The most Plausible Deity

[sharma-arke451]

Johnny B;759406 wrote:

^*** sigh ***,

So after two pages and two days, you're here telling me that your answer automates the relationship between my question and your answer because in Arabic you've what you call ''fiqhul xiwaar", which lubricates such automation. ? Oy vey !

being redundant is not my forte, and this arabic thing is intresting to say the least, but here is what i said to you after your inference that supernatural explanation is the only or more plausible answer than the natural ones regarding why Human beings speak different langauages.

Zap the zapping. Being a fickle, at its best.

 

for example,

If a wayfarer, fails to identify which path leads to the candy shop, and you direct him to pass first avenue, and he ends asking you

Wayf: Why and how is first avenue related to the candy shop.??

 

the wayfarer is being a joker,

 

So jb, the different languages is the card we play. Enjoy it.

[aero]

Dare I ask, is there any "proof" disproving the existence of God? If so, I'd like to know.

 

Knight of Wisdom, are you familiar with the Founding Fathers of the United States?

[Knight of Wisdom]

aero;759458 wrote:

Dare I ask, is there any "proof" disproving the existence of God? If so, I'd like to know.

 

Knight of Wisdom, are you familiar with the Founding Fathers of the United States?

Prove that God Exists. Prove that the Quran, Bible, Torah, or any Religious text isn't formulated by humans. The Muslims accuse the Christians to have a book that is corrupted, the Christians do the same thing and accuse the Jews and the Muslims. Lol,

[Garnaqsi]

N.O.R.F;759340 wrote:

The 'I can't see it so its not true' argument is rather simplistic.

Elaborate, please.

[Garnaqsi]

aero;759458 wrote:

Dare I ask, is there any "proof" disproving the existence of God? If so, I'd like to know.

While you're at it, it would be fair to also ask whether there's any proof of God's existence.

[Keyser Soze]

Garnaqsi;759492 wrote:

Elaborate, please.

Can you see atoms? Yet they are the building blocks of the world we live in...

 

You see where he is going at?

[aero]

Knight of Wisdom;759460 wrote:

Prove that God Exists. Prove that the Quran, Bible, Torah, or any Religious text isn't formulated by humans. The Muslims accuse the Christians to have a book that is corrupted, the Christians do the same thing and accuse the Jews and the Muslims. Lol,

This is where your argument goes sour. I am not the one questioning God's existence. I very much know He exist and I am absolutely satisfied to have Him as my Creator and Sustainer. You're the individual with the questions and you're the one trying to prove something hence why I posed my question. Since you're so keen on getting answers out of Theists, I'd like to hear your end and would appreciate it if you answered the question.

 

Thank you

 

Garnaqsi;759494 wrote:

While you're at it, it would be fair to also ask whether there's any proof of God's existence.

In the lovely words of Phillip E Johnson, "as a theist I believe that God exists and that God creates." Reference the above reply.

[Garnaqsi]

Keyser Soze;759500 wrote:

Can you see atoms? Yet they are the building blocks of the world we live in...

 

You see where he is going at?

No, atoms can be observed under appropriate laboratory conditions.

aero;759501 wrote:

In the lovely words of Phillip E Johnson, "as a theist I believe that God exists and that God creates." Reference the above reply.

That isn't an answer as to whether there is a proof for God's existence.

[aero]

Garnaqsi;759502 wrote:

That isn't an answer as to whether there is a proof for God's existence.

If you carefully read my reply you'd notice...

 

aero;759501 wrote:

I am not the one questioning God's existence. I very much know He exist and I am absolutely satisfied to have Him as my Creator and Sustainer.

In other words, I don't need to prove that Allah exists. I'm not the claimant. We can go back and forth about MY beliefs of God's existence and how you very much disagree with my proofs. What evidences can you bring to the table of His nonexistence (nacudubillah) and why you chose to disbelieve?

[Keyser Soze]

Garnaqsi;759502 wrote:

No, atoms can be observed under appropriate laboratory conditions.

