind is zero since we have no other instance to point to in the history of the universe. The design argument by the way does have a probability greater than zero.
So the choice is yours to either believe that this magnificiant universe and all her trappings sprang forth from nothing, or there was a creator of sorts that designed it.
The devils advocate. | | Back to Top | | |
| 165 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:22 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|