Conquer Club

To argue clearly and coherently for gods existence without using either the bible or creationism.

The bible because you end up using circular logic which is self-defeating, and then I'll just be pestered by those "I know you're wrong and I'm right"-posts.
Creationism because at least one of its main premisses is false (I know of one) and noone apart from the scientists who have been arguing for and against it really know what they're REALLY saying, so we'd end up with haphazard summaries, random quoting with and without sources and the general mud-slinging and bashing.



I think it was Ambrose who in another thread claimed that faith in god can be defended logically. I asked him to do so several times in the thread but got no reaction. I asked if anyone else was prepared to defend faith in god logically or logically show that god exists. Again noone reacted.

I don't want to use jay's thread with the similar topic for this, because from what I saw on the last few pages he's had to move his position so far that he is, topically, in the next country.



That's why I challenge you to finally come out and SHOW that your faith in an unseen, unfelt, omnipotent, omniscient, hardly definable, highly improbable being that we humans, according to the existing descriptions and definitions, should not be able to understand, can be defended by logical means.

Challenge moved to Logic Dictates There Is A God thread

Please read the whole text before posting things like that.

MeDeFe wrote:Please read the whole text before posting things like that.

I did.

then pay attention to the second-last paragraph.

MeDeFe wrote:then pay attention to the second-last paragraph.

The challege was already going on. What? you need a clean sheet of paper to continue the debate? This is what is known as pointless spamming.

If you're referring to your thread... I read the first few pages some time ago, I take a look at the last half dozen or so and the only thing that is the same is that god is mentioned sometimes and that you still couldn't argue clearly and coherently. I actually held you in some esteem a while ago, but the recent threads have changed my mind.

So yes, a clear sheet would be fine, now stop spamming this and make room for some real debaters.

Well, let's ignore Jay because he's a whiner and won't be satisfied until he gets his own way.




Anyhow, I believe simply because I like some of the concepts. Sure, the book is mostly a book of parables designed to teach lessons, but the core concept of God is one I can get behind.

Dig it, any being powerful enough to create matter from 'nothingness' would be seen as a god by early man. This theory that we were generated by aliens is as plausible as any other theory when you approach it with objectivity. Sure, the world could've come together by chance, or been created by a cow freeing an ancient being who was defeated by Gods and whose parts were used to build the world (Norse tradition).

I just dig the concept. It's not logical but there you go. Plus, saying that I believe in God (since I do and all) while not being a Christian in any sense of the word tends to send the fundamentalists into a confused tailspin.

If I had to defend it logically, i'd say that since so many possibilities exist, to outright deny one or many of them simply because a mythological deity is involved in the telling of the tale would be illogical.

I'm a creationists and beleive that the Bible is absalute truth.
You ask for proof, what do you mean by that give me proof for anything else, number one proof that the Bible is true is that all of the prophicies have come true that are inside of the oldtestiment. if you're looking for proof of Creation then go to http://www.answersingenesis.org. So I don't see how it is possible to argue That there is a God without either of these because that would be argueing for a God that could mean anytjomg. from any non-truth beleifes.

To calling Jay a winer who only wants his way, if you post somthing under this thread you obviously want your way.

LewisJB3 wrote:I'm a creationists and beleive that the Bible is absalute truth.
You ask for proof, what do you mean by that give me proof for anything else, number one proof that the Bible is true is that all of the prophicies have come true that are inside of the oldtestiment. if you're looking for proof of Creation then go to http://www.answersingenesis.org. So I don't see how it is possible to argue That there is a God without either of these because that would be argueing for a God that could mean anytjomg. from any non-truth beleifes.

To calling Jay a winer who only wants his way, if you post somthing under this thread you obviously want your way.

He is whiner, he tried to move the argument from this thread to his own thread.

If that isn't wanting his own way I don't know what is. I plan on sticking to the rules of MeDeFe's thread thank you very little.

And for God's sake, get Firefox 2.0, it's got spell check!

EDIT: Blasphemy! You offer monetary gain to the owners of that site? Don't you remember what Jesus did to the moneychangers in the temple?