That isn't an answer as to whether there is a proof for God's existence.

Again, can you see an atom?

 

With the right appropriate laboratory conditions you can imply that they exist, you can not "see nor observe them" in the way me and you can can comprehend visually i.e a tree.

 

Lets apply your theory to religion, I am sick, i do not seek any health assistance, instead i pray day and night to god that i shall get healthy. One day i get healthy as a horse. I have now proved that god exist with the right conditions....

 

Defuseness and irregualrity is something you can find in both fields, religion and science. That is if you look hard enough.

[Garnaqsi]

aero;759505 wrote:

I'm not the claimant.

You aren't making any sense, my friend. You said 'I very much know He exist and I am absolutely satisfied to have Him as my Creator and Sustainer.' That in fact makes you more than a claimant with regards to God's existence, whereas I haven't made any claims as of yet. But this is not the issue. The issue I tried to raise with you, and which you have terribly failed to understand, is that it isn't fair to consider the question of whether there are disproofs for God's existence without asking the twin question of whether there are any proofs for His existence -- and I have been more than generous here, ignoring the classical epistemic burden.

[Garnaqsi]

Keyser Soze;759508 wrote:

...

Your argument failed at the first instance you used the atom analogy. I think it will waste both my time and yours to go on about such a dead-end argument. Besides, the example of a patient praying then getting healed doesn't prove God's existence under 'appropriate conditions'. Inference of God's existence from such a case would be a logical fallacy -- I'm sure many reasonable nomads will agree.

[aero]

Garnaqsi;759510 wrote:

You aren't making any sense, my friend. You said

'I very much know He exist and I am absolutely satisfied to have Him as my Creator and Sustainer.'

That in fact makes you more than a claimant with regards to God's existence, whereas I haven't made any claims as of yet. But this is not the issue. The issue I tried to raise with you, and which you have terribly failed to understand, is that it isn't fair to consider the question of whether there are disproofs for God's existence without asking the twin question of whether there are any proofs for His existence -- and I have been more than generous here, ignoring the classical epistemic burden.

To you I am not. I assume you're very much familiar with the classical digression tactic which you and your colleagues here are displaying very well. Don't single yourself out. Firstly, I was addressing the Knight of Wisdom who questioned the existence of God in a previous post in which I felt I answered your question. Making him/her the claimant. I see you're clearly not satisfied which is the least of my worries. Secondly, I dislike ambiguous questions. You could have posed the question just as you have in this post then perhaps we would have gone another direction.

[Keyser Soze]

Garnaqsi;759511 wrote:

Your argument failed at the first instance you used the atom analogy. I think it will waste both my time and yours to go on about such a dead-end argument. Besides, the example of a patient praying then getting healed doesn't prove God's existence under 'appropriate conditions'. Inference of God's existence from such a case would be a logical fallacy -- I'm sure many reasonable nomads will agree.

Draw a parallel between the history of "God" and "The atom". Hopefully you will see how futile it was of you to try and disregard my argument. I was using them both as examples, and ofcourse wether you are a scientist or a fundementalist one of them will be more real.

 

Plus i find it ironic that you wrote. "I think it will waste both my time and yours to go on about such a dead-end argument" Not realising that the whole Atheism vs Religion is a dead-end argument...

[burahadeer]

First religion is environmental.If you were white European you would be christian( & don't mention few converts),if you were born in somalia you would be muslim,in india would be many among thm pagans,same with many africans..pagans except those coverted by colonization.It's much easier to disprove God than prove.What else you have that God exists than religious scripts written by humans.Where is he,how big,can anyone ever came across etc.

Religion is the same we have FGM for more than 3000yrs long before Islam & christianity...wat's the use of it.Just a culture & it's hard to discard cos we born in it.What you expect religion! no one is expecting to vanish but we have the right to question ofc unless you muslim!!!!!!

 

About atom...scientists split the atom to make nuclear bomb.It's like a pregnant woman that you can't see the baby inside,but you can detect with special machines same way you can see the womb nowadays.