|
|
|
|
#1
04-12-2005, 02:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wrong.
this "challenge" if you will, is open to any and all atheists as well as ambitious agnostics. If you are indeed certain, that God does not exist, than you should have little or no problem articulating your argument for your position. So, here's my proposition, give me your best argument for the non-existence of God, and I will demonstrate it to be incorrect* (provided, you are willing to forsake your ego.)
*Note: it is not part of my duty to "prove" to you that God does, in fact, exist- but rather to show that you cannot conclusively say he does not. 
|
|
#2
04-12-2005, 02:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wrong.
Sure. First things first. Could you please define God for me. Thanks.
|
|
#3
04-12-2005, 02:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
A God like the one you read about in Descartes, not Spinoza.
No knock against Spinoza, but that would make the challenge trivial.
|
|
#4
04-12-2005, 03:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
I don't think you understand the definition of the word "agnostic."
|
|
#5
04-12-2005, 03:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you understand the definition of the word "agnostic." [/ QUOTE ] If you were referring to me, I do understand the word... It was a bit of a joke "ambitious agnostics" i.e. those that wanted to give atheism a shot... Probably didn't come across the way it sounded in my head, oh well.
|
|
#6
04-12-2005, 03:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I don't think you understand the definition of the word "agnostic." [/ QUOTE ] If you were referring to me, I do understand the word... It was a bit of a joke "ambitious agnostics" i.e. those that wanted to give atheism a shot... Probably didn't come across the way it sounded in my head, oh well. [/ QUOTE ] Why would atheism be an ambition for an agnostic?
|
|
#7
04-12-2005, 03:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
[ QUOTE ]
Sure. First things first. Could you please define God for me. Thanks. [/ QUOTE ] This is a cop-out, if God exists, it would be utterly impossible for me to "define" something that existed infinitely beyond my understanding. I asked to prove God does not exist, if he does not exist and you can prove so, no definition should be necesarry as it would be impossible- or at least wasted words- to define something that didn't exist.
|
|
#8
04-12-2005, 04:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Come one, Come all... Prove God doesn\'t exist, I\'ll prove you wron
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Sure. First things first. Could you please define God for me. Thanks. [/ QUOTE ] This is a cop-out, if God exists, it would be utterly impossible for me to "define" something that existed infinitely beyond my understanding. I asked to prove God does not exist, if he does not exist and you can prove so, no definition should be necesarry as it would be impossible- or at least wasted words- to define something that didn't exist. [/ QUOTE ] WTF. How can you argue that X does not exist if X is not defined? To argue that anything doesn't exist requires a definition. You then have to argue that no thing exists which fits the definition.
|
|
#9
04-12-2005, 12:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
no definition required
[ QUOTE ]
How can you argue that X does not exist if X is not defined? [/ QUOTE ] This is a logical confusion. No definition is required to stipulate existence. Assume x = God E(x) A pity this forum doesn't support quantification symbols. You are asking for us to give a description of God, like 'God is the supreme being' or something like that. Assume x = God ; The extension of 'S' is supreme beings: E(x)(Sx) Translation, God exists and is a supreme being. The description is superfluous.
|
|
#10
04-12-2005, 02:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: no definition required
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] How can you argue that X does not exist if X is not defined? [/ QUOTE ] This is a logical confusion. No definition is required to stipulate existence. Assume x = God E(x) A pity this forum doesn't support quantification symbols. You are asking for us to give a description of God, like 'God is the supreme being' or something like that. Assume x = God ; The extension of 'S' is supreme beings: E(x)(Sx) Translation, God exists and is a supreme being. The description is superfluous. [/ QUOTE ] What does this have to do with my post? No definition is required to stipulate existence. Ok, sure. But how can someone argue against the existence of something without a definition? My point is that by refusing to define the parameter, the OP is guaranteeing that no one can argue that it doesn't exist, but his stunt doesn't prove anything, it's entirely illogical. Again, how can an argument that no thing X exists be formulated without defining X?
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