LewisJB3 wrote:I'm a creationists and beleive that the Bible is absalute truth.
You ask for proof, what do you mean by that give me proof for anything else, number one proof that the Bible is true is that all of the prophicies have come true that are inside of the oldtestiment. if you're looking for proof of Creation then go to http://www.answersingenesis.org.

To calling Jay a winer who only wants his way, if you post somthing under this thread you obviously want your way.

Thanks for the link! Pls read the whole god/logic thread - i guarantee by the time you finish you will be a happy and committed satanist.

BLEUGH!!!
If God was real, he'd stop retards like me from posting such crap.

jay_a2j wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:Please read the whole text before posting things like that.

I did.

MeDeFe you shouldn't make Jay read big words. If his head explodes it will be your fault

mandalorian2298 wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:Please read the whole text before posting things like that.

I did.

MeDeFe you shouldn't make Jay read big words. If his head explodes it will be your fault

What are you? 12?

heavycola I hope you enjoy my signature.

If we can't use our bible, you can't use your liberal books and websites.

happysadfun wrote:If we can't use our bible, you can't use your liberal books and websites.

Liberalism has nothing to do with logic. If by "Liberal Books" you mean books on logic and what is and is not a logical fallacy then you, my friend, are just critically thick.

vtmarik wrote:Liberalism has nothing to do with logic.

Learning is FINALLY taking place. A belief system SHOULD have to do with logic, it should come right off the tip of your tongue, and it should be logical. Something that is not logical is not natural, and disagrees with many imbedded-into-humans ideas.

happysadfun wrote: Something that is not logical is not natural, and disagrees with many imbedded-into-humans ideas.

So what you're saying is belief in God is unnatural.

happysadfun wrote:Learning is FINALLY taking place. A belief system SHOULD have to do with logic, it should come right off the tip of your tongue, and it should be logical. Something that is not logical is not natural, and disagrees with many imbedded-into-humans ideas.

And allow me to go one step further, true-believer syndrome is not logical either.

If you make allowances to the effect that the Bible's fallibility doesn't impugn God, then the learning can begin. The Bible is a book of stories, not the All-True Word of The Lord Our God™.

God is separate from the Bible, so cast off the book and worship the being for once in your miserable life.

happysadfun wrote:If we can't use our bible, you can't use your liberal books and websites.

fair enough. If you think you can avoid circular logic... feel free to use the bible. However, I don't think you will be able to argue convincingly for gods existence with the bible.
It might work if you want to use it to show why you have faith, though.

vtmarik wrote:

happysadfun wrote:Learning is FINALLY taking place. A belief system SHOULD have to do with logic, it should come right off the tip of your tongue, and it should be logical. Something that is not logical is not natural, and disagrees with many imbedded-into-humans ideas.

And allow me to go one step further, true-believer syndrome is not logical either.

If you make allowances to the effect that the Bible's fallibility doesn't impugn God, then the learning can begin. The Bible is a book of stories, not the All-True Word of The Lord Our God™.

God is separate from the Bible, so cast off the book and worship the being for once in your miserable life.

The problem with this is The Bible says it is the word of God. And if the things written in it are true (ie. that it was inspired by God himself) then you can't dismis it as a "book of stories"! The evidence of the Bible being the Word of God is within its pages. You can't have one without the other.

Here's a short word jay: sources
And a slightly longer one that might be more appropriate in this context: examples


give us the relevant passages. I haven't found any proof of the bible being the word of god. Not in the bible or anywhere else for that matter.

MeDeFe wrote:Here's a short word jay: sources
And a slightly longer one that might be more appropriate in this context: examples


give us the relevant passages. I haven't found any proof of the bible being the word of god. Not in the bible or anywhere else for that matter.

http://www.bibletruths.org/salvation/wordgod.html


http://www.rae.org/bibref.html


http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/gods_word.htm



These are a few links and VERY good reading from what I skimmed through. I hope you take the time to go throught them.

Two pages and no logic yet...lets see some intelligent discussion here fellas.